MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by anon291 | 2025-10-28 04:20:45+00:00
> the Curtis Yarvin / dark enlightenment nexus is big enough and really weird, but also not a topic for HN (not because it's political but because it's stupidly gross and dark).

It has high overlap with the rad trad Catholic wing, believe me. I am a fairly traditional Catholic. I had heard of Yarvin via the Haskell world, and was floored when a parishioner at my parish brought him up. Such a strange crossing of worlds.

I imagine by LGBTQ colleagues must have the same feelings at whatever it is they do on Sundays

Honestly I sometimes think I'm the most normal person in the field, but we all probably think that. I think if my colleagues found out that I only go to a traditional Novus Ordo on Sundays where we use a lot of Latin and not a full-fledged Tridentine Mass, all of them would be angry at me. The LGBTQ crowd for being Catholic and the rad-trad crowd fro not being the right kind lol.

But anyway, I guess what I meant with my last point is: where are the diversity initiatives to get 'normal' people into this field? Everyone agrees it attracts the neuro-diverse? Then doesn't it stand to reason that we ought to encourage the neuro typical? Imagine how great PLs would be if they were actually eloquent haha.
by hex4def6 | 2025-10-28 04:21:21+00:00
You had better luck than me. The San Jose PD only begrudgingly gave me a police report weeks after reporting it (needed it for insurance purposes), and told me a could get a copy of it a month later. I'd have to go to the records dept in person between the hours of 10AM - 2PM (email a copy? Are you crazy?).

So I did that, showed up. No other people there. Person behind the counter told me they were too busy, and I'd have to show up some other (unspecified) day.

So yeah, I'd like to trade PDs with ya.
by xdennis | 2025-10-28 04:24:07+00:00
>> (2011: 1%), (2012: 7%), (2013: 15%), (2014/15: 33%), (2016: 40%). #pycon2016

> Increased diversity in communities usually comes from active outreach work. PyCon's talk selection process starts blinded.

There is no world in which 40% of programmers are women. 1% in 2011 is also probably evidence of discrimination. But too few people are willing to admit that if 40% of the speakers are women that represents a drop in the quality of the talks. There just aren't that many women programmers.

If DEI is all about promoting women in the hopes that they'll succeed later, I could get behind that. But often DEI goes to absurd lengths like lowering standards for female firemen or combat soldiers.
by metalrain | 2025-10-28 04:24:41+00:00
I like the idea but the example doesn't make much sense.

In what application would you load all users into memory from database and then filter them with TypeScript functions? And that is the problem with the otherwise sound idea "Functional core, imperative shell". The shell penetrates the core.

Maybe some filters don't match the way database is laid out, what if you have a lot of users, how do you deal with email batching and error handing?

So you have to write the functional core with the side effect context in mind, for example using query builder or DSL that matches the database conventions. Then weave it with the intricacies of your email sender logic, maybe you want iterator over the right size batches of emails to send at once, can it send multiple batches in parallel?
by ranger207 | 2025-10-28 04:25:15+00:00
It's worth noting that the meme of "it was DNS", including the haiku[0], is from the old school sysadmin world, which has a lot more terrible DNS implementations than modern stuff (especially including Active Directory which has DNS attached to a massive complex system that does dozens of other things as well and because of which has its reliability suffer), so the meme is really a reflection of a harsher time.

[0] the original source of the haiku: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4oj7pv/network_so...
by Piccollages | 2025-10-28 04:25:33+00:00
Personalities Test is a free online platform designed to help you discover your true personality type based on the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) framework. By answering a series of carefully designed psychological questions, you’ll receive a detailed personality profile explaining your core traits, strengths, weaknesses, communication style, and personal growth areas.

Our test provides insights into how you think, make decisions, and interact with others. Each result includes a full explanation of your personality type, compatibility with other types, relationship patterns, and recommended career paths that best suit your natural preferences.

