MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jandrewrogers | 2025-10-10 23:05:21+00:00
I think a common blindspot that makes it difficult to fully take advantage of modern silicon is making distinctions between parallelism and concurrency in code that are in actuality ambiguous.

The canonical overly reductive examples are parallelism as trivial SIMD loop parallelism and concurrency as multiple threads working on different but related tasks. If those are your only models the opportunities will be limited. Parallelism, in the sense of executing multiple physical operations in a single instruction, is not limited to e.g. an arithmetic operation on arrays of numbers. If you can execute semantically orthogonal threads of logic in the same instruction, you arguably have both concurrency and parallelism at the same time.

For example, one of the most effective models for using AVX-512 is to treat registers as specialized engines for computing on 64-byte structs, where the structs are an arbitrary collection of unrelated types of different sizes. There are idiomatic techniques for doing many semantically orthogonal computations on the fields in these structs in parallel using the same handful of vector instructions. It essentially turns SIMD into MIMD with clever abstractions. A well-known simple example is searching row-structured data by evaluating a collection of different predicates across any number of columns in parallel with a short sequence of vector intrinsics. Query performance is faster than columnar for some workloads. For most code there is substantially more parallelism available within a single thread of execution than you'll see if you are only looking for trivial array parallelism. It is rare to see code that does this but the gains can be large.

On the other hand, I think concurrency is largely a solved problem to the extent that you can use thread-per-core architectures, particularly if you don't rely on shared task queues or work stealing to balance load.
by E-Reverance | 2025-10-10 23:05:28+00:00
>Figure 18: The Taiji-DDN exhibits a surprising similarity to the ancient Chinese philosophy of Taiji. Records of Taiji can be traced back to the I Ching (Book of Changes) from the late 9th century BC, often described by the quote on the left (a) that explains the universe’s generation and transformation. This description coincidentally also summarizes the generation process and the transformations in the generative space of Taiji-DDN. Moreover, the diagram (b) from the book Tom (2013) bears a closely resemblance to the tree structure of DDN’s latent fig. 1b. Therefore, we have named the DDN with K = 2 as Taiji-DDN.

Very nitpicky comment, but I personally find such things to make for a bad impression. To be more specific, branching structures are a fairly universal idea, so the choice of relating it ancient proverbs instead of something much mundane raises an eyebrow.
by Karrot_Kream | 2025-10-10 23:06:13+00:00
Well this post [1] got 2.4k likes and 467 reposts on Bluesky:

"Liberal politicians aren’t betraying you they are agents of fascism

If you believe they are your allies you will get fucked"

So there's certainly some bad blood.

[1]: https://bsky.app/profile/nerdjpg.com/post/3m2rmy3iap223
by serf | 2025-10-10 23:07:53+00:00
>Tens of thousands of riders

You saw tens of thousands of riders?

That anecdote just doesn't jibe with the throughput numbers -- that's why it seems like a flex, it's grossly inflated.

Now before we go into pedantry and you talk about how 'riders' meant 'all willing participants who are sitting in line' , fine -- i've been to SEMA and I understand those crowds , but those aren't riders. It's a misreporting of the situation, and frankly it seems intentional.
by modeless | 2025-10-10 23:08:06+00:00
> an inaccurate prediction market can still inform your knowledge updates

I didn't say an inaccurate prediction market is completely worthless. But it is self-evident that an accurate prediction market is a lot more valuable than an inaccurate one.

> the current laws already ban insider trading from corporate sources

Not only are most markets not related to corporations including the most important ones, I don't believe that insiders are actually that discouraged from trading even on corporate markets, and more importantly I don't believe the public believes insiders are prevented from trading. Everyone on Polymarket knows it's the wild west, and yet people still trade plenty.
by psychoslave | 2025-10-10 23:08:10+00:00
No, changing rdbms is a totally different challenge. They provide predictible reproducible output which are very sensitive and brittle to the slightest minor change in the input, while with LLM you expect the exact opposite.

