MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by omkar_savant | 2025-10-08 02:34:49+00:00
At current latency, there's a bunch of async automation usecases that one could use this for. For example:

*Tedious to complete, easy to verify

BPO: Filling out doctor licensing applications based on context from a web profile HR: Move candidate information from an ATS to HRIS system Logistics: Fill out a shipping order form based on a PDF of the packing label

* Interact with a diverse set of sites for a single workflow

Real estate: Diligence on properties that involves interacting with one of many county records websites Freight forwarding: Check the status of shipping containers across 1 of 50 port terminal sites Shipping: Post truck load requests across multiple job board sites BPO: Fetch the status of a Medicare coverage application from 1 of 50 state sites BPO: Fill out medical license forms across multiple state websites

* Periodic syncs between various systems of record

Clinical: Copy patient insurance info from Zocdoc into an internal system HR: Move candidate information from an ATS to HRIS system Customer onboarding: Create Salesforce tickets based on planned product installations that are logged in an internal system Logistics: Update the status of various shipments using tracking numbers on the USPS site

* PDF extraction to system interaction

Insurance: A broker processes a detailed project overview and creates a certificate of insurance with the specific details from the multi-page document by filling out an internal form Logistics: Fill out a shipping order form based on a PDF of the packing label Clinical: Enter patient appointment information into an EHR system based on a referral PDF Accounting: Extract invoice information from up to 50+ vendor formats and enter the details into a Google sheet without laborious OCR setup for specific formats Mortgage: Extract realtor names and address from a lease document and look up the license status on various state portals

* Self healing broken RPA workflows
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-10-08 02:35:41+00:00
>> How much does the AI add if you already have solid procedures in place for everything else the AI needs not to go bonkers?

> The AI adds a ton. It really is like having a whole team of extra coders available, all of which can type faster than you.

Funny thing is, the least time consuming aspect of making programs is encoding solutions in source form. For example, a reasonable typist can produce thousands of text lines per workday if they know what must be typed (such as transcribing documents).

What takes longest when producing programmatic solutions is understanding what must be typed in the first place. After that, the rest is just an exercise in typing and picking good file/type/variable names.
by cycomachead | 2025-10-08 02:38:04+00:00
I love JS and Ruby, and I spent a bit of time maintaining a web app in Lua.

There are parts about the language I really enjoy. I like dynamic languages; I don't run into type issues so often it bothers me, but the tooling around Lua still leaves me wishing for me.

Part of this is really my own ability, or lack thereof, but I feel slow and constrained in lua. I have a hard time debugging, but I don't feel these things in other languages.
by aspizu | 2025-10-08 02:38:06+00:00
I've created a library that use t-strings to prevent shell injection that even works on Windows. It's written in Rust. https://github.com/aspizu/tshu

$ uv run --with tshu python -m asyncio >>> from tshu import sh >>> username = "aspizu; rm -rf /" >>> await sh(t"echo {username}") aspizu; rm -rf /
by accrual | 2025-10-08 02:38:10+00:00
It's interesting to see the differences in industry adoption. My company just recently made Copilot an official tool for use. We're in a safety-oriented industry that moves more slowly. I do use it, but mostly just to tighten up existing code or get ideas for a refactor.

Meanwhile, I have a client project where my counterpart is definitely senior to me and excitedly shares how AI is helping them solve novel problems each week!
by mholt | 2025-10-08 02:38:44+00:00
Well, I don't plan on 1:1 feature parity with NextCloud or any comprehensive cloud suite. But I think in terms of what was mentioned: "storing all my documents and books and documenting when I added, opened, edited them. I want it to store all notes that I write," I think that's in scope.

So yes, Timelinize sits behind your current work flows. It's more of a resting place for your data (which you can still organize and curate -- more features to come in this regard), but I also can see why it might make sense to be one's primary photo library application, in the future, with more development.

As for document storage, this is still WIP, and the implementation could use more discussion to clarify the vision and specifics.
by apeytavin | 2025-10-08 02:38:52+00:00
That would not make it a complete product and would always require a complex setup whenever and wherever you want to use it.

This one is really, really convenient and intuitive. Turn it on anywhere, even outside, it just works. Even when I want to dev on it, it's super convenient.

On some level I truly believe robotics has to become more "complete", we can't always just piece things together, it makes it very hard to have a beautiful product.

I realize this is more of a philosophical answer, but I also think it is the right one to take this field to the next level
by hshdhdhehd | 2025-10-08 02:38:53+00:00
So hard to get done though. Needs global cooperation. The overlap with chemtrails and climate change means Trump might hate it on vibes and ban this correction for US airlines.

Airlines are on wafer thin margins and for the longer turnaround times affecting schedules wont love it. The fact that it is a small % is worse: if you get hit you become less competitive!

