MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by burnerRhodov2 | 2025-10-11 17:17:52+00:00
since you didn't ask, here's NVIDIA's net income over the last 10 years:

2025 – $72.9B 2024 – $29.8B 2023 – $4.4B 2022 – $9.8B 2021 – $4.3B 2020 – $2.8B 2019 – $4.1B 2018 – $3.0B 2017 – $1.7B 2016 – $0.6B

They have always been profitable as a company, and even after all the hype, I would still value them as a "Cash printing machine". Which is what you want when you buy an asset such as a stock.

With the US trying to hyperinflate their debt away, the only safe havens have proven to be cash generating tech businesses and its going to be that way for the forseeable future. Valuations are only going to get crazier from here.
by habinero | 2025-10-11 17:18:16+00:00
No. I see AI people use this reasoning all the time and it's deeply misleading.

"You can't explain how humans do it, therefore you can't prove my statistical model doesn't do it" is kinda just the god of the gaps fallacy.

It abuses the fact that we don't understand how human cognition works, and therefore it's impossible to come up with a precise technical description. Of course you're going to win the argument, if you insist the other party do something currently impossible before you will accept their idea.

It's perfectly fine to use a heuristic for reasoning, as the other person did. LLMs don't reason by any reasonable heuristic.
by PyWoody | 2025-10-11 17:18:27+00:00
Reposting my comment from [0]:

Have you tried the suggestions in https://ghostty.org/docs/help/terminfo#ssh? I don't know what issue you may be experiencing but this solved my issue with using htop in an ssh session.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45359239
by robotresearcher | 2025-10-11 17:18:32+00:00
It’s a mixture of both top down priorities from government and bottom up opportunities from scientists. I suspect you know this and are being sarcastic because that’s cool. But I’ll describe it anyway.

The NSF, DARPA, DOE, NASA, etc etc have research program offices that set priorities. For example let’s have a DARPA program that pushes new stealth materials, or an NSF program on quantum computing (possibly partly motivated by another three-letter agency). The program managers understand the state of the art AND what the government (as the agent of the People) could really use Real Soon Now, or down the road for big bets. They write a Call for Proposals that describes what they’d like to see.

Researchers watch out for CFPs they might be able to contribute to, and propose a project where their work could help. Sometimes the fit is easy, and sometimes the researcher will modulate their work to fit better, because they want support from somewhere.

The proposals compete for a share of the targeted pot of money.

This is how the government influences basic research, while still giving researchers the opportunity to propose novel stuff the government hasn’t thought of.

It’s the system that built the Internet and CRISPR, RNA vaccines and the laser, microelectronics and IVF.
by BlackLotus89 | 2025-10-11 17:18:50+00:00
Yeah and your experience is 2 years out of date. Especially in recent months the firefox for android experience got better exponentially. I am a tab hoarder (a few thousand open tabs) and 2 years ago firefox needed 15 seconds on a fresh start to load. It's instantanious now. Firefox for android tried to force "inactive" tabs down my throat (I'm sure it helps, but no I don't want it. You can easily disable it in the tabs settings btw). Tabs that didn't get used for 2 weeks get put in an "inactive" state. A few months ago switching to an open tab took a few seconds up to a minute. For a month or two it's now instantanious. There are way more optimizations done and I can often tell right away when something got better or worse. Suffice to say your "experience" is so much out of date it is not even funny. Comparing firefox 2 years ago today is a joke and firefox feels completely different (user interface and speed) and your comment only spreads FUD. Anybody reading this that hasn't tried firefox for android - give it a try!
by Noumenon72 | 2025-10-11 17:19:25+00:00
Like battles on the Western Front, the amount of interestingness from the daily headlines does not translate to there being no impact for people on the ground or for yourself over time. The headlines matter not as "was this an interesting story, taken on its own" but more as "in this process that takes years to play out, are we on the path toward a noticeably better or worse state of the world".
by Forgeties79 | 2025-10-11 17:19:50+00:00
Again it’s not about your preference. My initial comment was “they don’t have exclusives,” which you contested, then shifted to “well it doesn’t bother me.”

