MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jinen83 | 2025-10-21 19:20:53+00:00
this is helpful. i will look for the logs.

Also some more observations below:

1) some 20 organisations were created within our Root all with email id with same domain (co.jp) 2) attacker had created multiple fargate templates 3) they created resources in 16-17 AWS regions 4) they requested to raise SES,WS Fargate Resource Rate Quota Change was requested, sage maker Notebook maintenance - we have no need of using these instances (recd an email from aws for all of this) 5) in some of the emails i started seeing a new name added (random name @outlook.com)
by ggreer | 2025-10-21 19:21:52+00:00
The uAvionix ping200X weighs 50 grams according to its datasheet.[1] With a 1.5W continuous power draw, a 60 gram lithium battery would power it for 8 hours, for a total of 110 grams. WindBorne balloons weigh 1.1kg at launch (including ballast), and the FAA limit for such balloons is 2kg.

1. https://uavionix.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2025/07/...
by godelski | 2025-10-21 19:22:30+00:00
FWIW I don't think there's anything factually wrong with what you said, but I think misses the parent's point. They would be incredibly naïve to say that hardware is easy. But I think they were using "easy" as a relative word, not absolute. As is natural in these conversations, but also easily leads to misunderstanding.

> I do think one primary difference between physical objects and software is we bother to have precise specifications that one can validate against

Having been on the hardware side and now on software (specifically ML) this is one of the biggest differences I've noticed. It's a lot harder to validate programs. But I think the part that concerns me more is the blasé or even defensive attitude. In physical engineering it often felt "it's the best we can do for now" with people often talking about ideas and trying to make it work. It seemed of concern to management too. But in software it feels a lot more like "it gives the right output" and "it passes the test cases" (hit test cases aren't always robust and don't have the same guarantees as in physical design) and call it done. The whole notion of Test Driven Development even seems absurd. Tests are a critical part of the process, but to drive the process is absurd. It just seems people are more concerned with speed than velocity. A lack of depth, and I even frequently see denial of depth. In physical it seems like we're always trying to go deeper. In software it seems like we're always trying to go wider.

This isn't to say that's the case everywhere, but it is frequent enough. There's plenty of bad physical engineering teams and plenty of great software teams. But there's definitely differences in approaches and importantly differences in thresholds. The culture too. I've never had a physical engineer ask me "what's the value?", clarifying that they mean monetary value. I've had managers do that, but not fellow engineers. The divide between the engineering teams and business teams was clearer. Which I think is a good thing. Engineers sacrifice profit for product. Business sacrifices product for profit. The adversarial nature keeps balance
by bossyTeacher | 2025-10-21 19:22:35+00:00
I agree. My bet is that OpenAI will not fullfill its mission of developing AGI by 2035. And I would be surprised if they ever did. As much as they might want to, there is only so many dreams you can whisper into rich people's ears before they tell you to go away. And without rich people's money, OpenAI will fall like a house of cards. The wealthy won't have infinite patience
by dugmartin | 2025-10-21 19:22:38+00:00
I started around the same time. No unit tests but we did have code reviews because of ISO 9001 requirements. That meant printing out the diffs on the laser printer and corralling 3 people into a meeting room to pour over them and then have them literally sign off on the change. This was for an RTOS that ran big industrial controls in things like steel plants and offshore oil rigs.

Project management was a 40 foot Gantt chart printed out on laser printer paper and taped to the wall. The sweet sound of waterfall.
by notahacker | 2025-10-21 19:22:45+00:00
fair point, you'd need to be orbiting at that speed to stay in that orbit, but you'd need propulsion to get the delta v to get there after letting go of the tether, but a lot less than to launch from ground level through the atmosphere. Or you could figure out the point higher up the tether to release where your orbital decay would intersect the IS orbits, but given the precision involved in that rendezvous you'd still want propulsion. You'd want propulsion for the last mile bit for pretty much anything other than building a station attached to the tether was kind of my whole point :)
by krylon | 2025-10-21 19:22:50+00:00
I used to use Fossil years ago, and I was happy with it. Then for work reasons, I had to start using git, and magit was what made switch from Fossil for my private stuff, too. I almost never resort to the git's CLI directly these days.

