MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by notdefio | 2025-10-10 17:59:27+00:00
ar_lan specifically mentioned Neovim distributions. Examples would be LazyVim and AstroNvim. These are packages you can install that provide Neovim in a pre-configured and opinionated way. They generally come with language servers, linting, and various other features out of the box, and have their own paradigms for configuration.

They can be easier to get started with than just installing Neovim from scratch. But they add their own complexities. First, you have to know that they exist, and pick one. Then you have to know how to configure them, they may have their own nuances about how things are done. Under the hood they're using all the same packages, so you'll need to learn how to configure those as well if you don't want the defaults.

I would say the distributions to make it extremely easy to get started with a functional IDE experience with LSP features. But they're not without their own learning curve.
Show HN: I built a SaaS in 8 weeks, solo, using our own AI platform
by kirkmarple | 2025-10-10 17:59:30+00:00
I spent 8 weeks building Zine, an AI-powered search app for your team's knowledge, entirely solo. No team, no extra funding. Just me, AI coding tools, and the platform I had already built.

Instead of building infrastructure (connectors, vector DBs, transcription, entity extraction, etc.), I reused Graphlit, the same stack our customers use. That saved about 4-5 months of backend work and let me focus 100 percent on product and UX.

The result: I built and shipped an MVP in 8 weeks, got the first paying customer in 4 months, used 30+ data connectors with real-time sync and entity-aware semantic search, and 100 percent of coding was assisted by AI (Claude Code and Factory Droid).

The post covers the full stack (Next.js, TypeScript, Graphlit SDK, Vercel), the workflow of building with AI coding tools, what worked, what didn't, and why platform founders should build on their own platform.

TL;DR: If you've built a platform, use it to build products. It's the fastest way to find product-market fit, and AI coding tools make it shockingly fast.
by terio | 2025-10-10 17:59:36+00:00
> All Castro did was overthrow Batisa, another US ally, and nationalize Cuban assets.

That's not all. Castro also executed thousands creating a terror regime, nationalized American assets, funded and aided guerrillas in Latin America and Africa, aligned himself with the Soviet Union and caused the Missiles Crisis. He replaced a brutal dictatorship with another brutal dictatorship, a communist one, and ran the Cuban economy into the ground.
by oxguy3 | 2025-10-10 17:59:42+00:00
Another day, another IT company learning the hard way about the public suffix list, or well-known URIs, or some other well-documented-but-niche security technology.

I love that IT is a field where there's no required formal education track and you can succeed with any learning path, but we definitely need some better way to make sure new devs are learning about some of these gotchas.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-10-10 17:59:53+00:00
> not Russian and Chinese plants

“Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.”

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Show HN: Modeling the human body in Rust so I can cmd+click through it
by lleong1618 | 2025-10-10 17:59:55+00:00
I started this trying to understand two things: why my Asian friends turn red after drinking, and why several friends all seemed to have migraine clusters.

I was reading medical papers and textbooks, but kept getting lost jumping between topics. I thought: what if I could just Cmd+Click through this like code? What if "ALDH2 gene" was actually clickable, and took me to the variant, the phenotype, the population frequencies?

So I started modeling human biology in Rust with my Ralph agent (Claude in a loop, ty ghuntley). Turns out the type system is perfect for this. Every biological entity is strongly-typed with relationships enforced at compile time.

After 1 day of agent coding: - 277 Rust files, ~95k lines of code - 1,561 tests passing - 13 complete organ systems - Genetics with ancestry-specific variants - Clinical pathology models

Try it:

git clone https://github.com/lantos1618/open_human_ontology cd open_human_ontology cargo run --example ide_navigation_demo

Then open `examples/ide_navigation_demo.rs` and Cmd+Click through:

Understanding Asian flush:

AsianGeneticVariantsCatalog::get_metabolic_variants()

// Click through to:

// → ALDH2 gene on chromosome 12q24.12

// → rs671 variant (Glu504Lys)

