MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Vektorceraptor | 2025-10-14 08:29:34+00:00
My brain reads “No science, no startups” — alarm bells. This kind of mono-causal oversimplification can only be anti-Trump clickbait — I ignore the post. A few seconds later, guilt kicks in — “Don’t be so ignorant!” — I click the link. Literally the ninth word is Trump. My brain: “Alright, that says it all.”

I scroll a bit — should I really read this? My brain: “No, let ChatGPT analyze it critically.” Conclusion: The same kind of simplistic linear causality is presented without substance — no sources, no data, no valid projections — uncritically carried through. Typical NPC-scripted “science,” representative of much of today’s “NPC academia.” It’s just a patchwork of general knowledge and some combinatorial creativity, pretending to be expertise, seriousness, and understanding — enumerated to suggest strange, subjective, unscientific, and mostly personal goals.

This exact kind of NPC-scripted “science” needs to be exposed and discredited as pseudo. If this is the so-called “defense” of science, then it deserves to be opposed. Simple as that.

PLEASE - for the love of god - spare me with this nonsense!
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-10-14 08:29:45+00:00
It's tautological but models are models.

It doesn't really change anything to their inherent value that you build them from the hypotheses up or from the conclusions down. It holds the same that this set of interactions lead to this behaviour.

Sometimes going down can be equally interesting: "What would a system where tariff improves the overall well being of a country inhabitants look like?". Contrast the model requirements with empirical data and you have an interesting paper.
by h33t-l4x0r | 2025-10-14 08:30:05+00:00
I think this is right on, and the things that LLM excels at (react components was your example) are really the things that there's just such a ridiculous amount of training data for. This is why LLMs are not likely to get much better at code. They're still useful, don't get me wrong, but they 5x expectations needs to get reined in.
by vallavaraiyan | 2025-10-14 08:30:43+00:00
What is novel code?

1. LLM's would suck at coming up with new algorithms. 2. I wouldn't let an LLM decide how to structure my code. Interfaces, module boundaries etc

Other than that, given the right context (the sdk doc for a unique hardware for eg) and a well organised codebase explained using CLAUDE.Md they work pretty well in filling out implementations. Just need to resist the temptation to prompt while the actual typing would take seconds.
by skrebbel | 2025-10-14 08:31:01+00:00
This has been going on for decades.

I once did a brief consulting stint at what was then considered one of the most innovative, startuppy departments of Philips Healthcare, and it was by far the slowest-moving, least productive software team I've ever seen.

They had just "ended a sprint" when I came in, and 3 months later they still hadn't started another. People were just fooling around. There was a rule that talking about work during lunch was a no-no (so we talked about hockey and babies, the only subjects that 2+ people had in common). Testers were a separate team, and they refused to test things, no matter how small, without being allocated months of dedicated time to first make a detailed 50-page docx "test scenario". The mini product I was assigned to work on took 3 months to complete but the 5-page spec had been argued over for the past 18 months and signed off by, in total, 8 managers and 6 directors. I was the only person shipping anything of actual business value during that period (not because I'm so great, just because I was the only one asked to do anything of business value).

This is now a decade and a half ago. With the series of number-crunching Excel MBAs leading Philips since then I quite doubt that this will have changed for the better.
by theknarf | 2025-10-14 08:31:01+00:00
Config as code suffers from two big problems:

- Turing completeness means that you have to deal with the halting problem, meaning you can't statically ensure that a program ever completes. This is really shit when dealing with config, one buggy while loop or infinite recursive function and stuff just grinds to a halt with no good way of debugging it. Having this problem at the config level might mean that your program never even gets to properly start up, so you never get to setup the logging / otel or whatever you usually use to catch those problems.

- Normal programming languages have side effects and are therefor insecure! They can usually read and write files anywhere, open sockets, send traffic over the internet, etc. These are all properties you don't want of a config language! Especially if you can import code from other modules, a single import statement in a "config file" is now a huge security risk! This is why "npm" keeps having security nightmares again and again and again.