Whether you’re a student exploring your career choices, a professional aiming for better teamwork, or simply curious about human psychology, Personalities Test offers you an accurate and engaging way to understand yourself and others better.

We support multiple languages (English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Spanish, etc.), ensuring accessibility for users around the world.

Key Features

100% Free and Instant Results

Based on MBTI 16 Personality Theory

In-depth explanation for each personality type

Covers relationships, communication, and career paths

Perfect for self-discovery, psychology learning, and HR tools

Available in multiple languages
by int_19h | 2025-10-28 04:26:14+00:00
Natural language is too ambiguous for this, which makes it impossible to automatically verify

What you need is indeed spec-driven development, but specs need to be written in some kind of language that allows for more formal verification. Something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract, basically.

It is extremely ironic that, instead, the two languages that LLMs are the most proficient in - and thus the ones most heavily used for AI coding - are JavaScript and Python...
by zeroq | 2025-10-28 04:27:04+00:00
> code itself has an exact value of $0. That's because AI can generate it

That's only true for problems that has been solved and well documented before. AI can't solve novel problems. I have ton of examples I use from time to time when new models come out. I've tried to ride the hype train, and I've been frustrated working with people before, but I've never been so frustrated as trying to make AI follow simple set of rules and getting:

"Oh yes, my bad, I get that now. Black is white and white is black. Let me rewrite the code..."

My favorite example is tasked AI with a rudimentary task and it gave me a working answer but it was fishy, so I googled the answer and lo and behold I landed on stackoverflow page with exact same answer being top voted answer to question very similar to my task. But that answer also had a ton of comments explaining why you never should do it that way.

I've been told many times that "you know, kubernetes is so complicated, but I tell AI what I want and it gives me a command I simply paste in my terminal". Fuck no.

AI is great for scaffolding projects, working with typical web apps where you have repeatable, well documented scenarios, etc.

But it's not a silver bullet.
by forrestthewoods | 2025-10-28 04:28:08+00:00
> You can change the default

My unfortunate experience is that changing the default just breaks other things.

I really blame C++ as the root evil. This type of behavior really really ought to be part of the language spec. It’s super weird that it’s not.

> How is [foo.imp.lib] file created?

When the DLL is compiled

> I don't really see the benefit of linking against foo2.15.imp.lib compared to foo2.15.dll

The short version is “because the whole file isn’t actually necessary”.

Zig moves mountains to make cross-compiling possible. Linux is BY FAR the hardest platform to crosscompile for. macOS and Linuxate trivial. Linux it’s alllllmost impossible. Part of their trick to make it possible is to generate stub .so files which are effectively import libs. Which is what should have been used all along! https://andrewkelley.me/post/zig-cc-powerful-drop-in-replace...

> When you link against a symbol that was last changed in 2.15, you link against glibc2.15, not against glibc2.40. If you only use symbols from glibc2.15, then you have effectively linked the complete program against glibc2.15.

It really really needs to be explicit. It’s otherwise impossible to control. And hard to understand where a newer symbol is coming from.

> on Windows you put the libraries into 'C:\Program Files\PROGRAM\'

It is relatively rare for a program in Program Files to add itself to the PATH.

> they should have at least the decency to roll it in /opt

I think folders like /opt and /usr/lib are pure evil. Programs should include their %{#^]{}^]+}*}^ dependencies.

uv solves a lot of the Python problems. Every project gets to define its own version of Python and own collection of libraries with whatever god forsaken version resolution. Having /usr/lib/python3.x is a failure state.
by meowface | 2025-10-28 04:29:25+00:00
Try the TypeScript codex CLI with the gpt-5-codex model with reasoning always set to high, or GPT-5 Pro with max reasoning. Both are currently undeniably better than Claude Opus 4.1 or Sonnet 4.5 (max reasoning or otherwise) for all code-related tasks. Much slower but more reliable and more intelligent.