// → 40% frequency in Japanese population

// → Alcohol flush reaction

// → 10x esophageal cancer risk with alcohol

// → Acetaldehyde metabolism pathway

Understanding migraines: Migraine { subtype: WithAura, triggers: [Stress, LackOfSleep, HormonalChanges], genetic_variants: ["rs2075968", "rs1835740"], ... }

// Click through to:

// → 17 migraine trigger types

// → 12 aura symptom types

// → Genetic risk factors

// → Why clusters happen (HormonalChanges → Menstruation)

Now I can actually navigate the connections instead of flipping through PDFs. Heart → CoronaryArtery → Plaque. VisualCortex → 200M neurons → NeuralConnection pathways. It's like Wikipedia but type-checked and with jump-to-definition.

This isn't production medical software - it's a learning tool. But it's way more useful than textbooks for understanding how biological systems connect.

The agent keeps expanding it. Sometimes it OOMs but that's part of the fun.

Tech: Rust, nalgebra, serde, rayon, proptest

I am not a dr or medical professional this is for my education you can commit to it if you want to or review and open some PR's if you find wrong information or want to add references.
by badsectoracula | 2025-10-10 18:00:00+00:00
> It is still mandated by the standard, so absence of checking can lead the compiler to conclude UB and optimize stuff away.

The compiler can only prove that malloc/realloc may return NULL, not that it will or it will not return NULL - it is impossible for a compiler to know that as that is runtime behavior. So the most the compiler can do is remove checks for NULL in case subsequent code is written with the assumption that the pointer is valid (i.e. you use `malloc`, then try to use the pointer it returned, then you try to check if it is valid - the compiler may decide to remove that last because your earlier use assumed the pointer is valid).

> Also it is commonly made to return NULL for testing.

This is done explicitly by the developer though, it is not "normal" behavior, so the developer is opting in to that (and as i wrote earlier, testing for that case doesn't seem to be practical nowadays unless you target some limited environment).
by mmastrac | 2025-10-10 18:00:29+00:00
I am curious if the Cx series has the same issue as my B2 where Dolby Vision (Atmos?) seems to kill the video processing circuitry and requires me to power-cycle it.

Apparently the only fix is to disable it in your source, but it works like 75% of the time and I'd hate to lose the excellent picture quality of Netflix and YouTube via Google TV.
by eyalitki | 2025-10-10 18:00:47+00:00
OK, now I understood the gap. There is a technical limitation for relocation resolution when the relocation is against a different section. This means that for function sections we de-facto have no relocation finalization, only conversion of symbols from "global" to "local".

Hence, for a "file-sections" flag, we would only resolve relocations within a given file, but will leave intact relocations that cross the file boundary. Accordingly, this means that "function-sections" is identical to generating a static bundle object per original object file, and bundling them all together inside a .a archive.
by FfejL | 2025-10-10 18:01:09+00:00
"[Microsoft's] platform power didn’t just come from controlling applications on top of Windows, but the OEM ecosystem underneath. If OpenAI builds AI for everyone, then they are positioned to extract margin from companies up-and-down the stack — even Nvidia. "

Ah yes, the ChromeOS strategy. How'd that work out for Google?

Building a platform is good, a way to make quite a bit of money. It's worked really well for Google and Apple on phones (as Ben notes). But there's a reason it didn't happen for Google on PCs. Find it hard to believe it will for OpenAI. They don't (and can not) control the underlying hardware.
by FloorEgg | 2025-10-10 18:01:37+00:00
It's more feasible to think of the risks in one narrow context/use case.

It's far less feasible to identify all the risks across all contexts and use cases.