So what you want from a config language is not the same thing as from a programming language, you want as much power as you can get without "Turing completeness" and without any "side effects". That's the reason we have stuff like HCL and whatever the article used as an example.
by iLoveOncall | 2025-10-14 08:31:04+00:00
> brands injecting themselves into conversations on Reddit, LinkedIn, and every other public forum.

Don't forget HackerNews.

Every single new release from OpenAI and other big AI firms attracts a lot of new accounts posting surface-level comments like "This is awesome" and then a few older accounts that have exclusively posted on previous OpenAI-related news to defend them.

It's glaringly obvious, and I wouldn't be surprised if at least a third of the comments on AI-related news is astroturfing.
by mnky9800n | 2025-10-14 08:31:27+00:00
As a scientist there is a ton of boiler plate code that is just slightly different enough for every data set I need to write it myself each time. So coding agents solve a lot of that. At least until you are halfway through something and you realize Claude didn’t listen when you wrote 5 times in capital letters NEVER MAKE UP DATA YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE np.random IN PLACE OF ACTUAL DATA. It’s all kind of wild because when it works it’s great and when it doesnt there’s no failure state. So if I put on my llm marketing hat I guess the solution is to have an agent that comes behind the coding agent that checks to see if it does its job. We can call it the Performance Improvement Plan Agent (PIPA). PIPAs allow real time monitoring of coding agents to make sure they are working and not slacking off allowing for HR departments and management teams to have full control over their AI employees. Together we will move into the future.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-10-14 08:31:50+00:00
> it's an argument I'm sick of having, but it's an argument that needs to be had

OP [1] is the first person to make the argument that socialising anything implies communism in this thread. The entire shtick is a straw man. It doesn't need to be argued if it's only brought up by the side tearing it down.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45575045
by probiruk | 2025-10-14 08:32:58+00:00
Hey HN,

I’m Biruk, founder of ContextOne (contextone.ai). We’ve been working on ContextOne to solve a problem we kept running into with AI agents: they’re smart, but they often lack the right context.

ContextOne is a context layer that gives AI agents real, up-to-date knowledge. It lets agents retrieve context with RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) that’s both fast and deeply accurate.

When we say accurate, we don’t just mean “factually correct only” we mean version-aware. If your query relates to Next.js v15, your agent won’t mix in Next.js v13 docs by mistake. ContextOne knows exactly which version to pull from, so the information it returns is consistent and relevant.

You can connect agents to our Public Registry, which already includes a lot of documentation across popular frameworks and tools. It grows daily and if something’s missing, you can easily add it yourself.

Private indexing is just as important. When you work at a company, most of the valuable knowledge lives in internal documentation that’s not publicly available. AI agents can’t access that on their own. With ContextOne, you can index private docs internal wikis, private GitHub repos, or LLMs.txt files and make them available to agents securely via RAG. Enterprise features like SSO, SAML, and private workspaces make it easy to manage access and collaborate, which is a real game-changer for teams.

Key features:

- Multi-Version Indexing: Query exactly the doc version you need (e.g., Next.js v15 vs v13).

- MCP & API Integration: Works with agents like Cursor, Claude Code, OpenCode, and other agents (check out our full agent support here: https://docs.contextone.ai/quickstart) or integrate directly via API.

- Team & Enterprise Support: SSO, SAML, private workspaces, and advanced team collaboration.

- Public Registry: Instantly power AI agents with a growing, ready-to-use knowledge base across popular frameworks and libraries.

- Private Documentation: Securely index and use your company’s internal knowledge.

Everything described above is live today. There’s a free plan to explore the public registry, plus paid tiers for private indexing and team features.

We’d love to hear your thoughts, feedback, ideas, or ways you’d want to use it. Thanks!

contextone.ai
by nebula8804 | 2025-10-14 08:33:04+00:00
>When you take away cheap clothes and cheap TVs, all made in modern Asian factories and replace them with shitty American products at 3x the price, the current populist movement will look like a party in comparison.