I've been a Claude Code fanboy for many months but OpenAI simply won this leg of the race, for now.
by black_knight | 2025-10-28 04:29:35+00:00
I don’t really understand how to write tests before the code… When I write code, the hard part is writing the code which establishes the language to solve the problem in, which is the same language the tests will be written in. Also, once I have written the code I have a much better understanding as the problem, and I am in a way better position to write the correct tests.
by rich_sasha | 2025-10-28 04:30:43+00:00
We've refined the human experience to extinction.

In pursuit of that extra 0.1% of growth and extra 0.15 EPS, we've optimised and reoptimised until there isn't really space for being human. We're losing the ability to interact with each other socially, to flirt, now we're making life so stressful people literally want to kill themselves. All in a world (bubble) or abundance, where so much food is made, we literally don't know what to do with it. Or we turn it into ethanol to drive more unnecessarily large cars, paid for by credit card loans we can scarcely afford.

My plan B is to become a shepherd somewhere in the mountains. It will be damn hard work for sure, and stressful in its own way, but I think I'll take that over being a corpo-rat racing for one of the last post-LLM jobs left.
by int_19h | 2025-10-28 04:31:15+00:00
> I'm tempted to give them what they want: just a chatter box they can ask, "analyze this budget policy for me", just so I can see the looks on their faces when it spits out five poorly written paragraphs full of niceties that talk its way around ever doing any analysis.

Ah, but they'll love it.

> I don't know, maybe I'm too much of a perfectionist. Maybe I'm the problem because I value getting the right answer rather than just spitting out reams of text nobody is ever going to read anyway. Maybe it's better to send the client a bill and hope they are using their own AIs to evaluate the work rather than reading it themselves? Who would ever think we were intentionally engaging in Fraud, Waste, and Abuse if it was the AI that did it?

We're already doing all the same stuff, except today it's not the AI that's doing that, it's people. One overworked and stressed person somewhere makes for a poorly designed, buggy library, and then millions of other overworked and stressed people spend most of their time at work finding out how to cobble dozens of such poorly designed and buggy pieces of code together into something that kinda sorta works.

This is why the top management is so bullshit on AI. It's because it's a perfect fit for a model that they have already established.
by xdennis | 2025-10-28 04:33:13+00:00
If that's the case, I do think favoring non-whites and non-males is perfectly okay.

But how do you think people arrive at the conclusion that whites/males have been favored in the past? Do they:

1) inspect their hiring practices and find evidence of discrimination

2) look at the proportion of minorities in the company vs proportion of minorities in the general population and conclude that any disparity is proof of discrimination
by president_zippy | 2025-10-28 04:33:15+00:00
People from "hick, redneck, working class" areas don't say "hick, redneck, working class".

They might say "hick" if they're from rural northern New England, the upper midwest, rural Canada, or Cascadia, usually with self-deprecating facetiousness. Most of these people are smart enough to do whatever they want in life, but just choose to live by their standard of normalcy and just like their friendly small towns best.

If they are from the lower midwest or south, they will sure as hell just say "redneck", and most take it as a compliment even though many of them deep down are just compensating because they don't have any other options.

But nobody calls themselves "working class". Not in the rust belt, not in the rural midwest, and not in the south. That's more of a politician's word, and a condescending slur from the white collar crowd that usually ends in a broken jaw.
by punchfunk4lyte | 2025-10-28 04:34:14+00:00
It was legal and common to discriminate on the basis of sex in banking services until 1974. I actually don't see anything in your link that disputes that. It discusses some earlier milestones about women being able to own certain types of property.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act

Even if we quibble about the dates involved, we all understand that historically women have been marginalized, denied property, voting, and other rights, and that this was the status quo for millenia, right? And that that has lasting effects that continue in our society?
by eru | 2025-10-28 04:35:09+00:00
> [...] go look at the Sacramento startup Sircles. 7+ year old "startup" that has sub $100k revenue after several years but 9 million in debt.

Going on a tangent:

Depending on your industry, taking a while to see any revenue is common. Eg look into biotech or the people trying to make atomic fusion a reality.