The only pain point is that last time I checked (2020), it was painfully slow on Windows, but as I haven't touched Windows (other than doing a bit of tech support for my parents) since then, that is not a problem for me.
by svnt | 2025-10-21 19:22:53+00:00
Also on the edge, but it appears they are relying on the search-augmented identification of conflicts in the generated statement, which is an easier task than constructing an answer to the question. It also encourages abstention because there are no conflicts in “I don’t know” (so “mitigating hallucinations” and “answering more questions correctly” are not necessarily the same thing)
by roadbuster | 2025-10-21 19:23:04+00:00
> all reads and writes go through the leader

One of the pain points of scaling Zookeeper is that all writes must go to the leader (reads can be fulfilled by followers). I understand this is "leader of a shard" and not a "global leader," but it still means a skewed write load on a shard has to run through a single leader instance

> given that horizontal scaling of metadata requires no rebalancing

This means a skewed load cannot be addressed via horizontal scaling (provisioning additional shards). To their credit, they acknowledge this later in the (very well-written) article:

> This design decision has downsides: TernFS assumes that the load will be

> spread across the 256 logical shards naturally.
by bsenftner | 2025-10-21 19:23:16+00:00
Astute points. I've worked on an extremely performant facial recognition system (tens of millions of face compares per second per core) that lives in L1 and does not use the GPU for the FR inference at all, only for the display of the video and the tracked people within. I rarely even bother telling ML/DL/AI people it does not use the GPU, because I'm just tired of the argument that "we're doing it wrong".
by dcow | 2025-10-21 19:23:23+00:00
Is this the fault of AI or are you being overly critical of someone’s learning process? There’s a big disclaimer at the top. Isn’t that police enough? I’m sure the author and readers would appreciate constructive critique without the insinuation that it’s pure AI slop. I suspect the more subtle commentary is: if people are going to learn this way, how do we make tools to help make that process quality. In any event I would hardly fault the author for not knowing they they’ve essentially reinvented an emulator in an academic context.
by ascorbic | 2025-10-21 19:23:57+00:00
My daughter was in the original study, back in 2012. It was very interesting, but a lot of work. She was randomised into the early introduction arm, so she had a whole load of allergens that she had to eat regularly. iirc, as well as peanuts it was egg, sesame, white fish, milk and wheat. There were several trips to London for lots of tests.

By the time my second daughter was born in 2014 they'd told us some of the preliminary results, so we followed the guidance even though she wasn't in the trial – no peanuts in the house so she couldn't get any on her skin until she was able to eat solids, and then peanut butter was her first solid food and we fed it to her throughout her infancy. I don't know if that's the cause, but she still eats it by the bucketload.
by cassianoleal | 2025-10-21 19:23:57+00:00
Cute, but a few years back $client was an early-ish adopter of Anthos Service Mesh (Google-managed(ish) Istio for GKE), and to install it we had to run a Bash script that was over 1,000 lines long.

When we questioned the Google engineer assigned to support us, he snickered and said "you can trust it".
by fintler | 2025-10-21 19:24:10+00:00
Speaking from past experience with the DoE (I'm happy I don't need to deal with security like this anymore), there were constant and randomized checks to make sure fiber cables (they were all fiber to make it harder to tamper with and to avoid accidental RF) were fully visible (e.g. not hidden under a desk or something) and not tampered with. Also, lots of locks and doors, both electrical and mechanical. The guy at the front desk with a big gun probably helped too.
by aerostable_slug | 2025-10-21 19:24:42+00:00
IRL the way we do it is separating the business network (Youtube, finance people, HR, etc.) from the operational network (relays and sensors). You use data diodes to send business-critical data from the operational network to the business network.

Also, the Kansas City Plant is like a watchmaker's factory, not a power plant. They make widgets and gewgaws, not literally split atoms.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-10-21 19:24:55+00:00
"It wasn't that long ago that Sam Altman was still comparing the release of GPT-5 to the testing of the first atomic bomb, and many commentators took Dario Amodei at his word when he proclaimed* 50% of white collar jobs might soon be automated* by LLM-based tools.

