MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Workaccount2 | 2025-10-04 15:03:36+00:00
>Meanwhile LLM fatigue has started to set in

Has it?

I think there is this compulsion to think that LLMs are made for senior devs, and if devs are getting wary of LLMs, the experiment is over.

I'm not a programmer, my day job isn't tech, and the only people I know who express discontent with LLMs are a few of programmer friends I have. Which I get, but everyone else is using them gleefully for all manner of stuff. And now I am seeing the very first inklings of completely non-technical people making bespoke applets for themselves.

From OpenAI, programming is ~4% of chatGPTs usage. That's 96% being used for other stuff.

I don't see any realistic or grounded forecast that includes a diminishing demand for compute. We're still at the tip of adoption...
by belter | 2025-10-04 15:04:30+00:00
> If you speak with AI researchers, they all seem reasonable in their expectations.

An extraordinary claim for which I would like to see the extraordinary evidence. Because every single interview still available on YT form 3 years ago ...had these researchers putting AGI 3 to 5 years out ...A complete fairy tale as the track to AGI is not even in sight.

If you want to colonize the Solar System the track is clear. If you to have Fusion, the track is clear. AGI track ?
by ninetyninenine | 2025-10-04 15:04:42+00:00
The benefit of FP has nothing to do with it being easier to read. FP is HARDER to read. The benefit of FP is modularity. Take your example:

arr.map().filter().filter().map()

Every step on that is a modular operation.

const x = arr.map() const y = x.filter() const z = y.filter() const d = z.map()

now I can easily do this:

const x = (arr) => arr.map() const y = (arr) => arr.filter() const z = (arr) => arr.filter() const d = (arr) => arr.map() o = d(z(y(x(arr))))

This is the main reason why functional programming is elegant. It makes every corner of your program modular and solves the fundamental program of program organization and modularity.

with a for loop it is easier to read initially but if that filter chain grows the functional approach will begin to be better.

Take an example of a for loop doing the same thing:

const acc = [] for (const x in arr) { y = map1(x) if(filter(y) { continue } z = y if(filter(z)) { continue } d = map2(z) acc.push(d) }

Yes more readable but imagine if the logic gets even more complex. Then at scale functional will become more readable AND more modular. Modularity, however, is the main problem here. You cannot split or modularize that for loop.

But I agree with you. Initially and not at scale, functional programming loses readability. Functional programming is harder to read because people think procedurally over functionally. We like numbered instructions or a todo list, not a series of composed function calls and thus from a general view point functional programming is harder to read than procedural programming. But this has never been the benefit of functional.

Functional programming is supposed to solve the modularity problem with how you organize programs to be reusable. Functional programming objectively does this while it is only subjectively considered less readable by the majority of people.
by howieburger | 2025-10-04 15:04:50+00:00
I am all for letting low effort labor exploiters create low effort comics. Same as I am for my having no obligation to support them directly by reading their comics.

Entertainers are a kind of contemporary secular faith healer and tribal shaman, imo.

To mix metaphors, stopped clocks who can be right and worth listening to only in very specific situations.
by JKCalhoun | 2025-10-04 15:04:51+00:00
Another oddity re. the ImageWriter. There was even a color ribbon for the printer as I recall. The early Mac, even though black and white, had some very primitive color attributes buried in the "Mac Toolbox" (ROM) that, while not allowing you to display color on those devices, could in fact send simple color to the ImageWriter with said ribbon.

I feel like MacDraw (or some other lesser-known app — not MacPaint) exposed this functionality.
by smeej | 2025-10-04 15:05:11+00:00
Actually when I medicated it, it was with mesalamine, not an antibiotic. I didn't do anything to attack the bacteria.

The meal consisted of well-boiled meat (pork/beef/chicken together, slow cooked, overnight), and carrots, zucchini, and butternut squash cooked in its juice until it mostly wasn't soup anymore.
by pengaru | 2025-10-04 15:05:16+00:00
In SF they _do_ provide housing to homeless people. The homeless people, largely addicted to illegal drugs, use the housing to store most their possessions and occasionally come in to change clothes and bathe, but continue living in tents, or otherwise existing strung out on the sidewalks.