I’m not debating preference. I’m saying they don’t have a robust library for the PS5 compared to previous hardware and they lack exclusives, yet here they are hyping the PS6. If you are happy with your PS5 then great! Many people are. But the library is thinner and depends on old titles. That is just reality.

Why should I expect the library to be better next iteration when they’ve farted their way through the last 5+ years and seem to have no interest doing otherwise?
by gr4vityWall | 2025-10-11 17:19:55+00:00
Although not intuitive, it's common to call that the 'runtime' in the JS world, while V8 and JSC would be called 'JS engines'.

Deno used similar wording in a tutorial for creating your own JS runtime using Rust and V8 bindings: https://deno.com/blog/roll-your-own-javascript-runtime

IMO the tutorial is still cool nonetheless, it's a fun subject.
by dan-robertson | 2025-10-11 17:20:32+00:00
It feels to me like there are two different things going on:

1. Video codecs like the denoise, compress, synthetic grain approach because their purpose is to get the perceptually-closest video to the original with a given number of bits. I think we should be happy to spend the bits on more perceptually useful information. Certainly I am happy with this.

2. Streaming services want to send as few bytes as they can get away with. So improvements like #1 tend to be spent on decreasing bytes while holding perceived quality constant rather than increasing perceived quality while holding bitrate constant.

I think one should focus on #2 and not be distracted by #1 which I think is largely orthogonal.
by andsoitis | 2025-10-11 17:20:35+00:00
> Are your tulips worth less if you bought them in 1636 or were they fairly priced and we're just still waiting on the market to come back to rationality?

When you’re broadly invested in the market (diversified portfolio), you’re basically saying to yourself that you are optimistic that the future will be better than today. There will be more prosperity, more peace, more human flourishing. If you believe those things, then it is rational to be invested.

If, on the other hand, you believe the future is doomed, then I supposed it could make sense to withdraw all your money in a defensive move and, I dunno, do something else with it.

I know which path I choose.
by dooglius | 2025-10-11 17:21:51+00:00
Pretty clueless. When hardware with a new paradigm is invented that provides value, new software has been created for it. GPUs are a great example, TPUs/systolic arrays and the Cerebras device are others; all of these are pretty successful. CPUs architecture is what it is because it's the best approach anyone has come up with for it's domain, and C is built around that, not the other way around. If you want to claim CPUs can be done better, you're going to give something much more concrete than vague gesturing at how things could be different. How, specifically, do you intend to build an abstraction around Pong's approach? What does the programming model look like? Seems to me that this is a pretty difficult way to build anything, and Pong only managed out of its simplicity.
by vincnetas | 2025-10-11 17:22:04+00:00
Starting in Claude bypass mode does not give me confidence:

WARNING: Claude Code running in Bypass Permissions mode │ │ │ │ In Bypass Permissions mode, Claude Code will not ask for your approval before running potentially dangerous commands. │ │ This mode should only be used in a sandboxed container/VM that has restricted internet access and can easily be restored if damaged.
by pstuart | 2025-10-11 17:22:59+00:00
Seems like a wonderful win/win opportunity to have the software be FOSS but enable small businesses to provide hosting/support/customization.

The biggest win of all is if we had an open/extensible/maintainable data exchange format so that we could eliminate the need for paperwork. How many times must we fill out the same information, and then require the providers to keyboard it in?
by abustamam | 2025-10-11 17:23:07+00:00
Omg yes, I thought I was crazy when I was pushing for native input type=date instead of JS date picker, it worked perfectly with minimal configuration on my phone and on my Mac, but then my coworkers said it didn't work for them on their browsers, turns out, yeah, it's not consistent.

I then proceeded to spend the next week crying trying to get JS date picker to work as well as native did on my browsers.
by Kon5ole | 2025-10-11 17:23:08+00:00
>The point here is that even if one uses the grid rarely, one is still depending on it being there. And that dependency means one is still exploiting things with fixed costs

Obviously the grid is needed and anyone using it should pay. But equally obviously, you should not have to pay when you are NOT using it! And residential solar is not using it.

