MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by shkkmo | 2025-10-05 14:58:17+00:00
> If someone has enough money that wasting it on gambling is a problem, then they clearly had no business giving up hope because "the system" doesn't have the ability to make their lives better. The system that makes their lives better is the money they just wasted, but invested in something productive.

This seems to be pretty clearly saying that you think poor people only gamble with money they don't need and if they didn't gamble they would be able to stop being poor by investing that money. That seems a pretty clear statement that you think that poor people who gamble wouldn't be poor if they didn't irrationally gamble money that they should have invested in their future.

You say you have a "better grasp" of your opinion. I say you don't have a good enough grasp of it to present it in an understandable way since this "misinterpretation" of your view seems to match pretty well with what you've actually said.
by vonnik | 2025-10-05 14:58:27+00:00
more broadly, laptops and desktops have also degenerated as tools for thought, largely because they have been turned into vehicles of consumption. every screen has become the infinite push algorithm.

https://vonnik.substack.com/p/how-to-take-your-brain-back

i think it's underrated, too, how much the pairing of phone-camera to produce media amplifies the possibility of consumption via the same device.
by pbsd | 2025-10-05 14:58:29+00:00
The SIKE comparison is not particularly inconsistent since Bernstein has been banging the drum that structured lattices may not be as secure as thought for years now.

Currently the best attacks on NTRU, Kyber, etc, are essentially the same generic attacks that work for something like Frodo, which works on unstructured lattices. And while the resistance of unstructured attacks is pretty well studied at this point, it is not unreasonable to suspect that the algebraic structure in the more efficient lattice schemes can lead to more efficient attacks. How efficient? Who knows.
by sublinear | 2025-10-05 14:58:46+00:00
> And these AI-fueled proposals aren’t necessarily bad. That’s what makes them so tricky. [...] Every idea has costs, trade-offs, resources, and explanations attached. And guess who must explain them? Me.

Don't explain. Don't argue. Simply confirm that the person fully understands what they're asking for despite using AI to generate it. 99% of the time the person doesn't. 50% of the time the person leaves the conversation better off. The other 50% the lazy bastards get upset and they can totally fuck off anyway and you've dodged a bullet.
by raincole | 2025-10-05 14:59:14+00:00
When it comes to "humans collectively..." kind of grand scheme issues, I just can't take the risk of AI making us stupider too seriously, compared to:

- Wars and violence to resolve geopolitical problems

- The biggest trading partner of most countries is waging tariff warfare

- Climate change

- Declining birth rate in almost every country

- Healthier foods are getting more expensive despite our technology and nutrition knowledge [0]

I'm not saying there is 0 chance that AI will make people dumb, but it just doesn't seem to be such an emergency humans should collectively be worried about.

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpql53p9w14o.amp
by onion2k | 2025-10-05 14:59:23+00:00
If you need authority over someone to persuade them then your argument isn't compelling enough, either because your reasoning is flawed or you're not communicating it well enough.

In the case in the article the author believed they were the expert, and believed their wife should accept their argument on that basis alone. That isn't authority; that's ego. They were wrong so they clearly weren't drawing on their expertise or they weren't as much of an expert as they thought, which often happens if you're talking about a topic that's only adjacent to what you're an expert in. This is the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy. It's easy to believe you're the authority in question.

...we’ve allowed AI to become the authority word, leaving the rest of us either nodding along or spending our days explaining why the confident answer may not survive contact with reality.

The AI aspect is irrelevant. Anyone could have pointed out the flaw in the author's original argument, and if it was reasoned well enough he'd have changed his mind. That's commendable. We should all be like that instead of dogmatically holding on to an idea in the face of a strong argument against it. The fact that argument came from some silicon and a fancy random word generator just shows how cool AI is these days. You still have to question what it's saying though. The point is that sometimes it'll be right. And sometimes it won't. Deciding which it is lies entirely with us humans.
by GeekyBear | 2025-10-05 14:59:36+00:00
> they must be holding Apple over a barrel with backdoors

Nope.