Why? Because they're not permitted to use illegal drugs in the provided housing facilities, they will lose the housing. These "houseless" people basically have two homes, the streets are their summer home where they get high and continue to be a nuisance. The provided housing goes mostly unoccupied in these instances. Having written that, maybe the analogy works better in reverse - the public housing is the unoccupied summer home? Either way, it's totally not being used as intended because of the restrictions placed on the housing.
by ekjhgkejhgk | 2025-10-04 15:05:23+00:00
In reference 14 we read

> However, what’s become clear is that OpenAI plans to pay for Nvidia’s graphics processing units (GPUs) through lease arrangements, rather than upfront purchases

I wish someone here could explain it to a dummy like me. Nvidia tells OpenAI: heres some GPUs, can you pay for them over 5 years. How is this an "investment" by Nvidia? That reference keeps calling this an investment, but what they describe is a lease agreement. Why do they call it an investment? What am I missing?
by scheeseman486 | 2025-10-04 15:05:59+00:00
Thinking about it abstractly like "people don't want headwear displays" ignores that people don't know what smart glasses are or what they would offer them and it's difficult to convey their value without a product that can fully deliver on all the promises.

I'm not sure what degree of sophistication they have to hit for people to catch on, my hunch is it needs to use transparent lenses with at least 90 degrees FOV of display, full 6DOF tracking, eye tracking and hand tracking. Vision Pro's performance capabilities are overkill, but something with it's user experience in a pair of lightweight glasses,even if it's mostly floating virtual windows and environmental overlays with simple graphics, would be self evidently useful to anyone who would try them for a few minutes.

None of the products released thus far have hit the mark, though.
by chuckadams | 2025-10-04 15:06:09+00:00
> AGI is not near

There's also plenty of argument to be made that it's already here. AI can hold forth on pretty much any topic, and it's occasionally even correct. Of course to many (not saying you), the only acceptable bar is perfect factual accuracy, a deep understanding of meanings, and probably even a soul. Which keeps breathing life into the old joke "AI is whatever computers still can't do".
by o11c | 2025-10-04 15:06:34+00:00
It's backwards. Highly eccentric orbits are the default; near-circular orbits are the inevitable result of averaging out a large number of orbits after they collide.

It's also ignoring the fact that we likely did have additional planets, but after interactions with other planets with nearby orbits, they would have been either ejected out of the solar system entirely, caused to collide, or herded into more circular (non-overlapping) orbits.

This is why Pluto is not a planet.
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-10-04 15:06:41+00:00
> We're not here to write code, but to solve problems.

In my opinion having had multiple technical job roles (car stereo/alarm installer, website builder, military officer, CEO, CTO etc…) this is always the job.

The job is *always* to make the organization more effective and efficient full stop. Your role in that is what you choose and negotiate with your team throughout your life; boundaries change pre/during/post employment.

When you join a company you usually (not always) have a niche role, to fill in a gap that is preventing effective organizational execution.

If you’re mentally flexible to understand that your narrow focus is not the actual output, that is a temporal means to an output, then you transform how you view the concept of work and relationships
by smeej | 2025-10-04 15:07:01+00:00
The meal consisted of well-boiled meat (pork/beef/chicken together, slow cooked, overnight), and carrots, zucchini, and butternut squash cooked in its juice until it mostly wasn't soup anymore.

I wanted it to be soft/easy to digest, but also nutritious. This was at least a wide enough variety of nutrients that I didn't feel miserable (just bored).
by MASNeo | 2025-10-04 15:08:06+00:00
I wonder if the buying customers of Nvidia are going to find the self’s left with the overcapacity. Certainly people are waking up to LLM challenges and as budgets focus more on useful applications, smaller language models, how much of that demand will remain.

Also, depreciation schedules beyond useful life of an asset may not be fraud but I’d call it a bit too creative for my liking.

Time will tell.
by derefr | 2025-10-04 15:08:22+00:00
> I see so much convoluted code with arr.reduce() or many chained arr.map().filter().filter().map(), that would just be so much simpler and easier to read if it was a classic for-loop.

It's interesting; when I'm writing JS in an actual .js file, I do tend to use for loops. But when I'm writing JS at the (CLI or browser-dev-console) REPL, I'll always reach for arr.map().filter().filter().map().

When you're at a REPL, with its single-line/statement, expression-oriented evaluation, it's always easier / more intuitive to "build up" an expression by taking the last expression from history, adding one more transformation, and then evaluating the result again to see what it looks like now. And you don't really want side-effects, because you want to be able to keep testing the same original line vis-a-vis those modifications without "corrupting" any of the variables it's referencing. So REPL coding leads naturally to building up expressions as sequences pure-FP transforms.

Whereas, when you're iteratively modifying and running a script, with everything getting re-evaluated from the start each time, it's not only more intuitive to assign intermediate results to variables, but also "free" to have side-effect-y code that updates those variables. It's that context where for loops become more natural.