Pilots workload is increased too.

Its a great technical idea but not sure how you'd get it off the ground.

In an alternative timeline with a carbon price it may work. You get x$ carbon credits for a detour. Let the planes decide if they want it.
by gpm | 2025-10-08 02:39:10+00:00
As I've describe elsewhere in this thread I've read what appear to be the relevant sections of the bill, and have concluded the headline is entirely unjustified.

You're welcome to respond to those posts if you believe I missed a bit somewhere.

I didn't read the article not because I would have to click on it, but because it is paywalled and I'm not giving them my money, as I said in the post you replied to.
by sojournerc | 2025-10-08 02:40:03+00:00
Next time you want to protest something your government is doing (ie, a bill to restrict internet access without due process), remember your comment. The truckers were peaceful and principled.

I wish I was surprised that people can hold opinions such as this, but I see so many cheering for authoritarianism in what once were liberal societies. Freedom dies not with a bang but a wimper after being crushed by people with "good intentions".
by zahlman | 2025-10-08 02:40:17+00:00
One person's "sedition" or "insurrection" is another's "protest" or "activism".

As an objective matter, the convoy protests are documented to have resulted in no deaths, eight injuries and a few hundred arrests (and very speculative estimates of economic damage); whereas the George Floyd protests are documented to have resulted in nineteen confirmed deaths, over 14,000 arrests and ten figures of directly measurable economic damage (i.e. insurance claims resulting from vandalism and arson).
by carlosjobim | 2025-10-08 02:41:14+00:00
You can do whatever you want to do with your car, your kitchen, or your home. There is nothing a manufacturer can do to stop you. But you can't demand that they help you and provide you with assistance. Likewise, you can do exactly whatever you want with your iPhone or Android phone. You can rip out the chips and put in different chips, if you have the talent to do it. But you can't demand that the manufacturer helps you.
by Bender | 2025-10-08 02:41:48+00:00
That's a very naive view

No, it is not. What I stated is how the domain name system has operated since it started. An entity rents one or more domains. They can use them however they wish provided they are paying for it and not breaking any laws. If the domain is violating a trademark there is a process for that. Otherwise people will game any system put in place. If one feels this current system is unfair they would have to get a movement started to change ICANN policies in a way they can not be gamed and would not result in yet more artificial business models including the shady ones and infinite spawning of legal battles gamed by lawfair and so on. Hind-sight is 20/20 and I am sure the people at ICANN would fundamentally agree the artificial businesses that popped up as a result of the design is sub-optimal but they would also probably shrug their shoulders. I think you are talking about changes that this late in the game would be very challenging to navigate especially given businesses park dozens or hundreds of domains and if anything threatened this they would start flinging lawsuitsin addition to lobbying to stall any attempt to change anything. It could be a naive view to think it is only the shady re-sellers that would be impacted by changing this.

Business models pop up all the time as unintended or intended consequences of a system or busines design. Anti-spam and anti-malware could have been avoided all together but instead became a multi-billion dollar industry. Half of the medical care fields could have been avoided by people eating right and not engaging in risky behavior but they don't so there are business models built around that too. I could go on all day and night about artificially created business models. That used to bug me too but I came to the realization that I can not change that without dedicating my entire life to making changes but I would rather spend my life doing things I enjoy and just navigate the existing systems to the best of my ability.

If you have a proposal on how to address your concerns then I suggest writing it up, propose it on assorted sites get feedback to refine it and then submit it to ICANN. If you take the time to do a well thought out proposal I am certain people here could review it and try to poke holes in it. If you have a blog that may be a good place to do your write-up and link to it from HN.
by GMoromisato | 2025-10-08 02:42:02+00:00
This seems to be a case of a feedback loop creating emergent behavior.

Let's say almost everyone believed in the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH). Then, trading would decrease significantly, since most people would think that stocks are already fairly priced. That means the few people who trade would move the market significantly, based on whatever idiosyncratic value-theories they had.

But then the EMH believers would see wild moves in the market and stop believing in EMH. They would start trading more to gain profits.

And as more traders participated, the market would behave more and more like the EMH were true. Eventually, the market would stabilize. Prices wouldn't swing so much. This would increase the number of EMH believers.

It would be interesting to survey belief in EMH among traders. If my model is correct, the percentage of EMH believers should be roughly constant, or at least oscillate around some optimum value.
by harrall | 2025-10-08 02:42:19+00:00
Let’s see… use the Arduino IDE, plug it in via USB, and press Upload. Your program starts on boot, every time, reliably and quickly.