Apple is subject to the same restriction that every other company in China is.

Or Google in the US, for that matter.

If you store customer data on your server, when the government shows up with a warrant, you have no choice but to hand a copy over.

Handing over a copy of push notifications stored on your server isn't a "backdoor". It's how the law works in the United States when any agency shows up with a warrant.

That's what makes Google's business model of spying on customers as much as possible and hording customer data on their servers so dangerous.

If your state prosecutes women seeking an abortion, for instance, Google handing over data showing you were in an abortion clinic in response to a warrant is harmful.

Contrast with Apple, which operates it's own map service without keeping a log of everywhere you've been on their servers.
by brynary | 2025-10-05 14:59:53+00:00
This looks great! Duplication and dead code are especially tricky to catch because they are not visible in diffs.

Since you mentioned the implementation details, a couple questions come to mind:

1. Are there any research papers you found helpful or influential when building this? For example, I need to read up on using tree edit distance for code duplication.

2. How hard do you think this would be to generalize to support other programming languages?

I see you are using tree-sitter which supports many languages, but I imagine a challenge might be CFGs and dependencies.

I’ll add a Qlty plugin for this (https://github.com/qltysh/qlty) so it can be run with other code quality tools and reported back to GitHub as pass/fail commit statuses and comments. That way, the AI coding agents can take action based on the issues that pyscn finds directly in a cloud dev env.
by loloquwowndueo | 2025-10-05 15:00:04+00:00
> And these AI-fueled proposals aren’t necessarily bad. That’s what makes them so tricky. They’re often plausible, sometimes even smart, but some come with strings. Every idea has costs, trade-offs, resources, and explanations attached. And guess who must explain them? Me. The guy who’s now debating not just people, but people plus the persuasive ghostwriter in their pocket

Don’t spend your time analyzing or justifying your position on an AI-written proposal (which by definition someone else did not spend time creating in the first place). Take the proposal, give it to YOUR AI, and ask it to refute it. Maybe nudge it in your desired direction based on a quick skim of the original proposal. I guarantee you the original submitter probably did something similar in the first place.
by rcarmo | 2025-10-05 15:01:09+00:00
Yup. Mine rates 80W on idle, but it has _two_ NAS boxes, a pair of N150s, a Ryzen APU Steam server, and a beefy i7 with 128GB RAM and a 3060 (which of course is the one burning the most watts in use). Most of it is running Proxmox and backing up VMs to the Synology (which I've demoted to dumb storage with a few Docker containers since they started burning bridges with their customers).
by tux3 | 2025-10-05 15:01:39+00:00
>RISC-V-Zxxx implementation can be as incompatible with any other RISC-V implementations (and even specification) as one wants.

It can't. Extensions have a lot of freedom, but still have to follow the core spec. You can't just submit amd64 as a riscv extension for a myriad of reasons, it clearly conflicts with the base ISA.

This is also why there is a trademark. If you or Intel wanted to deliberately create nonsense to be disruptive, you are allowed to create it, but then you can't call it RISC-V without receiving some fan-mail from lawyers.
by password54321 | 2025-10-05 15:02:06+00:00
The post was largely about young people who are growing up with these tools and are still at the stage of developing their habits and tendencies. Personally I am glad I learnt programming before LLMs even if it meant the tedious searches on stackoverflow because I didn't feel like I was coming up against a wave of new technology when it came to future job searches. Having done so I can understand and appreciate the intrinsic value of learning these things but western culture is largely about extrinsic values that may lead to the future generation on missing out on learning certain skills.
by chuckadams | 2025-10-05 15:02:09+00:00
If anything, jQuery allowed things to be more FP-oriented. I don't remember who said it, but "jQuery selectors are lenses for the DOM" is one of the better observations about jQuery I've read. A lot of jQuery is unnecessary in modern JS, but we still don't have those sweet selector semantics, and you're still expected to loop over everything by hand. And as a continuing middle finger to the DX, NodeLists don't even support the HOFs of the Array interface and have to be converted to arrays by hand.
by encyclopedism | 2025-10-05 15:02:28+00:00
> Is it really much different from most people? The average Joe doesn't produce novel theories every day"

You've presented a false choice.