Changing the LLM backend in some IDE is as complicated as selecting an option in a dropbox for those who integrate such a feature. They are other scenarios where it might be a bit more complicated to transition of course, but that's it.
by RandomBK | 2025-10-10 23:08:29+00:00
> Getting on the public suffix list is easier said than done [1].

Can you elaborate on this? I didn't see anything in either link that would indicate unreasonable challenges. The PSL naturally has a a series of validation requirements, but I haven't heard of any undue shenanigans.

Is it great that such vital infrastructure is held together by a ragtag band of unpaid volunteers? No; but that's hardly unique in this space.
by jasonvorhe | 2025-10-10 23:08:36+00:00
In many of the examples the new UI doesn't actually show true liquid glass but just bad blurry recreations of the basic shapes of it or even better contrast on the icons on the iOS 26 screenshots. Some of it is clearly a matter of taste (spacing in Photos for example) and iOS 26 often has the bigger hitbox for input elements. I wouldn't want to use an iPhone right now regardless until they fixed all the inconsistencies, with the changing Safari ui elements for example.
by aiisahik | 2025-10-10 23:09:13+00:00
"Couldn’t we develop technology in a way that serves the human interest in having labor be a good part of life?"

You can go farm rice or wheat by hand - is that a good part of life? You can ride a horse to go to work - is that a good part of life? You can use an abacus to do your accounting - is that a good part of life?

We don't want to go back to these things because we simply grew up in a world where were no longer values those activities as 'work'. We valued other things like memorizing ailments and legal doctrine, like typing computer code out one character at a time.

I think this argument about technology removing the joy of work hides the fact that technology has no interest in your joy for your work. It only has interest in the economic value of that work. You can continue to do the same work for joy - the only difference is you can no longer derive economic value from it. Basically if you enjoy being a translator that's great but maybe you will only be able to somehow do it as a hobby. And of course that's deeply unsatisfying for us because humans want to feel needed and useful. But this 'useful work' requires two parties - not just the one doing the work but the one needing the work. By focusing on the needs of the producer, we miss the needs of the buyer who would rather buy the service from a machine. The loss of the producer is the gain of the buyer who can now spend less on the good and buy more of everything else.

Of course we still have classical musicians despite there being Spotify because there will be a niche for them. And so there will always be a niche certain people doing artisanal stuff. And you can always do whatever you want as a hobby. Technology and capitalism doesn't prevent that. It just serves the interests of the buyers as well as the interests of the producers.
by vesterde | 2025-10-10 23:09:35+00:00
Oh you brought back fond memories of using the very first education product Replit had. It was so good. I was teaching GCSE CS and having a blast giving kids python with turtle to play with. I would just give them some multicoloured octagon and more complex shape, and they had to draw it with turtle.

They enjoyed it, I enjoyed it, and the teacher UX was great.
by drakeballew | 2025-10-10 23:09:46+00:00
Great writeup. As a beginner hobbyist, I have found AI to be extremely frustrating to work with much of the time, but extremely enjoyable and actually my best tutor/teacher when I use it the way the author describes, as a conceptual guide rather than an author.

Kind of an aside, I also think that ChatGPT is a great car-ride companion, and that the "conversation mode" that currently exist is pretty bad, primarily due to its response length limitation. If you're driving and verbally chatting with ChatGPT, having it only give you 500 word responses is infuriating because you can't really get into any level of depth without going in constant circles, which isn't a problem that text-based chats have to the same extent.
by GiffertonThe3rd | 2025-10-10 23:10:20+00:00
Having followed Data-* from its beginning, it's now fascinating seeing how these threads play out. The troll-y takes from those who took one brief look at the front-page and felt compelled to tear it down in their own 'worthy, hot-take'.

Like T3, the critiques usually compare to JS stacks or how non-HTML it looks(!). It just doesn't make sense to them, so... "I know what I must do, instead of looking into this more, make sure I have a fuller picture of this thing, HN NEEDS to know now".

You have every right, of course. But you undermine yourselves as soon as you post - you clearly have not taken any time to understand where it came from, why it is what it is. Your responses are not, say, genuine questions for clarification or helpful critiques. For the most part they are straight out judgements: 'This is just wrong'.