Also obviously, we should not have to pay more than what is required to maintain the grid, in order to protect the profits of power companies that are being squeezed by free electricity. If they are increasing the prices due to solar, they should be held accountable for the actual reasons why.

We are deviating from the topic, I just wanted to protest against the notion that there is something wrong or sinister about encouraging rooftop solar. It's one of the best things that have happened in the efforts to reduce emissions, perhaps second only to the large-scale deployment of electric cars.
by kgwgk | 2025-10-11 17:23:11+00:00
> The difference here and between the .com bubble is these companies have high earnings. They are literally walking cash cows and are printing money...

The difference between you and me is that I know that Sun Microsystems was not burning money and had a price to earnings ratio similar to Nvidia now.

What are “these companies” by the way? Do you mean Tesla?
by hannofcart | 2025-10-11 17:23:44+00:00
On the contrary, I urge you to consider whether it is your statement that is overly dismissive. Is there perhaps some existing conditioning, maybe in the form of religious upbringing that is driving your reaction to this? Many of us in fact find OP's a very thoughtful comment than a "silly statement".

> By your logic we should kill everyone at their peak.

No, they suggested that the old and ailing whose quality of life has deteriorated to the point where there is no hope or no more joy in living, ought to be given the choice.

Let me end by quoting my favourite lines from the HN guidelines:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
by tombert | 2025-10-11 17:23:53+00:00
It's not "just spreading FUD", I disclosed the timeline of when I used it and why I don't think it was a good app. Whether or not it's better now doesn't change the fact that two years ago they had an objectively terrible app that I had a terrible experience with that they still put their name on, and as such I am going to associate it with the experiences I've had. That's not weird; I can only really assess things based on the experiences I've had with them.

I'm glad it has improved but I feel like you claiming this is implying dishonesty on my end, and I do not think that's fair.
by irs | 2025-10-11 17:24:52+00:00
yeah that was one of the articles that got me curious about atproto. very clever hack.

like the article mentions, blobs are little different in the sense that they can't be independently added to the PDS. there needs to be a another record created right after the blob upload that references it. Otherwise the blob gets deleted. https://atproto.com/specs/blob#blob-lifecycle

sounds like an interesting feature to add, will check on how feasible it is (along with some possible guardrails to not abuse the system). thanks for the suggestion!
by WD-42 | 2025-10-11 17:25:26+00:00
This post demonstrates one area where ai agents are a huge win: ui frameworks. I have a very similar workflow on an app I’m currently developing in Rust and GTK.

It’s not that I don’t know how to implement something, it’s that the agent can do so much of the tedious searching and trial and error that accompanies this ui framework code.

Notice that Mitchell maintains understanding of all the code through the session. It’s because he already understands what he needs to do. This is a far cry from the definition of “vibe coding” I think a lot of people are riding on. There’s no shortcut to becoming an expert.

Loving Ghostty!
by epistasis | 2025-10-11 17:25:50+00:00
I think the underlying point is that it production capacity, no matter the tech, takes time to grow.

It's not lithium that's the bottleneck, it's building a big enough supply chain to get the lithium into battery factories. It's about building enough factories.

For the particulars of sodium, it's similar enough to lithium that factories for one can be repurposed into factories for the other without a total rebuild or even total retooling.

There are also many different lithium chemistries that are economical and feasible, and we see big swings in chemistries when there's a temporary supply block for, say, cobalt. So perhaps sodium would add a bit more to that flexibility, actually... However even when lithium was at its maximum in 2023, nearly 6x more expensive than it is now, it wasn't the main blocker for expanding battery production capacity

(Sorry for the rambling, when I get some coffee in me sometimes it just pours out!)
by SteveJS | 2025-10-11 17:26:01+00:00
Having the llm write the spec/workunit from a conversation works well. Exploring a problem space with a (good) coding agent is fantastic.

However for complex projects IMO one must read what was written by the llm … every actual word.

When it ‘got away’ from me, in each case I left something in the llm written markdown that I should have removed.

99% “I can ask for that later” and 1% “that’s a good idea i hadn’t considered” might be the right ratio when reading an llm generated plan/spec/workunit.