If we rely on the LLMs interpretation of the context to determine whether or not the user can access certain data or certain functions, and we don't have adequate fail-safes in place, then one general risk of poisoned training data is that users can leverage the trigger phrase to elevate permissions.
by bariumbitmap | 2025-10-10 18:02:09+00:00
Yes, I'm aware of Dubai lamps; they run the LEDs at lower power for greater longevity. However there are a number of issues with them for my use-case:

1. They run at 230 VAC and 50 Hz, i.e. Dubai power standards instead of US power standards.

2. The brightest bulb is the 3 W model, which emits 600 lumen. I'm looking for something in the 800-880 lumen range.

3. They are famously not available for purchase in the US or other countries other than Dubai.

https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-li...
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-10-10 18:02:15+00:00
The Boring Company’s mission is in its name. Better boring tools. The Teslas running around inside it are dumb, but that’s almost the point: it’s a PR project. We wouldn’t be talking about it if it were a train.

From what I can tell, TBC has failed to revolutionize tunnel-boring machines to date.
by zackmorris | 2025-10-10 18:02:35+00:00
A little bit off topic but: GL_LINES doesn't have a performant analog on lots of other platforms, even Unity. Drawing a line properly requires turning the two endpoint vertices into a quad and optionally adding endcaps which are at least triangular but can be polygons. From my understanding, that requires a geometry shader since we're adding virtual/implicit vertices. Does anyone know if mesh shaders could accomplish the same thing?

Also I wish that GL_LINES was open-sourced for other platforms. Maybe it is in the OpenGL spec and I just haven't looked. I've attempted some other techniques like having the fragment shader draw a border around each triangle, but they all have their drawbacks.
by nemo30s | 2025-10-10 18:02:53+00:00
Alright, so here's my stupid cycle:

Ask ChatGPT/Claude something

Get a perfect answer

Think ohh I'll definitely remember this

Couple days later (or same day sometimes): Where the hell was that explanation or code??

Scroll through tons of messages like I'm on an archaeological dig haha

Give up after 5 minutes

Ask the AI the same question again like a moron

I'm so tired of doing this that I'm considering building something to fix it. A simple Chrome extension that lets you bookmark individual AI messages, tag them, and actually search for them later.

But before I waste two weeks coding this, LIKE ALWAYS, I need to know if maybe I'm just uniquely disorganised or if other people have this problem too.

I made a landing page with a quick survey: https://ai-answer-saver.vercel.app/

It's literally six questions and takes maybe 2 minutes. I'm doing the whole "validate before you build" thing because I've definitely built stuff nobody wanted before and I'd like to not repeat that mistake.

Honest feedback appreciated. Roast the idea if it's dumb.
by nakamoto_damacy | 2025-10-10 18:03:06+00:00
Whenever I see a post at #1 with not comment, I know it's been artificially pumped to the top. So many people upvoted but not a single comment yet. Let there be some comments! lol.

OpenAI is a geopolitically important play besides being a tech startup so it gets pumped in funding and in PR, to show that we're still leading the world. But that premise is largely hallucinated.
by huijzer | 2025-10-10 18:03:14+00:00
> I'd be very wary to get ahead of the investigation and make speculative statements on how this could have happened, the one thing that I know for sure is that it shouldn't have happened, no matter what.

Just watch Juan Browne, he usually turns out pretty good in analyzing the mishaps. He didn’t upload anything for Manchester yet but will probably soon: https://youtube.com/@blancolirio
by Terr_ | 2025-10-10 18:03:18+00:00
> 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.

I'm not sure if "on the API" here means "the LLM and nothing else." This is important because it's easy to overestimate the algorithm when you give it credit for work it didn't actually do.

In general, human developers have taken steps to make the LLM transcribe the text you entered into a classically-made program, such as a calculator app, python, or Wolfram Alpha. Without that, the LLM would have to use its (admittedly strong) powers of probabilistic fakery [0].

Why does it matter? Suppose I claimed I had taught a chicken to do square roots. Suspicious, you peer behind the curtain, and find that the chicken was trained to see symbols on a big screen and peck the matching keys on pocket calculator. Wouldn't you call me a fraud for that?

_____________

Returning to the core argument:

1. "Reasoning" that includes algebra, syllogisms, deduction, etc. involves certain processes for reaching an answer. Getting a "good" answer through another route (like an informed guess) is not equivalent.

2. If an algorithm cannot do the algebra process, it is highly unlikely that it can do the others.

3. If an algorithm has been caught faking the algebra process through other means, any "good" results for other forms of logic should be considered inherently suspect.