Of course in your minds the front-page MUST provide you all that in under 30secs, yes? Like, the 'hidden', 'real cost' is ON ANOTHER PAGE?! - instead of reading the reasoning behind it and why YOU won't need it.

You don't need to immediately post here - you are not really looking for answers, are you? You could've just read the website and history of Data- for that?

To all the 'clarfiers' here like Delaney, Anders, nchmy, and others, thank you for the comments refuting most of this stuff, it must be tiring.

All the best, An old, grumpy, ex-HyperCard 'programmer'. *You don't need to validate your comment by reply to this, many comments here are valid and you know it.
by impossiblefork | 2025-10-10 23:10:27+00:00
I think it might be possible to automate development of short programs. I also think it might be possible to reduce the confusion, misunderstandings and cliches, so that the models can work for longer stretches.

But people probably expect to get the next version for what they pay in subscriptions now, so I can't imagine much more revenue growth for the model companies.
by hunterpayne | 2025-10-10 23:10:31+00:00
Unfun fact, the Arab Spring was caused by a spike in food prices, not from any sort of political or leadership changes or behavior. The spike in food prices came from an unfortunate combination of bad weather in Russia and Obama's policies (specially biofuels). To his credit, Obama pulled the plug on the biofuel disaster after about 6 months but by then, it wasn't spring anymore and the Syrian civil war had already begun.
by jychang | 2025-10-10 23:11:02+00:00
> Why would we protect willing participants betting on arbitrary events?

Because some information affects the stock market. So Regulation FD already applies, for financial news.

> Even if we ban on this one too

The UK already banned this, see other comment above in this thread.

> insideinformationverywelcomemarket

You might as well as cut out the middleman, don't call it a "market" anymore, and just call it "crowdfunded-will-pay-reward-for-insider-information-website". Or, basically a crowdfunded TMZ. TMZ will pay thousands of dollars for non-financial info on celebs and then publish that news. That that point, you're just describing a slightly classier crowdfunded TMZ.
by int_19h | 2025-10-10 23:11:04+00:00
AFAIK Nihon-shiki is designed to reflect the Japanese kanas and their traditional regular arrangement as close as possible - note that it also uses e.g. "tu" for ツ.

OTOH Polivanov seemingly tried to reflect actual pronunciation, thus ツ is "цу" (tsu), ふ is "фу" (fu), を is "о", は is "ва" (va) when it's a particle, the syllabic nasal is "m" in environments where it is so pronounced etc.

The only real mystery about Polivanov system from this perspective is why ち is "ти" (ti) and not "чи" (chi).
by travisgriggs | 2025-10-10 23:11:11+00:00
As I read through the complaints, I'll note that two of my (younger) colleagues love it (mostly). I haven't updated yet, but when I made some observations about what I was seeing, it was defended as "making all the products the same".

It made me wonder if the whining is less about the particulars of liquid glass (I mean, remember the aquagel days of early mac os x), and more of lamenting the unification of design. I personally, just do not believe that there is a design aesthetic where form<->function have a balanced interplay, and users of 8K desktop screens and handheld iPhones are going to want the exact same experience. Similiarities maybe. But not the same thing.
by LauraMedia | 2025-10-10 23:11:29+00:00
I've actually pointed out some of the issues right after that first trailer myself [1].

Back then, I was sure Apple's designers (who I would see as very competent) would course-correct. What has been shown clearly was a "mood trailer" to me. Actually implementing this design would surely make them understand that they would need to dial back some of those effects for readability.

For a while, they seemed to have done that, utilizing frosted glass more than in the initial trailers. Recent betas however seemed like they are slowly converting back to full-glass with all the known usability issues.

I really don't know who at Apple thought "dark text on almost fully transparent button with dark background" was a good idea.