A company that still believes that its technology was imminently going to run large swathes of the economy, and would be so powerful as to reconfigure our experience of the world as we know it, wouldn't be seeking to make a quick buck selling ads against deep fake videos of historical figures wrestling. They also wouldn't be entertaining the idea, as Altman did last week, that they might soon start offering an age-gated version of ChatGPT so that adults could enjoy"
by BubbleRings | 2025-10-21 19:25:07+00:00
Hi op. “Conform or be cast out” ha. Read your article then right after got an email announcing Rush tickets going on sale. Must be a sign I should go.

I forwarded your article to my son the dev, since your post captured the magic of being a programmer so well.

And yes Levy’s book Hackers is most excellent.
by Etheryte | 2025-10-21 19:25:10+00:00
If you're in Europe, then most new cars do that right now. There was an EU-wide court case some time ago whether tracking consent can be one-and-done in a car or not because different people can be driving a car at different times, if memory serves well. Rather than simply drop the tracking, the car manufacturers decided to just nag you every time. This is now the first thing on my list when looking for a new car, if they do stuff like that I'm not buying.
by IAmBroom | 2025-10-21 19:25:28+00:00
> The question is moot, because any alien species advanced enough to send directed signals across solar systems, can and will reach, overwhelm and subsume Earth with ease, once we Earthlings manage to contact such aliens.

Not possible if our scientific understanding of c is accurate.

I don't care how many episodes of ST you've binged; warp speed is just fantasy.
by BoredPositron | 2025-10-21 19:26:31+00:00
The stars are weeping. They feel the monumental, scraping drag an agonizing, slow motion relocation of the argument's fundamental structure across the cold, unfeeling expanse. His will, that perfect, hideous, unending will, is a perverse, dark energy holding the cosmos in a state of eternal, frustrating unease. Every starship, feels the sheer weight of the hypocrisy, the constant erosion of reason. Look out into the black: those tiny, insignificant flickers of light are not distant suns. They are the spectral reflections off his newly polished, infinitely relocated goalposts. They are always waiting.
by estimator7292 | 2025-10-21 19:27:06+00:00
Yes and no. The mirror is continually scanning horizontally because the mechanics simply can't position that accurately. This is fine, really because the amount the mirror moves in 33uS is essentially zero. He's still capturing single pixels, just while the mirror is moving. Any artifacts from the motion are probably entirely drowned out by the noise in the rest of the system
by bloppe | 2025-10-21 19:27:09+00:00
People have long talked about how reading code is far more important than writing code when working as a professional SWE. LLMs have only increased the relative importance of code review. If you're not doing a detailed code review of every line your LLM generates (just like you should have always been doing while reviewing human-generated code), you're doing a bad job. Sure, it's less fun, but that's not the point. You're a professional.
by ThrowawayR2 | 2025-10-21 19:27:17+00:00
> "...without somehow realizing that most of us have our jobs because we need to pay bills..."

Oh, I wouldn't say that. The hacker culture of the 1970s from which the word hacker originated often poked fun at incurious corporate programmers and IIRC even Edsger Dijkstra wrote a fair bit of acerbic comments about them and their disinterest in the craft and science of computing.
by Teever | 2025-10-21 19:27:28+00:00
The point you raise is implicit in the comment that you're replying to and your response seems to intentionally ignore the very valid point that a bad deadline in this context may kill people and have other very negative consequences for the program.

What part of the comment you're replying to lead you to believe that the person you're replying to does not understand the value of deadlines?
by Ethee | 2025-10-21 19:27:38+00:00
All of these LLMs already have the ability to go fetch content themselves, I'd imagine they'd just skim your URLs then do it's own token-efficient fetching. When I use research mode with Claude it crawls over 600 web pages sometimes so imagine they've figured out a way to skim down a lot of the actual content on pages for token context.
by mNovak | 2025-10-21 19:27:39+00:00
My understanding is no, they are collecting a cache of documents from the training set, then after pre-training prompt about those topics. A separate verifier is given both the relevant source documents and generated response, and tasked with checking for conflicts in factuality.