4. LLMs are one of the algorithms in points 2 and 3.

_____________

[0] https://www.mindprison.cc/p/why-llms-dont-ask-for-calculator...
by robertakarobin | 2025-10-10 18:03:30+00:00
I had the same thought but found there are very few TV-size monitors on the market, and the ones there are cost an arm and a leg. There are also very few "dumb" TVs -- we finally got one by Insignia, Best Buy's store brand, which has been fine. If someone knows a better alternative please let me know!

Worth clarifying that when I was a kid "TV-size" meant anything above 13", but the times have changed considerably. :)
by tejohnso | 2025-10-10 18:03:54+00:00
Yeah, of course you'd rather pay a fine when your net worth is thousands of times more than most people's, and the fines aren't scaled according to net worth.

You see this from time to time with headlines like "$CORP fined fifty MILLION dollars for ..." And then when you look into the details the fine turns out to be about one week of revenue and the offense resulted in early death for thousands of people over the past five years.
by consumer451 | 2025-10-10 18:04:22+00:00
The counter argument, saying that it’s likely going to be Google, appears in the latest Acquired.fm podcast.

They’re the only AI lab with their own silicon.

Edit: they didn’t say “likely,” they just marveled at the talent + data + TPU + global data centers + not needing external investment.

If I recall correctly, their theory was that google could deliver tokens cheaper than anyone else.
by eviks | 2025-10-10 18:04:23+00:00
> crashes: every week or so there’s a segfault and the editor crashes. ... This doesn’t bother me that much though, I can just reopen it.

Strange approach to data loss, since it doesn't have persistent undo, you can't just reopen it to the same editing state?

> After using Vim/Neovim for 20 years, I’ve tried both “build my own custom configuration from scratch” and “use someone else’s pre-buld configuration system” and even though I love Vim I was excited about having things just work without having to work on my configuration at all.

I don't really get it given how primitive the resulting Helix config is (I mean, even the most frequent commands are based off the mistaken unergonomic w/b defaults), presumably you would've been able to replicate it comletely in the first X years of using vim, and then there is no hell anymore?

> little help popup telling me places I can go. I really appreciate this because I don’t often use the “go to definition” or “go to reference” feature and I often forget the keyboard shortcut.

Exactly! Pity this basic contextual help isn't more widespread, every single app that uses a lot of keybind sequences could benefit from it, especially if it becomes a bit smarter and only shows a popup if you don't finish the sequence right away
by munk-a | 2025-10-10 18:04:35+00:00
As someone who works enthusiastically on new ground breaking technology... a dumb idea is a dumb idea - and when we pour this many resources into a dumb idea it prevents us from funding good ideas.

This tunnel has been used as a continued excuse for NIMBYism to block an extension of the monorail which is the actual solution that Las Vegas needs. In fact, the entire boring company appears to, after the fact, have been an effort dedicated solely to derailing SoCal high speed rail efforts.
by vulk | 2025-10-10 18:05:13+00:00
I use LLMs for teaching me how code exactly like that, I am the apprentice and the LLM move forward only If I say so, it does only explaining and teaching I do the writing. I much prefer it than looking for the next course or tutorial. The tutorial hell is mainly a problem of the people who decided that they can be teachers. From the countless books and courses I have purchased nothing actually teaches you anything, the whole model of teaching someone how to code is completely wrong in my opinion. At this point it is just plain frustration I rather prefer to tell the LLM to look for the latest documentation of a language or just go and look the documentation myself, a library, or whatever, and come up with a plan from it. My only gripe is that I am not sure if the LLM hallucinates and it is actually looking at the thing I pointed to or just spits the things that It was pre-trained on.
by whs | 2025-10-10 18:05:52+00:00
I think Datastar back when I was learning web programming and the dawn of AJAX would be Xajax [1]. I didn't even learn JavaScript back then because Xajax would generate a JS shim that you could call to trigger server side functions, and the function replace page fragments with new, server-generated content.