Debt is just as valid a way to finance your company as equity is. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modigliani%E2%80%93Miller_theo... for the theory.
by dahart | 2025-10-28 04:35:50+00:00
As others have mentioned, the headline stat is unsurprising (which is not to say this isn’t a big problem). Here’s another datapoint, the CDC’s stats claim that rates of thoughts, ideation, and attempts at suicide in the US are much higher than the 0.15% that OpenAI is reporting according to this article.

These stats claim 12.3M (out of 335M) people in the US in 2023 thought ‘seriously’ about suicide, presumably enough to tell someone else. That’s over 3.5% of the population, more than 20x higher than people telling ChatGPT. https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/facts/data.html
by beefnugs | 2025-10-28 04:36:02+00:00
Of course, there is already news about how they use every single interaction to train it better.

There is news about how a judge is forcing them to keep every chat in existence for EVERYONE just in case it could relate to a court case (new levels of worldwide mass surveillance can apparently just happen from one judges snap decision)

There is news about cops using some guys past image generation to try and prove he is a pyromaniac (that one might have been police accessing his devices though)
by bloudermilk | 2025-10-28 04:37:10+00:00
Funny to see this pop up as I’m reading this book for the first time currently. I’m about half way through and have enjoyed the story so far. The writing is often frantic and sometimes exhausting to read, but it certainly keeps one’s interest. I’ve been surprised to find the social commentary so resonant with life today. I’ll wait to read this review until I’ve finished the book.

Free to download from Standard Ebooks for anyone interested: https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/fyodor-dostoevsky/the-brot...
by ra0x3 | 2025-10-28 04:37:34+00:00
I have rarely in my 11+ years of professionally writing software, met someone who could _really_ "write code", but couldn't build software. Anecdotal obviously. But I'd say the opposite tends to be the case IMO - those who tend to really know "the code", also tend to know how to effectively build software (relatively speaking).

It kinda makes sense - "knowing how to code" in modern tech largely means "knowing how to build software" - not write single modules in some language - because those single modules on their own are largely useless outside the context of "software".
by dang | 2025-10-28 04:37:38+00:00
This is off topic but I need to ask you to stop breaking the site guidelines. You've been doing it repeatedly lately (not in the current case—present comment is fine), and we end up banning such accounts.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. We've asked you at least once before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36796345.
by tcmart14 | 2025-10-28 04:37:46+00:00
While TDD can have some merits, I think this is being way to generous to the value of tests. As Dijkstra said once, "Testing shows the presence, not the absence of bugs." I'm not a devout follower of Uncle Bob, but I was just thumbing through Clean Architecture today and he has a whole section to this point (including the above quote). Right after that quote he writes, "a program can be proven incorrect by a test, but it can not be proven correct." Which is largely true. The only garuntee of TDD is you can show a set of behaviors your program doesn't do, it never proves what the program actually does. To extrapolate to here, all TDD does it put up guardrails for the the AI should not generate.
by pasteldream | 2025-10-28 04:38:20+00:00
> The reason is that they can enable people to take action on their suicidal feelings, before their suicidal feelings are fixed by the treatment.

I see that explanation for the increased suicide risk caused by antidepressants a lot, but what’s the evidence for it?

It doesn’t necessarily have to be a study, just a reason why people believe it.
by eru | 2025-10-28 04:38:37+00:00
> They produce evidence of tampering.

That's why one of the more advanced challenges in lock picking is to minimize the amount of evidence you leave. Eg even a normal pick can leave some scratches on and in the lock in different places than a normal key.

If I remember right, 'bumping' is an interesting technique partially because it leaves even less of a trace.
by al_borland | 2025-10-28 04:38:46+00:00
The realization I had was that while I could do things faster myself, there was a limit to how much I could do as one person.