OR buy an SD card, learn what the heck “writing images” is, find a spare keyboard and monitor so you can see the RPi, learn how to use Linux for your first time, figure out how to copy files between your Macbook and Linux, figure out how to setup Wi-Fi, figure out how to run a program, then restart your RPi to find that your program didn’t start on its own, then figure out the million different ways in Linux to start a program on boot, only to find it takes forever before your program starts when you plug the RPi back in, then it turns out Linux screws up your timings so your LED art project doesn’t even work…
by mholt | 2025-10-08 02:43:08+00:00
Glad you like Caddy!

> How does this handle data updating / fixing?

In the advanced import settings, you can customize what makes an item unique or a duplicate. You can also configure how to handle duplicates. By default, duplicates are skipped. But they can also be updated, and you can customize what gets updated and which of the two values to keep.

But yes, updates do run an UPDATE query, so they're irreversible. I explored schemas that were purely additive, so that you could traverse through mutations of the timeline, but this got messy real fast, and made exploring (reading) the timeline more complex/slow/error-prone. I do think it would be cool though, and I may still revisit that, because I think it could be quite beneficial.
by Tazerenix | 2025-10-08 02:44:16+00:00
The EMH is a description of how the market behaves when a sufficiently large number of independent actors are looking for alpha. It is not a prescription of how the market should behave.

The conclusion is that with a sufficiently large number of actors in the market all seeking profits by trying to find misevaluation of stock prices, the excess profits of any individual actor will (assuming they all have access to the same information) converge to zero.

Its less a paradox and more a matter of game theory. Every investment firm which gives up trying to look for alpha (believing it is fruitless) means the remaining firms have more opportunities to find stocks with available information not reflected in the price. There's no paradox here: each individual actor is incentivized to participate in order to not miss out on that potential for excess profits, and the net effect is the EMH.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-10-08 02:44:40+00:00
Evolution doesn't have end goals like building the most powerful computer possible. If caloric excesses are a factor, it's because there was some other selective pressure that made use of the energy to support more neurons. But even then, more hardware isn't the same thing as more intelligence. Elephants and whales have bigger brains than we do. Shrews and birds have a higher brain/body mass ratio. None of them are intelligent to the degree humans are. An explanation for human intelligence has to explain us, not just our brain mass.
by taylorlunt | 2025-10-08 02:46:20+00:00
These seem like a lot of great ways to work around the limitations of LLMs. But I'm curious what people here think. Do any career software engineers here see more than a 10% boost to their coding productivity with LLMs?

I see how if you can't really code, or you're new to a domain, then it can make a huge difference getting you started, but if you know what you're doing I find you hit a wall pretty quickly trying to get it to actually do stuff. Sometimes things can go smoothly for a while, but you end up having to micromanage the output of the agent too much to bother. Or sacrifice code quality.
by dataflow | 2025-10-08 02:46:51+00:00
> Strictly speaking, in the C++ object model, malloc allocates storage but doesn't create objects.

No - strictly speaking, it does create objects. https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/c/malloc.html#:~:te...

It gets confusing (to say the least) if you start questioning the details, but the spec does formally intend the objects to be implicitly created.
by showcaseearth | 2025-10-08 02:46:52+00:00
Yep, this is it. I've heard similar.

I worked for a few years at a 100+ year old privately owned (same family) B2B supplier with insane profits. Website was outdated but highly practical, sales/CRM (if you can call it that) systems were mostly command line and hadn't changed fundamentally since the 1980s. These systems worked, and any proposal to change anything took months of meetings and debates and review of every cost/benefit possible. Proving that a change directly translated to a clear revenue metric was nearly impossible– for at least this niche, would more modern sales software actually translate to more orders? (answer: not really, a question reanalyzed every few years in depth). Would a nicer website get more conversions? (also no, something A/B tested to death every few years). Changing the position of one product grouping by a few pixels might be a 6 month job, lol.

By contrast, their fulfillment center was cutting edge, highly automated, and relatively experimental– if it improved the speed and cut costs, they jumped right on. These are much easier to measure as profitable.
by jrk | 2025-10-08 02:47:19+00:00
People of course often do read (and even modify) the model-generated code, but doing so is specifically not “vibe coding” according to the original definition, which was not meant to encompass “any programming with an LLM” but something much more specific: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/
by marcus_holmes | 2025-10-08 02:47:45+00:00
> Taking citizenship away from those who voluntarily join terrorist organizations like ISIS? 100% agree with this, how could you not?

Given the UK's recent use of anti-terrorist legislation to arbitrarily classify a protest organisation as terrorists, this is really dangerous. If the government can classify any organisation as terrorists, and then remove citizenship from any members of that organisation, that is horrifying.

So yes, I very, very, strongly disagree with this measure, for very good reasons. How could anyone with any common sense support it?
by thedataexec | 2025-10-08 02:47:49+00:00
Not every process needs to be automated. In some instances, the best solution is basically admitting that Excel is good enough. Throughout my career I have seen so many dashboards sitting on a server and never being used, or if they were used, mainly to extract it to an Excel spreadsheet where they did the actual work.