However the average Joe does indeed produce unique and novel thoughts every day. If it were not the case he would be brain dead. Each decision - wearing blue or red today - every tiny thought, action, feeling, indecision, crisis, or change of heart these are just as important.

The jury maybe out on how to judge what 'thought' actually is. However what it is not is perhaps easier to perceive. My digital thermometer does not think when it tells me the temperature.

My paper and pen version of the latest LLM (quite a large bit of paper and certainly a lot of ink I might add) also does not think.

I am surprised so many in the HN community have so quickly taken to assuming as fact that LLM's think or reason. Even anthropomorphising LLM's to this end.

For a group inclined to quickly calling out 'God of the gaps' they have quite quickly invented their very own 'emergence'.
by zdw | 2025-10-05 15:02:49+00:00
In my observation of others, it's not an easy skill unless you've done it before. Most people have little idea where they are and no idea what they would do next if the turn-by-turn tech failed on them. I'd argue it is useful the first time you want to take a scenic route, or optimize for things other than shortest travel time, like a loop bike route that avoids major streets.

Not to say that apps aren't useful in replacing the paper map, or doing things like adding up the times required (which isn't new - there used to be tables in the back of many maps with distances and durations between major locations).
by hajile | 2025-10-05 15:03:37+00:00
This seems to have its own issues and the proof is in the final cores.

ARM’s entire gross profits are about half of AMD’s R&D budget, but ARM cores have soundly beat x86 in IPC for years now (since around A78) and the most recent generations seem to be beating them in total performance, perf/watt, and core size.

We now have all three of the big ARM-based cores (Apple, ARM, and Qualcomm) beating x86. Apple you could maybe write off as unlimited money, but all three isn’t just coincidence.

If that weren’t enough, ARM designers are releasing new cores every year instead of every other year meaning they are doing around twice as many layout and validations despite the massively lower budget.

Before I get the “ARM only makes cores” excuses, I’d note that ARM announced that they’ve been working on their own server chips and that work is obviously having to fit within their same (comparatively tiny) budget.

It seems fairly obvious. Spring legacy garbage drives up complexity and cost (eg, ARM reduced A-series decoder size by 75% when they dropped 32-bit mode which was still way less complex than x86). This complexity drives up development time and cost. It also drives up validation cost and time.

There’s also a physical cost. Large, high frequency uop caches and cache controllers are better than just decoders on x86, but worse than not needing them at all is better still. Likewise, you hear crazy stuff like the x86 overly-strict memory model not mattering because you can speculate it away. That speculation means more complexity, more power, and more area.

Once you’re done with enough of these work-around, you get a chip that is technically as fast, but it cost more to design, costs more to validate, costs more to fab, costs more to buy, costs more to operate, and carries an opportunity cost from taking so much longer to get to market.
by rvz | 2025-10-05 15:03:37+00:00
This isn’t an issue for experienced software engineers who understand the limitations of these LLMs and also will scrutinise the chatbot’s answer if they see a bug it generated. Non-engineers, vibe-coders won’t know any better and click “Accept all”.

Everyone wants to be a “programmer” but in reality, no-one wants to maintain the software and assume that an “AI” can do all of it i.e Vibe coding.

What they really are signing up for is the increased risk that someone more experienced will break your software left and right, costing you $$$ and you end up paying them to fix it.

A great time to break vibe coded apps for a bounty.
by justonceokay | 2025-10-05 15:04:05+00:00
I don’t want to nitpick but the declining birthrate is almost certainly driven by us becoming smarter, not dumber. In most countries the birthrate was propped up heavily by teen pregnancy, which the internet and access to healthcare is slowly eradicating worldwide.

If we as humans can’t maintain our current population without getting high schoolers pregnant, then so be it.
by philipov | 2025-10-05 15:04:35+00:00
> and if it was reasoned well enough he'd have changed his mind.