The work I did after this was about finding ways to make everyone else on the team better and more productive. The code I wrote was for little internal utilities to reduce friction with the tools, reports to surface information that would be useful to the team, documents to help with knowledge transfer, and other such things. I handled the majority of the administrative overhead, so they didn’t have to waste anymore time on it than necessary.
by derektank | 2025-10-28 04:40:13+00:00
I could be mistaken, but my understanding was that the people most likely to interact with the suicidal or near suicidal (i.e. 988 suicide hotline attendants) aren't actually mental health professionals, most of them are volunteers. The script they run through is fairly rote and by the numbers (the Question, Persuade, Refer framework). Ultimately, of course, a successful intervention will result in people seeing a professional for long term support and recovery, but preventing a suicide and directing someone to that provider seems well within the capabilities of an LLM like ChatGPT or Claude
by Suppafly | 2025-10-28 04:40:42+00:00
>I'm a believer in taking advantage of GM crops but also believe that some kind of regulation should be put in place to ensure that those crops yield seeds that can be used to plant future generations.

That's not a GMO issue, that's a hybrid issue that applies to pretty much all modern seeds. Unless you're specifically worried about so-called terminator seeds, a common boogeyman discussed by organic farming proponents, but those have never been on the market and there is basically a worldwide ban on them.
by antonvs | 2025-10-28 04:43:00+00:00
You didn’t provide enough of a hypothesis to seriously discuss.

> A case where someone is conscious but without continuous propagation of neural signals?

That would be irrelevant. All known conscious beings are made up of biological cells, but that doesn’t prove that all conscious beings must be made of biological cells, or that biological cells are the key causative factor in consciousness. The same goes for “continuous propagation of neural signals.”

You described a personal conjecture as though it solved a known hard problem, even throwing in the word “just” as though the solution is really simple. This is a lot like the Feynman quote about quantum mechanics: if you think you understand it, you almost certainly don’t. You may not even have recognized the core problem yet. The original Chalmers paper is a good place to start: https://consc.net/papers/facing.pdf

But coming at it from a computational perspective, in some ways it’s even easier to see the problem. We don’t generally assume that a deterministic, non-neural net program written in say Python has a conscious subjective experience. To use Nagel’s terminology, there is “nothing it is like” to be that program. But, an LLM or any other computational neural net is no different from a program like that. It’s executing deterministic instructions, like a machine, because it is a machine. We can speculate about consciousness being some sort of emergent property that arises in such systems given the right conditions, but that’s all it is: speculation.

And it’s completely unclear what those right conditions might be, or how those conditions could possibly give rise to conscious experience. Why aren’t humans philosophical zombies with no conscious experience, just reacting to input like machines? No-one has succeeded in getting past the conjecture stage in answering that question.
by lanyard-textile | 2025-10-28 04:43:25+00:00
I choose to believe that too. I think more people are interested than we’d initially believe. Money restrains many of our true wants.

Sidebar — I do sympathize with the problem being thrust upon them, but it is now theirs to either solve or refuse.

A chat like this is all you’ve said and dangerous, because they play a middle ground: Presenting a machine can evaluate your personal situation and reason about it, when in actuality you’re getting third party therapy about someone else’s situation in /r/relationshipadvice.

We are not ourselves when we are fallen down. It is difficult to parse through what is reasonable advice and what is not. I think it can help most people but this can equally lead to a disaster… It is difficult to weigh.
by xdennis | 2025-10-28 04:44:26+00:00
Here's an example: the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 allocated grants to help restaurant owners. It did so on a racist basis: if the restaurant is owned primarily by women, veterans, or the "socially and economically disadvantaged".

There was a trial. The government lost. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca6/21...
by psychoslave | 2025-10-28 04:44:46+00:00
So is there an actual paper?

As is it's hard to evaluate if there is anything substantial to get out of these claims.

First time for me to meet with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity_Science_Hub

Is that cause or correlation?

Like, if people are more polarized, there are more likely to have wider ground to sympathize. Less throttle in opinion divergences, so they can deal with more social exchanges as the only interactions are endless smooth easy agreements within their social bubbles.