Would the rest of the world even care anymore? Everyone from Canada to New Zealand is now making plans for long term disconnection from the US. They will not let the next Trump boss them around like they have been this past year. The reputation is torched and so if the US launches another populist movement that leads nowhere and collapses the country as a result why should the other 95% of the planet care?
by bux93 | 2025-10-14 08:33:08+00:00
Firing a company's boss and appointing a trustee is uncommon, but it happens.

E.g. at IT service provider Centric, where the majority owner and CEO had a mental breakdown. Employees suffered from his delusions, but it also threatened to affect customers. The trustees aren't government agents, they just run the business as a going concern, minus the mismanagement (in this case, minus the mental illness).

US law also provides for a CEO to be ousted and a trustee to be appointed in cases of mismanagement or fraud. I wouldn't call that taking control, in much the same way as bankruptcy proceedings appointing a trustee don't amount to government taking control.

Now, the article refers to a filing made by former management. That filing is conflating the order and the firing of the CEO. The ministerial order didn't fire the CEO, that was a separate action filed by the company's works council and happened before the order was issued. The reason for the firing lies mostly in mismanagement and conflicts of interest.

The ministerial order is much more limited in scope, allowing the government to roll back decisions detrimental to the company - especially transfers of assets.

It's a shame that CNBC is just parroting the former management's objections, rather than you know, doing any reporting.

In both the order and the legal case, it's clear the ownership/management wanted to shut down the company and take the assets. The company was also not doing OK financially, and this kind of thing reeks of bankruptcy fraud (i.e. fraudulent conveyance).

The kind of tech nexperia makes isn't rocket science but I could imagine they produce some chips that are used in essential supply chains. So rather than wait for the bankruptcy and the fraud to happen, the company was restricted from transferring assets.

So the wording "takes control" is misleading. "subjected to additional oversight" is perhaps too wordy but more accurate. "put on a leash" might be a good way of putting it.
by vidarh | 2025-10-14 08:33:35+00:00
My experience is opposite to yours. I have had Claude Code fix issues in a compiler over the last week with very little guidance. Occasionally it gets frustrating, but most of the time Claude Code just churns through issue after issue, fixing subtle code generation and parser bugs with very little intervention. In fact, most of my intervention is tool weaknesses in terms of managing compaction to avoid running out of context at inopportune moments.

It's implemented methods I'd have to look up in books to even know about, and shown that it can get them working. It may not do much truly "novel" work, but very little code is novel.

They follow instructions very well if structured right, but you can't just throw random stuff in CLAUDE.md or similar. The biggest issue I've run into recently is that they need significant guidance on process. My instructions tends to focus on three separate areas: 1) debugging guidance for a given project (for my compiler project, that means things like "here's how to get an AST dumped from the compiler" and "use gdb to debug crashes" (it sometimes did that without being told, but not consistently; with the instructions it usually does tht), 2) acceptance criteria - this does need reiteration, 3) telling it to run tests frequently, make small, testable changes, and to frequently update a detailed file outlining the approach to be taken, progress towards it, and any outcomes of investigation during the work.

My experience is that with those three things in place, I can have Claude run for hours with --dangerously-skip-permissions and only step in to say "continue" or do a /compact in the middle of long runs, with only the most superficial checks.

It doesn't always provide perfect code every step. But neither do I. It does however usually move in the right direction every step, and has consistently produced progress over time with far less effort on my behalf.

I wouldn't have it start from scratch without at least some scaffolding that is architecturally sound yet, but it can often do that too, though that needs review before it "locks in" a bad choice.

I'm at a stage where I'm considering harnesses to let Claude work on a problem over the course of days without human intervention instead of just tens of minutes to hours.
by mihaaly | 2025-10-14 08:34:37+00:00
What I recently experienced on asking for a string manipulation routine that follows very arbitrary logic (for a long existing file format) that it forgots things like UTF string handling (in general, but also its subtle details requiring second round), its own code replacing special characters with escape sequence can be cut in half in limited width fileds (being an input for the function), considers some aspects of the specification document while omiting the others. Needs heavy supervision in the details and constant adjustments.