I bet that a lot of the chained-expression JS code you see out there was originally built up at a REPL, and then pasted into a file, without then "rephrasing" it to be more readable/maintainable in the context of a code file.

...though there's also just FP programmers who write JS (or more often TS) as if it were a pure-FP language — either literally making every variable const / using Object.freeze / using Readonly<T>, or just writing all their code as if they had done that — where for loops become almost irrelevant, because they're only really for plain iteration (they're not list comprehensions), and plain iteration has few uses if you're not going to do anything that produces side-effects.
by asymmetric | 2025-10-04 15:08:47+00:00
Numtide | Software Developer Contractor | Full-time | Remote

We're seeking an experienced software developer to work on novel problems in data storage on Ethereum. We're launching a new network that uses Optimism L3s.

You'll develop smart contracts, design and maintain infrastructure built for resilience, throughput and decentralization (Optimism, Kubernetes, IPFS) and manage deployment pipelines (argo-cd, restate).

Key Requirements:

- Experience with, and interest in keeping up with, the Ethereum ecosystem - Knowledge of the architecture and trade-offs of optimistic rollups - Good understanding of Solidity for smart contract development - DevOps experience with CI/CD, containerization, and Kubernetes

Competitive rates, flexible schedule.

Reach out to dragan+hn@numtide.com
by Workaccount2 | 2025-10-04 15:09:03+00:00
Getting gold in the math Olympiad is a pretty strong indicator of operating independently on substantive problems.

A year ago they need an extensive harness to get silver, and two years ago they could hardly multiply 1000x10000.

Terence Tao tweeted yesterday about using GPT5 to help quickly solve a problem he was working on.
by lxgr | 2025-10-04 15:09:09+00:00
> But how do they prevent people double spending the same amount?

Both payment cards and merchant terminals (essentially also using embedded or removable smartcards) are tamper-resistant and hold symmetric keys only known to the payment scheme or issuer.

The terminal essentially creates a cryptographic secure channel between two smartcards, and they transactionally agree to decrement the balance on one, and increment the one on the other correspondingly.

The really neat thing is that this theoretically even works without the need for central accounts, and is as such very privacy friendly. (Practically, even just one key leaking would have catastrophic consequences though, and to detect whether that has happened, systems usually aggregate all transactions asynchronously and check money movements for plausibility.)
by FollowingTheDao | 2025-10-04 15:09:15+00:00
> it seems our systems are balanced to regulate cancer during our youth and reproductive years

Yes, the most important question, and an easy answer if you know where to look. What is it that we lose when we age?

Mineral and vitamin deficiencies can accelerate the mitochondrial decay of aging

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16102804/

Age-associated B vitamin deficiency as a determinant of chronic diseases

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-r...

Emerging Roles of Vitamin B12 in Aging and Inflammation

https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/25/9/5044

There is more if you want to look. Lots more.
by Isamu | 2025-10-04 15:09:51+00:00
Comments mention multiplexing and that’s not wrong but the real reason for the vast number of wires is amplifiers, or rather the lack of practical ones at the time. You had to transmit at high enough power to overcome losses and still be able to hear at the destination.

Each wire carries just one signal at a power that would easily interfere with others, they needed relatively thick wires separated from each other. You see pictures of poles with lots of cross bars carrying lots of wires in this period.

Once amplification was practical they could use the thin telephone wires bundled together in a cable, each wire carrying a much fainter signal that can be easily amplified as needed.

Amplification existed but it took the vacuum tube to get it affordable and reliable for each circuit to have its own amplification.
by jstimpfle | 2025-10-04 15:10:05+00:00
So, as an example, you'd be happily spending an extra allocation and extra pointers of space for each item in a list, even when that item type itself is only a couple of bytes, and you potentially need many millions of that type? Just so your design is not "from the nineties"?

An extrusive list needs at least 1 more pointer (to the item, separate from the link node), and possibly an additional backpointer to the link node when you want to unlink that node. It also adds allocation overhead and cache misses.

Intrusive lists are one of the few essential tools to achieve performance and low latency.

Or were you thinking of dynamically reallocating vectors? They are not an alternative, they are almost completely unusable in hardcore systems programming. Reallocating destroys pointer stability and adds latency, both very bad for concurrency.
by smeej | 2025-10-04 15:10:18+00:00
CRP and fecal calprotectin. The meal consisted of well-boiled meat (pork/beef/chicken together, slow cooked, overnight), and carrots, zucchini, and butternut squash cooked in its juice until it mostly wasn't soup anymore. Picked things that were very soft/easy to digest, with at least some nutritional value, because it didn't bother me. I just wanted to buy time for things to calm down.