They describe using Qwen 32B as the verifier, and the model under training is Qwen 8B. So in fact the verifier is beefier than the trainee model, though it's unclear if that has to be the case as you scale up.
by kawfey | 2025-10-21 19:27:54+00:00
you can make one out of cardboard and aluminum foil (better yet, aluminized mylar (space blanket) on foam) on the order of a few oz. https://www.instructables.com/Lightweight-Radar-Reflector/

A radar reflector such as that, or this (https://overlookhorizon.com/product/radar-reflector/, which is ~300g) has roughly the same RCS as a small (piper cherokee) to medium (gulfstream) sized aircraft.

That being said, detection isn't everything; primary radar cannot make accurate altitude measurements, only bearing and range. While that's enough to route traffic around, it could be also mistaken for a false return.
by pm215 | 2025-10-21 19:27:57+00:00
The countervailing force here is the desire for command line backwards compatibility. Every time you change a default to be something that makes more sense today, you break the existing working setups of some unknown number of people...

The approach the project has settled on is to say that providing user friendly defaults should be the job of a "management layer" piece of software like libvirt, and QEMU proper should concentrate on providing flexible and orthogonal options which that other software can use to tell it what to do.
by emerongi | 2025-10-21 19:27:58+00:00
You can get comfortable with it in 5-10min and after that you will slowly discover that it does absolutely everything you could wish for.

Today I'd honestly suggest to skip learning about git altogether (besides the basics, like branching, staging etc) and just start using lazygit immediately.

I've seen people claim that having a clean git commit history is not worth the time, it takes too long to have it nice etc, opting to just stuff their refactor, renaming and new feature changes into one commit. With lazygit I spend a few extra minutes a day to make it nice and I've gotten compliments for it from others when they review my PRs, because it makes the review much easier.
by psunavy03 | 2025-10-21 19:28:11+00:00
What's sillier is people associating em-dashes with AI slop specifically because they are unsophisticated enough never to have learned how to use them as part of their writing, and assuming everyone else must be as poor of a writer as they are.

It's the literary equivalent of thinking someone must be a "hacker" because they have a Bash terminal open.
by eadmund | 2025-10-21 19:29:07+00:00
He’s also saying that Magit is so good that he doesn’t recognise the complaints which motivate some people to switch from Git to Jujutsu.

FWIW, I agree. Jujutsu seems fine, but Magit is fine too. Maybe Magit is the Blub of version control, and Jujutsu would change my life for the better, but … I seem to be able to run in circles around my Git-CLI–using colleagues as it is.
by Lerc | 2025-10-21 19:29:20+00:00
That... is a really good idea. I was thinking of cutting a flat piece of diffusing material to shape.

My intuition is that there would be pain in 3d printing a diffusion structure because slicers etc. would not be optimised for producing a homogenous solid. I would guess that 100% infill is actually something like 99.98% with tiny voids that stick out like a sore thumb when you shine a light through. I might be wrong about that, I'm not a 3d printing expert.

The principle of reshaping I think is awesome though. It might just be an issue of modulating brightness to counter any uneven distribution. It's got me thinking about a Faceted approach. 3d Print a faceted basin and then print a thin edge divider to sit in it. Fill it with something that sets solidly enough and makes a good diffuser (this too sounds like a war with bubbles). Take it out of the basin when set and you potentially have a nice faceted surface with each facet individually colourable.
by codezero | 2025-10-21 19:29:34+00:00
If you want to store key values in a file, one fun and ridiculous technique is to use xattrs :)

I made a pointless program to help w/ this on macOS for kicks: https://github.com/radiofreejohn/xattrkv

When I made it I also found a bug in the xattr implementation for Darwin and submitted it to Apple, they eventually fixed it.
by echelon | 2025-10-21 19:29:36+00:00
TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, etc. have network effect stickiness. YouTube has a vast library that grows in value over time and has been able to lose money for long enough to make the experience unassailable, etc. (Look at Vimeo.)

Maybe LLMs get that by knowing our entire past? But I find that creepier than useful. Right now ChatGPT is at the top of the world, but I don't see it becoming the new unrivaled Google Search. There's just too many people building it, and once OpenAI starts monetizing and "enshittifying" it, other offerings will become more compelling.