Yet, it makes the bulk of the work. Saves brain energy, that goes into the edge cases then. The overall time is the same, it is just the result could become more robust in the end. Only with good supervision! (which has better chance when we are not worn out with the tedious heavy lifting part)

But the one undebatable benefit is that the user can feel the smartest person in the whole wide world having so 'excellent questions', and 'knowing the topic like a pro', or being 'fantastic to spot such subtle details'. Anyone feel inadequate should use an agentic AI to boost self morale! (well, only if the person does not get nauseous from that thick flattering)
by the-scrabi | 2025-10-14 08:34:41+00:00
It's not even about power users. The article describes this pretty well: It is about the fact that this action will destroy or at least severely harm the open source app ecosystem. What I can see is that this already has a chilling effect on app developers releasing apps on F-Droid. You might say why should I care about that when I am one of the 99 % of normal users. But it all comes down to freedom. If you destroy alternatives to the Play Store, you remove the freedom of choice that even the 99 % of users would have if they were willing to switch to proper open source solutions.

Does anyone know if there is a concrete evidence that bespoke measure violates the EU's digital markets act?
by em500 | 2025-10-14 08:34:44+00:00
> The article shows that the west, on a per capita basis, has nearly 300% the robots that china does. Germany by itself has 449 robots per 10k compared to china's 567 per 10k.

I think you misunderstand the metrics. The listed numbers are already per capita, adding them together does not increase the per capita number for the aggregate.
by anzizdaouda0 | 2025-10-14 08:35:43+00:00
Every framework handles backpressure differently (RxJS throttling, Kafka consumer lag, Node streams highWaterMark). Nexus creates one universal standard that works across all of them.

Built this after struggling with memory leaks across microservices using different streaming frameworks. Now teams can use one protocol everywhere.

GitHub: github.com/Tryboy869/nexus-backpressure Feedback welcome!
by fho | 2025-10-14 08:36:02+00:00
> On the ground, we know that creating CLAUDE.md or cursorrules basically does nothing.

I don't agree with this. LLMs will go out of their way to follow any instruction they find in their context.

(E.g. i have "I love napkin math" in my kagi Agent Context, and every LLM will try to shoehorn some kind of napkin math into every answer.)

Cursor and Co do not follow these instructions because they:

(a) never make it into the context in the first place, or (b) fall out of the context window.
by dvfjsdhgfv | 2025-10-14 08:36:49+00:00
> we know that creating CLAUDE.md or cursorrules basically does nothing

While I agree, the only cases where I actually created something barely resembling useful (while still of subpar quality) was only after putting in CLAUDE.md lines like:

YOUR AIM IS NOT TO DELIVER A PROJECT. YOU AIM IS TO DO DEEP, REPETITIVE E2E TESTING. ONLY E2E TESTS MATTER. BE EXTREMELY PESSIMISTIC. NEVER ASSUME ANYTHING WORKS. ALWAYS CHECK EVERY FEATURE IN AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT WAYS. USE ONLY E2E TESTS, NEVER USE OTHER TYPES OF TEST. BE EXTREMELY PESSIMISTIC. NEVER TRUST ANY CODE UNLESS YOU DEEPLY TEST IT E2E

REMEMBER, QUICK DELIVERY IS MEANINGLESS, IT'S NOT YOUR AIM. WORK VERY SLOWLY, STEP BY STEP. TAKE YOUR TIME AND RE-VERIFY EACH STEP. BE EXTREMELY PESSIMISTIC

With this kind of setup, it kind attempts to work in a slightly different way than it normally does and is able to build some very basic stuff although frankly I'd do it much better so not sure about the economics here. Maybe for people who don't care or won't be maintaining this code it doesn't matter but personally I'd never use it in my workplace.
by crossroadsguy | 2025-10-14 08:37:39+00:00
You do realise USA is not the sole beneficiary of global destabilisations and installing of puppet regimes and overthrowing, et cetera. The West in general has been. USA, as the tip of the spear, is seen first, if not as the tip of the iceberg :)

So you see, such businesses have been quite fruitful for the resources the West has gulped over the years.
by myrmidon | 2025-10-14 08:37:52+00:00
> the cause wasn't climate change, like all the media worldwide boasted.