[1] https://laura.media/blog/liquid-glass-is-unreadable-now-what...
by SerCe | 2025-10-10 23:13:18+00:00
What this post might be missing is that it’s not just Google that can block your website. A whole variety of actors can, and any service that can host user-generated content, not just html (a single image is enough), is at risk, but really, any service is at risk. I’ve had to deal with many such cases: ISPs mistakenly blocking large IP prefixes, DPI software killing the traffic, random antivirus software blocking your JS chunk because of a hash collision, even small single-town ISPs sinkholing your domain because of auto-reports, and many more.

In the author’s case, he was at least able to reproduce the issues. In many cases, though, the problem is scoped to a small geographic region, but for large internet services, even small towns still mean thousands of people reaching out to support while the issue can’t be seen on the overall traffic graph.

The easiest set of steps you can do to be able to react to those issues are: 1. Set up NEL logging [1] that goes to completely separate infrastructure, 2. Use RIPE Atlas and similar services in the hope of reproducing the issue and grabbing a traceroute.

I’ve even attempted to create a hosted service for collecting NEL logs, but it seemed to be far too niche.

[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Guides/Net...
by sampo | 2025-10-10 23:13:34+00:00
> Where did you find this?

I put together the pieces mentioned in various places in the first Dune book. Every step sounds good and plausibly science(-fiction)-esque when presented separately, like the book does. Only when you put all the steps together, the picture starts to look like an M.C. Escher drawing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_%28M._C._Escher%29
by kragen | 2025-10-10 23:14:47+00:00
Yeah, I was puzzled about why modo_mario thought you might need a machine shop to make a hay rake — sounds like the kind of thing Primitive Life might make with stone tools. So I checked out the John Deere model number mentioned in the spreadsheet, and it turns out that the hay rake in question can rake hay at utterly inhuman speeds over a wide swath of your field. Handy if your cows are depending on you for winter fodder.
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-10-10 23:14:51+00:00
To your last question, zero, because no one has children anymore because of the present.

The past can be interesting, but is not a direct substation for actual discussion in the present. I mean in this one thread supposedly about the impact of capital itself now being able to create labour, instead of paying for labor, something that has never happened in history we have such depth on the topic at hand as:

'In the past everything perfectly just magically worked out so it will magically work out now and magic new jobs will appear because jobs appeared in the past'

'The past was horrific, you should be grateful for any current job and ignore you are getting poorer'

'The past was an special one off time in history, you can't expect that now'

'Medicine didn't exist in the past. Think about the children'

Zero depth of discussion but a shit load of handwaving away actual discussion.
by DTrejo | 2025-10-10 23:15:18+00:00
Nice extension!

1. It'd save a lot of time if one could just click a Markdown PR description and start editing it, without entering edit mode first.

2. Thanks to the following prompt, I barely write PR descriptions these days.

> Run `gh pr view` then `gh pr edit` to fill out the PR description. Use my words verbatim as much as possible. Be brief. Use tasteful markdown formatting.
by kulahan | 2025-10-10 23:15:41+00:00
They do need a lot less lithium, but we have like 300M cars in the US and only 4M EVs, so unless it's using, like, an ounce of lithium, you'll still have massive sourcing problems.

It's also not straightforward (in the US at least) to replace gas taxes with electricity taxes. Electricity is a utility, while gasoline is a good. You can tax goods very easily. Taxing utilities, especially when it comes to "I'm only taxing THIS type of electricity tax" directly violates utility carrier regulations. We had a whole argument over net neutrality, and the foundation of the argument was literally "could you imagine if we charged electricity this way??"

So maybe you could do it with registration fees, but that's going to be MUCH harder on lower-income people. It's simple to pay a $.15 tax on your gas tank. It's very difficult to pay an extra $75 on your registration.
by dh2022 | 2025-10-10 23:15:50+00:00
Obama considered the war in Afghanistan justified- at least that is my recollection from one of his debates with McCain. Obama considered the Iraq unnecessary- and got him elected.

in 2008 the American public was deeply upset about how things were going in Iraq. Obama was one of the only 2 senators voting against the war in Iraq back in 2003; and Hillary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq, while McCain vowed to be aWar president. In this climate Obama won both the Democratic nomination and later the US presidency.
by jfil | 2025-10-10 23:16:10+00:00
Have you ever battled an 87-year-old wearing mechanized battle armour? They're crazed, hopped on speed, eyes goggling in their sockets

A pack of 3 oldies burst through our perimeter one winter night... the screaming woke me up. Outside my tent the forest was lit up red by our laser blasts, trying desparately to take them out.