[1] https://github.com/Xajax/Xajax

While htmx reminds me of Adobe Spry Data [2] enough that I did a research into htmx and realize that Spry Data's equivalent is a htmx plugin and htmx itself is more similar to Basecamp's Hotwire. I assume there should be a late 2000 era AJAX library that do something similar to htmx, but I didn't use one as jQuery is easy enough anyway.

[2] https://opensource.adobe.com/Spry/articles/spry_primer/index...

Anyway as other commenters has said, the idea of htmx is basically for some common use cases that you used jQuery, you might as well use no JavaScript at all to achieve the same tasks. But that is not possible today, so think of htmx as a polyfill for future HTML features.

Personally I still believe in progressive enhancements (a website should work 100% without JavaScript, but you'll lose all the syntactic sugar - for example Hashcash-style proof of work captcha may just give you the inputs and you'll have to do the exact same proof of work manually then submit the form), but I've yet to see any library that is able to offer that with complex interface, without code duplication at all. (Maybe ASP.NET can do that but I don't like the somewhat commercialized .NET ecosystem)

The UI I think would require React is a wizard-style form with clientside rendered widgets (eg. tabs). If you can't download a library to implement that, it is a lot of work to implement it on backend especially in modern websites where your session is now JWT instead of $_SESSION that requires a shared global session storage engine. I'd imagine that if you don't use React when the user go back to the tabbed page you'd need to either implement tab switching code on the backend side as well, or cheat and emit a JS code to switch the active tab to whatever the backend wants.
by yencabulator | 2025-10-10 18:05:56+00:00
Is that still true? Even 3G support was largely torn down in the US some years back.

https://www.eseye.com/resources/blogs/2g-3g-network-status-u...

https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/the-3g-shutdown-how-will-it-aff...
by isaacdl | 2025-10-10 18:06:21+00:00
I don't think that's all that true for airliners. Pilots definitely practice for engine-out scenarios during all levels of training up to the airlines, but the ability of a plane the size of a 737 to safely land on anything but a runway is...limited. And if you're low, slow, and trying to go around, that's not a lot of time to glide to ground that is "level enough".
by feoren | 2025-10-10 18:06:27+00:00
> Mathematical notation evolved a lot in the last thousand years

That is not counter to what I'm saying.

Mathematical notation <=> Programming Languages. Proofs <=> Code.

When mathematical notation evolves, old proofs do not become obsolete! There is no analogy to a "breaking change" in math. The closest we came to this was Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and the Cambrian Explosion of new sets of axioms, but with a lot of work most of math was "re-founded" on a set of commonly accepted axioms. We can see how hostile the mathematical community is to "breaking changes" by seeing the level of crisis the Incompleteness Theorem caused.

You are certainly free to use a different set of axioms than ZF(C), but you need to be very careful about which proofs you rely on; just as you are free to use a very different programming language or programming paradigm, but you may be limited in the libraries available to you. But if you wake up one morning and your code no longer compiles, that is the analogy to one day mathematicians waking up and realizing that a previously correct proof is now suddenly incorrect -- not that it was always wrong, but that changes in math forced it into incorrectness. It's rather unthinkable.

Of course programming languages should improve, diversify, and change over time as we learn more. Backward-compatible changes do not violate my principle at all. However, when we are faced with a possible breaking change to a programming language, we should think very hard about whether we're changing the original intent and paradigms of the programming language and whether we're better off basically making a new spinoff language or something similar. I understand why it's annoying that Python 2.7 is around, but I also understand why it'd be so much more annoying if it weren't.

Surely our industry could improve dramatically in this area if it cared to. Can we write a family of nested programming languages where core features are guaranteed not to change in breaking ways, and you take on progressively more risk as you use features more to the "outside" of the language? Can we get better at formalizing which language features we're relying on? Better at isolating and versioning our language changes? Better at time-hardening our code? I promise you there's a ton of fruitful work in this area, and my claim is that that would be very good for the long-term health and maturation of our discipline.