That was not the typical claim of news outlets.

The actual headlines were more like "How climate change affected the LA fires".

Media outlets linking small regional problems to big global issues is to be expected because that drives engagement.

There is no need for retractions/corrections because what those articles typically said was something like "climate change can facilitate extended droughts making such fires more likely", not that climate change was the cause for the fire.

You could argue that articles like that are trying to mislead the reader, and you would not be wrong. The main purpose of a lot of modern reporting is not to inform, but to bait for clicks/ads.

edit: You can see the exact same issue in this article: It kinda baits the reader into thinking that ChatGPT is monitoring chats and snitching on you to the police preemptively, but doesn't actually say that.
by wongarsu | 2025-10-14 08:38:37+00:00
I have had LLMs write entire codebases for me, so it's not like the hype is completely wrong. It's just that this only works if what you want is "boring", limited in scope and on a well-trodden path. You can have an LLM create a CRUD application in one go, or if you want to sort training data for image recognition you can have it generte a one-off image viewer with shortcuts tailored to your needs for this task. Those are powerful things and worthy of some hype. For anything more complex you very quickly run into limits and the time and effort to do it with an LLM quickly approaches the time and effort required to do it by hand.
by JuniperMesos | 2025-10-14 08:38:50+00:00
> I suspect we're seeing WWII anti-Nazi propaganda being promoted all over social media in an attempt to shock people into a moment of introspection. Someone watching this propaganda piece today doesn't even have to make substitutions. The man on a street-corner ranting about immigrants could be a talking head on certain current "news" programs. However, the shock relies on the viewer's perception of Nazi's as irredeemably evil.

Anti-Nazi propaganda from WWII has been a staple of American and broader Anglosphere culture for the entirety of my life; and so has the counter-phenomenon of people deliberately using Nazi symbols to be shocking or provocative.

Anyway, at the time this film was produced by the US government, legal immigration from foreign countries to the US had been heavily curtailed for a generation by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924, and immigration would not be liberalized until another generation later in the 1960s.
by dominicrose | 2025-10-14 08:39:58+00:00
MAML sounds like mammelle in French, but besides that I think that making things optional adds complexity. JSON is simple because it's strict and the syntax parts are not optional.

As much as I like writing javascript objects without quotes, it's javascript, not JSON. I don't mind putting quotes in JSON. Plus, it helps distinguishing it from javascript.

People don't always agree wether there should be a trailing comma or not. At least with JSON there's no choice. Making a trailing comma mandatory would be weird. Because mandatory is different than "automatically added by Prettier".

What I like about JSON is that people can't use it to make weird things like HTMLX on top of it. Even plain HTML is no longer XML. At least JSON is JSON.

I don't mind VS Code using JSONC for it's config though.
by wk_end | 2025-10-14 08:39:59+00:00
It's kind of a silly question, but: when the N64 came out in 1996, MIPS CPUs were high-end workstation chips; by the time the PS2 was released in 2000, SGI had effectively declared MIPS a dead-end and was shipping Intel-based machines. So I'd say the N64 wins handily: peak MIPS was a MIPS chip in every living room, powering video games that felt like the future.

Even though the PS2 won its generation - and the N64 decidedly did not - that was despite and not because of its technical prowess; it was a less impressive machine than its two closest competitors.
by boomskats | 2025-10-14 08:40:02+00:00
I agree with you 100%, though arguably what you could be describing is how docker changed your deployment workflow, not your development workflow (although with devcontainers that line is blurry, as you say).

I guess it's worth keeping in mind that Justin only quit Docker a few months ago, and his long tenure as CTO there will have (obviously) informed the majority of the opinions in the article. I think the deployment over development spin and some of the other takes there more closely reflect the conversations he had with large corp paying customers at the exec level than the workflows of solo devs that switch dev environments much more frequently than most etc.