In my experience, motivated reasoning rules the day. People have an agenda beyond their reasoning, and if your proposal goes against that agenda, you'll never convince them with logic and evidence. At the end of the day, it's not a marketplace of ideas, but a war of conflicting interests. To convince someone requires not the better argument, but the better politics to make their interests align with yours. And in AI there are a lot of adverse interests you're going to be hard pressed to overcome.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
by Thorrez | 2025-10-05 15:04:57+00:00
Bernstein wasn't the only objector. There were 7 objectors and 20 proponents.

Dual EC isn't the only comparison he's making. He's also making a comparison to DES, which had an obvious weakness: 53 bit limitation, similar to the obvious weakness of non-hybrid. In neither case is there a secret backdoor. At the time of DES, the NSA publicly said they used it, to make others confident in it. Similarly, the NSA is saying "we do not anticipate supporting hybrid in NSS", which will make people confident in non-hybrid. But in the background, NSA actually uses something more secure (using 2 layers of encryption themselves).
by rwmj | 2025-10-05 15:05:17+00:00
There's a lot of bad actors on the internet, which makes running a small website quite a chore -- and this one is much more visible than the average small website. At the very minimum you must keep it up to date, because it will be under a constant barrage of exploit attempts. Then there are DDoS attacks (people have tried to used my webserver as a way to DDoS my ISP in the past). Then there's the crazy people who will email you demanding why you broke their IPv6 or that you urgently fix some issue that and they are "losing money" because of it.
by Aurornis | 2025-10-05 15:05:41+00:00
It's definitely in LLM style. Some times I wonder if newer bloggers and writers are inadvertently picking up LLM style blathering by using ChatGPT to refine their work. The style of subheadings and bullet points to expand simple statements into something that appears structured is an LLM hallmark, but I'm starting to see younger people adopt this style as if it's how they're expected to write.
by raincole | 2025-10-05 15:05:48+00:00
I didn't say declining birth rate is a result of people being dumber.

And I also don't think higher education necessarily means smarter. I'm quite confident that in the next decade, worldwide educational attainment will keep rising with only some temporary setbacks. If making people smart is as simple as sending them to colleges we really have nothing to worry about.

But anyway neither was my point.
by ednite | 2025-10-05 15:06:20+00:00
Yes, author here. I’m not against AI at all, blogging and storytelling are a new adventure for me.

At first I leaned on AI pretty heavily as my “editor-in-chief” to save time. Later, it’s become more of an opinionated buddy I bounce ideas off. The narrative has always been mine, though, I’ve always understood what I (or it) was writing. I still use AI when it saves me time, but what matters most is the story and the message.

I’m learning as I go, and my newer posts are less AI-shaped and more in my own voice. It’s a process I don’t regret. Thanks for your comment.
by rkomorn | 2025-10-05 15:06:24+00:00
You're completely missing the point of my original response to you.

You're sanctimoniously telling "us" to make milder accusations, then nearly immediately accusing us of being against law enforcement.

That is an entirely non-mild accusation, to the point that I consider it entirely discredits the rest of your comments because of how hypocritical it makes you look.

It's rhetoric that doesn't entitle you to the good faith engagement you supposedly want.
by xp84 | 2025-10-05 15:06:57+00:00
Was this posted from a Brussels IP? This certainly seems to reflect how the EU regulators see themselves, but I haven't met many real Europeans who have themselves realized any actual value coming from their laughable, vague attempts at legislating the problems away. The best they've managed is making some Europeans smug, but their data still exists in all the same places. Worst case a few fines get levied, for megacorps that can easily afford them, while small businesses grapple with confusing and vague language that threaten to punish them even absent any actual harms or even ill intentions.
by jakebasile | 2025-10-05 15:08:29+00:00
I work with the engineer behind this (different team, but we interact semi-often and work on overlapping projects), but had no idea it was him until I looked at the little copyright notice in the footer. He is a fascinating guy and a fantastic engineer (one of those 10x engineers you hear about) while being humble and always willing to help out.