Breaking work into single context passes … 50-60k tokens in sonnet 4.5 has had typically fantastic results for me.

My side project is using lean 4 and a carelessly left in ‘validate’ rather than ‘verify’ lead down a hilariously complicated path equivalent to matching an output against a known string.

I recovered, but it wasn’t obvious to me that was happening. I however would not be able to write lean proofs myself, so diagnosing the problem and fixing it is a small price to be able to mechanically verify part of my software is correct.
by trod1234 | 2025-10-11 17:26:02+00:00
> But you're right, complaining about big tech surveillance didn't help with making that point at all.

I disagree. Everyone with a brain is thinking it. Its important to address what your audience may be thinking especially given the other factors in this which I've mentioned in other responses related to gross negligence.

Technical capability exists to narrowly define blacklists, and they chose a gross negligence route (baby with bathwater), without providing notice.
by athenot | 2025-10-11 17:26:18+00:00
You're being downvoted but yes, this is about risk mitigation. The IT department at a health care organization has to balance matching the requirements of payers, admins and clinical staff, do so in a way that fits inside the allocated budget, and de-risk the unknowns as much as possible.

Even if the vendors are only half accurate about the solution they offer, by being paid suppliers, they are on the hook (to varying degrees). These systems are highly customized and serious headaches arise from interoperability and security. If some of that can be shifted to a vendor, it's a net positive insofar as the IT department and the compliance departments are concerned.

Some healthcare organization have invested in the technology side and become leaders in innovation but those are the exception.
by imtringued | 2025-10-11 17:26:31+00:00
So you're telling me Alzheimers is a death sentence? Also, what is the minimum nuisance that should lead to someone's death? Because that is the problem with the euthanasia obsession.

At some point everything indirectly leads to euthanasia and society is not built for that at all. Everything you do might or might not lead to someone's euthanasia, which means you are liable for their death.

Let's say we can predict school shooters before they shoot and give them an euthanasia to save lives. If bullying or encouragement causes someone to start shooting up a school, then the latent shooter will die before they do their shooting, but it also means that the instigator is a murderer themselves, because in the absence of instigation, no crime would be committed and no euthanasia would be necessary.

Since it is probably not possible to assign liability of a euthanasia to a single individual, because multiple people contributed to the outcome, the liability will be shared. Ten people being involved means each has committed 10% of a murder, meaning that they should receive 10% of a life sentence. Are you ready to serve a cumulative year in prison spread throughout your life to account for indirectly causing euthanasia?

Note that this problem isn't necessarily unique to euthanasia. The problem applies to any cure all solution. (Think of series like "Common Side Effects")

If you punch someone's face in, but cure it with a blue mushroom, was it really a crime, since their face is intact? And yet, more punching happens as a result of the existence of the panacea, which is why there needs to be a punishment for making someone dependent on the panacea.
by OCTAGRAM | 2025-10-11 17:26:48+00:00
There is a love and hate relation from programmers who started from it. Hate goes from the fact different Pascals didn't manage to settle an agreement on standard. Well, there are ISO Standard Pascal and ISO Extended Pascal. But does Turbo Pascal conform to any of them? No. So do Apple Pascal, UCSD Pascal, whatever.

As much as I hate C enemies, I must admit they were for some reason better at standard. If Pascals were such religiously adopting the standard and if C was remaining as fragmented as Pascal, with "otherwise" in one dialect and "else" in another one, then Pascal could win. Probably not the Turbo Pascal as we know it. Another Pascal, standard enough Pascal.

Or maybe it should have been Modula-2. Amiga had TDI Modula-2. Don't know if TopSpeed Modula-2 and TDI Modula-2 were source compatible, but I guess far more than different Pascals.

This table is built by ex. Pascal developer that moved to Ada: https://p2ada.sourceforge.net/pascada.htm

Indeed, Ada's standard conformance is a breathe of fresh air.