What is your threshold when deciding whether something should be automated or stay manual?
by zahlman | 2025-10-08 02:48:06+00:00
This area of Canadian law is almost entirely dependent on concepts of "reasonability" so there is nothing unusual here. Our equivalent of the Bill of Rights is bookended by a section of "reasonable limits" (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_1_of_the_Canadian_Char...) and a "notwithstanding clause" that allows for a "temporary override" of several other sections (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_33_of_the_Canadian_Cha...). It's as vague and unpredictable as ever.
by bruce511 | 2025-10-08 02:48:30+00:00
Govts are typically "large enterprise". In most cases the largest enterprise in a country.

In some countries they also have the burden of being legible to outsiders. Between the shareholders (voters) and journalists etc there's a lot of process that has to be transparent.

This transparency is legibility driven to extremes. If an enterprise kills a project (think Windows Phone) its done, and we move on. If a govt kills a project there's a lot of external attention on what went wrong, who's getting fired (or going to jail) and how "our money got wasted".

So yes, as things get bigger they matter to more people. The more people involved the more every single thought and action has to be meticulously detailed.

Which is party why (democratic) govt is soooo bad at actually getting anything done. Feudal govts, and autocratic businesses, get a lot done - much of it quickly. It might not be good. It might be motivated my enrichment not care, but it gets done fast.

A good autocrat moves the needle, and things get a lot better very quickly. A bad autocrat achieves his goals, often at enormous cost to the organization (which may not survive. )
by keithnz | 2025-10-08 02:48:35+00:00
likewise, for a lot of frontend I "vibe code" it. I mostly don't look at the code anymore while doing it either, after I get where I want, I will look through the code and maybe clean stuff up. But a lot of the code is fine. Works really well I find. (using Augment Code with Claude Sonnet 4.5).
by opello | 2025-10-08 02:48:40+00:00
That's interesting, but I wonder if it's not more accurate to say "tradition doesn't support the use of an inverted rook as a promoted queen's proxy" or "FIDE would prefer not using inverted rooks as a promoted queen proxy" instead? Unfortunately neither explain why this is the preference, but avoiding ambiguity for observers seems obvious.

My thinking is that if we take "many active tournament players will see it every year or two" as the absence of a strict prohibition, and that this description of how it is illegal occurs in the "Arbiters' Manual," which self-describes as guidelines for arbiters and in the preface explains that rules can't cover every situation which is why the arbiters exist, but not in the actual rules document, it seems less "illegal" and more "unadvised."

I did not wax metaphysical, quite the opposite with the desire to find a definition for how one identifies a given piece. I imagine there are some other tournament organizational guidelines which outlines how chess sets are chosen for official events. These conventions taken in aggregate would provide some perspective, but still not answer the original question. I wager that everyone in your tournament hall would also recognize the use of an inverted rook as a promoted queen. So if it's not a question of avoiding ambiguity, then I wonder again, "why?"

There is a shorter version of this reply, which I will now include below:

At the end of the table of contents there is another interesting note in an offset grey box, just like the box which contains the note you quoted above:

> IMPORTANT:

> Throughout this manual, text which appears in a box such as this one is given as advice and is the opinion of a number of experienced arbiters. It does not form part of the Laws nor the Regulations in which it appears.
by im3w1l | 2025-10-08 02:50:04+00:00
It's better to force the opponent to capture than give him the choice of capturing or doing something else. If your opponent chooses not to capture the rook it's because he has found a move he thinks is even better than taking the rook. And that move is then something you should fear.

A big part of chess is maximizing your own choices and freedom while restricting your opponents choices.
by dlubarov | 2025-10-08 02:50:21+00:00
No, there was literally a public Google form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScndnMojIJoflfSPTD2...

They later moved to a self-hosted form, which remains available to anyone who wants to report a purported casualty: https://sehatty.ps/moh-registration/public/add-order

This has been well known since early last year, when Hamas themselves spoke about their incorporation of these other sources.

Casualty reports slowed down presumably because the fighting slowed down; in any case it's not a reason to make assumptions about Hamas' methodology that are contradicted by easily verifiable facts.
by xvector | 2025-10-08 02:50:33+00:00
Security engineer here. Bundling these together actually makes sense.

- Message attachments are blocked because Apple has not figured out to serialize and deserialize attachments without buffer overflows. Look at how many zero days are due to message attachments. It's pretty clownish tbh.

- FaceTime is blocked because Apple has not figured out how to prevent an incoming FaceTime call from silently spying on you, which has already happened a couple times.

Government interception of your cell connection falls into a similar category of threat, so it's bundled together.