Thanks for the site for the last 15 years, it's helped me a number of times.
by dzonga | 2025-10-05 15:08:47+00:00
I like the convenience of the cloud. but don't know whether its due to declining literacy rates / awareness etc. the cloud is nice and e.g google storage, iCloud but now with fast microsd's you can buy 1TB for $100. have a few copies then boom, you own your own data. but now phones don't allow you to have microsd's so here we are.

likewise things like email etc instead of all of us being on gmail we could have community email servers etc.
by righthand | 2025-10-05 15:09:30+00:00
A Solid protocol cryptowallet. Arcane on top of arcane.

I think it’s entirely unfair to dismiss technology because it hasn’t demanded immediate adoption by society. Solid is attempting to help define a better data future. We have working mechanisms in place but everyone is at a disadvantage except the people loyal to these giant corps. Attempting to give people the power to organize their data as they wish and to be used as they wish is worth it. Even if it doesn’t bring a renaissance.
by rwallace | 2025-10-05 15:09:38+00:00
Or unless delete is a rare operation. So yeah, to make the best decisions here, you need to know expected numbers as well as expected access patterns.

As far as I can see, you are indeed going to incur one extra memory access apart from the object itself, for any design other than just 'Temporarily flag the object deleted, sweep deleted objects in bulk later' (which would only be good if deleted objects are uncommon). It still matters how many extra memory accesses; deleting an object from a doubly linked list accesses two other objects.

It also matters somewhat how many cache lines each object takes up. I say 'somewhat' because even if an object is bulky, you might be able to arrange it so that the most commonly accessed fields fit in one or two cache lines at the beginning.
by LexiMax | 2025-10-05 15:09:50+00:00
> Maybe HNers are more tolerant of addictive substances and activities than the American average because addictive substances and activities tend to be interesting experiences.

I think the more accurate lens would be that Hacker News likes money.

On the surface at least, it seems like running a gambling or sports betting company would be a dream job. You get to systemically rip off your customers through your house edge, you retain the right to back off skilled players that can bypass your house edge, your expenses go to infrastructure as opposed to creating anything of value, and you get to externalize the wider societal consequences by blaming nebulous mental illness.

"This guy wants to pay me for the privilege of gradually losing money to me, why should I stop him?"
by pablopang | 2025-10-05 15:09:51+00:00
Yesterday, we released the official MCP server for Svelte!

You can use the local version using the command `npx -y @sveltejs/mcp` or use the remote version with `https://mcp.svelte.dev/mcp`)

It provides tools and resources for docs and an autofixer tool that gives the LLM suggestions on how to write proper Svelte code.

And it's open source, of course: https://github.com/sveltejs/mcp to look at the code and open issues/feature requests!

We are eager to make your AI experience writing Svelte the best possible!
by vel0city | 2025-10-05 15:10:04+00:00
I've pressed people who chat this way with me to change, and usually it seems people get it once they get shown how unproductive this kind of conversation is.

Just ask me your question. Feel free to start with pleasantries if that's your style, but get to your point or the ask on the first message.

https://nohello.net/en/
by hajile | 2025-10-05 15:10:10+00:00
Transistors aren’t free. x86 cores are all bigger than their ARM competitors even when on the same node while also getting worse performance per watt.

The translation layers cost time and money to build which could be spent making the rest of the chip faster. They stuck up extra die area and use power.

ARM’s total income in 2024 was half of AMDs R&D budget, but the core they finished that year can get x86 desktop levels of performance in a phone.

The idea that there’s no cost to x86 just doesn’t seem to hold up under even mild scrutiny.
by CamperBob2 | 2025-10-05 15:10:24+00:00
It's legitimate perpetual motion, but not a machine. In a vacuum the test mass will never stop moving, but you can't extract any work from the system if you want it to keep going forever.

Technically you can't even look at it, because that requires bouncing photons off its surface. The resulting radiation pressure will slow it down eventually.