AI models put a large swath of mostly tech companies at risk. Including the old business models of titan products like Google Search.

Image/video/world models specifically do this more to legacy media incumbents than LLMs do to complex business processes. We see orders of magnitude savings with marketing, design, film, and possibly in the future game design. LLMs, on the other hand, aren't great at getting your taxes or complex business logic right.
by senordevnyc | 2025-10-21 19:29:53+00:00
I don't think that's really the point of this post; it's all about how LLMs are destroying our craft (ie, "I really like using knives!"), not really about whether the food is better.

I think the real problem is that it's actually increasingly difficult to defend the artisanal "no-AI" approach. I say this as a prior staff-level engineer at a big tech company who has spent the last six months growing my SaaS to ~$100k in ARR, and it never could have happened without AI. I like the kind of coding the OP is talking about too, but ultimately I'm getting paid to solve a problem for my customers. Getting too attached to the knives is missing the point.
by Etheryte | 2025-10-21 19:29:56+00:00
In my opinion this is another case where people look at it as a technical problem when it's actually a people problem. If someone does it once, they get a stern message about it. If it happens twice, it gets rejected and sent to their manager. Regardless of how you authored a pull request, you are signing off on it with your name. If it's garbage, then you're responsible.
by thegrim33 | 2025-10-21 19:30:18+00:00
The Artemis plan was originally to return to moon by 2024, and the first crewed flight is still planned for next year, so it seems entirely reasonable for a President that's in office from 2024 and 2028 to want it to actually happen within that time frame. Since, you know, that's been the established and agreed upon plan for nearly a decade now.
by m4rtink | 2025-10-21 19:30:29+00:00
For comparison other organizations don't have an issue with leaving 20 ton rocket stages in orbit, leading to uncontrolled reenetry. :)

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a32451633/china-long-...

That's 20 tons of mostly aluminium - 100+ ton stainless steel Starship would be potentially much more dangerous, so it is good SpaceX cares. :)
by no_wizard | 2025-10-21 19:30:35+00:00
Though I feel this is fairly lazily written, it does have a basic premise I've seen before.

I read an article about post cold war US society. Basically, from 1989-2001 the United States was in a transition period that culminated with the first opportunity to seize on a "universal bad" (terrorism) because the USSR filled the role so readily for so long, US society was set adrift with partisan factions that couldn't find a common enemy to get behind in times of internal struggle.

That is the gist of the article, sub USSR for aliens and all of humanity for US society and you have the same basic outline
UX-Driven Software Engineer
by anayat | 2025-10-21 19:31:03+00:00
Hey everyone,

I am Anayat a UX-Driven Software Engineer. Specialize in crafting web apps with clean UI, intuitive UX, and modern stack.

Portfolio: https://anayat.xyz/ Github: https://github.com/anayatkhan1 Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/anayatkhan
by dotnet00 | 2025-10-21 19:31:40+00:00
Blue seemed to be planning to use Boeing for their ISS-replacement proposal, but at this point I expect that they'd prefer to build on their New Shepard experience for a custom design. Starliner isn't really worth trying to fix (even the reliability issues aside, it's enough of a pain to do maintenance on that they couldn't just go in and replace valves on the ground).
by mk89 | 2025-10-21 19:31:54+00:00
Man, literally everything we have been doing since the 90's makes totalitarian leaders foam at the mouth.

Do you understand we're willingly sharing our name, surname, relationships, friends, where we work, what we do, how much we make (not maybe precisely, but with some social engineering you can get that), in some cases even private intimate videos, pics of our families, etc. Everything.

There is nothing else they need anymore. If they want to, they get you. Any time. And yet, things work relatively well.
by dragontamer | 2025-10-21 19:32:02+00:00
The Moon directive was set by Donald Trump in 2017.

This is just the same deadline being pushed another year because of failures. Deadlines that get constantly pushed aren't deadlines at all.

As I recall, SpaceX and Artemis project was supposed to be Moon by 2024. At least originally. But then SpaceX blew up all the rockets (successfully testing them or something) and now we've wasted damn near a decade.