We thought that a revolution would be a good idea, but an upside-down population pyramid is a hell of a thing when you're on the bottom.
by jychang | 2025-10-10 23:16:33+00:00
> I don't believe that insiders are actually that discouraged from trading even on corporate markets, and more importantly I don't believe the public believes insiders are prevented from trading.

Yeah, you're just describing humans behaving irrationally then. That's clearly not rational behavior (which to be fair, is totally expected for humans), which means that even if it's descriptive of the current markets now, that's not actually ideal.
by nostrademons | 2025-10-10 23:17:21+00:00
I think a lot of this is simply asymmetric incentives for the lawyers. If they give legal advice that is overly conservative, it's some other portion of the business that suffers - we hire the wrong people, or we provide a worse product, or we lose out on revenue, or deals don't get made, or the code is overly convoluted, or employees get muzzled. If they give legal advice that is overly aggressive, they have to deal with the consequences when we get sued (at best) or they get fired (at worst). So they will always err on the side of caution.

I've also noticed a dramatic difference in how willing legal, HR, PR, REWS, etc. is to take risks now vs. back in the heyday of the 00s when the company was smaller and everybody felt like they were in it together. Some of that is probably simply because the company was a lot smaller and hence less likely to get sued, but a lot of it is because back then people tended to act in Google's interests a lot more while now they act in their own interests.
by acomjean | 2025-10-10 23:17:52+00:00
Or 80s Merlin’s Magic square game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(console)

Which was only 3x3. But red LEDs which were all the rage in handhelds in the 80s.

When learning JavaScript I made a dupe of the Merlin game in JavaScript. It’s really old but still seems to run. Lacks the depth of this game with its larger grid.

https://www.aramcomjean.com/magic_squares.html
by Reason077 | 2025-10-10 23:19:38+00:00
At least with Macs you are free to choose and downgrade to any OS version that you like, so long as that version supports your hardware. macOS 15.7.1 will run just fine on any M4 Mac, and Apple will likely continue to release 15.x updates for a year or so yet, and security updates even beyond that.

It's not like iOS where, once updated, you're generally blocked from ever downgrading back to a previous OS version.
by Arainach | 2025-10-10 23:20:09+00:00
There are many, MANY ways things could have gone dramatically worse. There are things that could have been done better, but "as poorly as humanly possible" is a trivially wrong statement.

Here's one way he could have handed it dramatically worse with a huge amount of empirical evidence: started lobbing random tariffs and abandoning trade deals and going isolationist.
by int_19h | 2025-10-10 23:22:51+00:00
It's not just pushing it on the users. There's also a heavy-handed push to get teams to use more AI coding inside the company. I'll let you guess what that does to software quality, on average...

Regarding Linux gaming, the biggest problem there right now is all the multiplayer games with kernel anti-cheat. But I suspect that it'll be resolved eventually by Valve pushing for SteamOS support (although I doubt it'll ever work on any random Linux distro).
by fragmede | 2025-10-10 23:23:08+00:00
because of the size of the respective offerings. If I were to take someone else's hard work and stick my name on it with sticker big enough to cover their name, I'd be an asshole. But everyone here understands that's not what this is. No one's going to accidentally come across the live feed page, and , critically, give money to this guy when they were originally gonna give money to hacker news instead. So big picture, you're right, but this isn't that.
by Mobius01 | 2025-10-10 23:23:50+00:00
Frank himself, you can get a clear picture of the ecosystem as outlined here by the end of Children of Dune.

One (possible) omission here - the sand trout traps water underground by linking and forming dams around water pockets - that’s the cause of Arrakis’ ultra arid environment, but maybe it’s also the source of nutrition?

Anyway, it is a bit silly indeed but in the novel’s context it feels grounded.