But Amiga had no Ada compiler, and had Modula-2 compiler. So for the sake of good guys' winning, if time machine moves me to 80s, I would pick Modula-2 for every platform. Nowadays Ada is a choice of good guy
by nightski | 2025-10-11 17:27:29+00:00
Obviously if you instruct the autocomplete engine to fill in questions it will. That's not the point. The LLM has no model of the problem it is trying to solve, nor does it attempt to understand the problem better. It is merely regurgitating. This can be extremely useful. But it is very limiting when it comes to using as an agent to write code.
by furyofantares | 2025-10-11 17:27:40+00:00
I do a lot of work with claude code and codex cli but frankly as soon as I see all the LLM-tells in the readme, and then all the commit messages written by claude, I immediately don't want to read the readme or try the project until someone else recommends it to me.

This is gaining stars and forks but I don't know if that's just because it's under the github.com/microsoft, and I don't really know how much that means.
by ksec | 2025-10-11 17:28:54+00:00
>The IEEE 802.11bn (Wi-Fi 8) working group has acknowledged the need for a shift in focus, framing the standard’s goals differently from past generations: not chasing ever-higher peak speeds, but improving reliability, lower latency (especially at the 95th percentile), reduced packet loss, and robustness under challenging conditions (interference, mobility).

For people who dont follow WiFi closely. While WiFi 8, or 7 or 6 all has the intended features for its release, they are either not mandated or dont work as well as it should. Instead every release was a full refined execution of previous version. So the best WiFi 6 ( OFDMA ) originally promised will only come in WiFi 7. And current WiFi 7 feature like Multi-Link Operation will likely work better in WiFI 8. So if you wanted a fully working WiFi 8 as they marketed it, you better wait for WiFI 9.

But WiFi has come a long way. Not only have they exceeded 1Gbps in real world performance, they are coming close to 2.5Gbps, maximising the 2.5Gbps Ethernet. And we are now working on more efficient and reliable WiFi.
by BlackLotus89 | 2025-10-11 17:30:00+00:00
I was not claiming dishonesty and I'm sorry if it felt that way. My main problem is that a review of software that is getting updates as often as firefox that is based on 2 year old experience feels so wrong. I myself am no stranger to critizing firefox. They have done some thigns that made me nearly switch multiple times. But especially in recent times I feel that they are finally getting their act together (vertical tabs in firefox, performance optimizations, actually asking for feedback, ...) and I know that for me user reviews on hn are more valuable than random bloggers I find through $searchengine. Your comment is actually way more transparent than those blogs that have no date mapped to them or are just AI spam or whatever so again sorry for not giving credit where credit is due, I just find it unfair to write under a recent article experiences that are far from the present reality. (sorry for rambling and being kinda incoherent)
by hansmayer | 2025-10-11 17:30:06+00:00
More creative? I've just seen my premium subscription "AI" struggling to find a trivial issue of a missing import in a very small / toy project. Maybe these tools are getting all sorts of scores on all sorts of benchmarks, I dont doubt it, but why are there no significant real-world results after more than 3 years of hype? It reminds of that situation when the geniuses at Google offered the job to the guy who created Homebrew and then rejected him after he supposedly did not do well on one of those algorithmic tasks (inverting a binary tree? - not sure if I remember correctly). There are also all sorts of people scoring super high on various IQ tests, but what counts, with humans as with the supposed AI is the real world results. Benchmarks without results do not mean anything.
by skopje | 2025-10-11 17:30:09+00:00
Wish I had saved my VHS C++ Tutorials from 1990 with Bjarne Stroustrup. It was mostly him staring into the camera teaching C++. They don't appear to be on his homepage either. Bummer, because this was back before C++ went crazy, and they were a great intro to the "simpler" days.
by Izkata | 2025-10-11 17:30:19+00:00
> I don't remember when the term javascript was even really used in regular vernacular

2004 or 2005. Gmail and Google Maps were a "holy crap this is actually possible?" for a lot of people, both technical and non, and was when javascript switched from mostly-ignored* to embraced.

*Just minor enhancements, outside of technical people mostly only known to MySpace users who wanted to add a little flair to their page. XmlHttpRequest was almost entirely unknown even in technical spaces until gmail showcased interaction without page refreshes.