It was meant to be an elimination diet with reintroduction, but every reintroduction attempt failed miserably for 20 months. Then, suddenly, it was fine.

I still mostly eat food I would recognize in its ingredient form instead of highly processed stuff, but if everybody's going out for pizza, I can have a couple slices and be fine. I just can't do that all the time.
by mindslight | 2025-10-04 15:10:48+00:00
A company with significant coercive power (through sticky market effects) is much better thought of as a governmentesque censoring entity rather than some mere group of individuals exercising their individual speech. What you're describing is not a virtue of the first amendment, but rather a shortcoming of its implementation and a subsequent failure to properly regulate corporations/LLCs/etc. OP is right - people's ready embrace of corpo-authoritarianism when it lined up with their social mores set the stage for where we are at now. That comic has always been a low point of Munroe's.
by eli_gottlieb | 2025-10-04 15:11:19+00:00
>If you aren't a billionaire capital owner, you are working class. If your primary income comes from a job, you are working class.

The petty bourgeoisie is a thing, and if you receive stock-grants as part of your pay-package, you're in it. You own real-estate in an expensive city where your property is an appreciating asset? You're in it.
by marginalia_nu | 2025-10-04 15:11:44+00:00
I suspect there's a class of problems, front end development is one, ORM is another; where the problem itself is constrained in such a way that only shitty solutions exist.

ORM keeps sucking because RDBMSes simply don't operate on objects. You can either impose ill conceived object models on the database, or try and fail to capture the database's affordances in objects.

I don't have a theory on what's gone wrong with front-end development to cause its chronic disease, but it may simply be that HTML is a document markup language, and makes a questionable base for a user interface.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-04 15:12:08+00:00
I'm fascinated by the idea of at://.

But besides even whether it would ever make business sense, I worry about basic things like:

- If you own your data, can't you change it at any time? I can make perfectly reasonable posts that lots of people agree with, then change it to vile stuff. Even if existing sites at the time store hashes and prevent updates, a new site loading the post will never know it was once different.

- How are things like upvotes tracked? If every upvote is an object stored by the person upvoting, how do you even find the people upvoting? And doesn't it become trivial to create tons of fake profiles upvoting everything you do?

- And how is moderation/spam even handled? Now if sites are supposed to be showing replies to posts made from everyone across any platform, not just their own, how is moderation handled when you don't know anything about these accounts making replies?

I just don't understand how all of the necessary work around transparency, accountability, moderation, and spam can be done in a world where users store their own data, and therefore can fake their own data.
by squidbeak | 2025-10-04 15:12:35+00:00
In the next couple of decades? Starship is real, space mining companies are real, NVIDIA Cosmos is real, robotics development is nascent, but real and thrilling. Ordinary market forces will ensure the uptake of robotics.

You're calculating the expense of returning mined resources using past metrics that are superseded altogether in this scenario. For instance miniaturization suddenly won't be necessary for mining companies wishing to send gear to asteroids.
by SAI_Peregrinus | 2025-10-04 15:12:35+00:00
You're basically describing Nix.

The big issue I see with Nix is that it's solving several related & very complex problems, and isn't doing so at a particularly easy level of abstraction. It's a PITA to package software that isn't using an already-supported build system. And mixing versions is messy, instead of just `[ package1="versionA", package2="versionB", …]` sort of thing with a lockfile to convert versions to immutable IDs like commit hashes you have to specify which commits of nixpkgs had each version and then do something like `nixpkgs-versionA=GIT_COMMIT_HASH_A; nixpkgs-versionB=GIT_COMMIT_HASH_B; [ nixpkgs-versionA.package1, nixpkgs-versionB.package2, …]`. There are lots of other "warts" like that, of varying levels of annoyance.
by TrackerFF | 2025-10-04 15:12:41+00:00
For almost 20 year, Amazon has been the poster child of "A company can be unprofitable for years and still turn out a winner", but of course - not all companies can pivot from being a regular e-commerce company to cloud infrastructure/hosting, and become a money machine.

So the question, at least to me, is how these AI companies will find a product or service that makes them profitable. Other than becoming actual monopolies in their current domains.
by sigmoid10 | 2025-10-04 15:12:51+00:00
It could also be indirectly linked to other benefits. Humans have lost the CMAH gene, making us able to run long distances and hunt down large prey animals. But because of this we can no longer process specific sugars that you will still find in mammalian meat. That causes inflammation and arteriosclerosis. But those things only kill you after many decades, so there seems to have been a net positive effect on evolution.
by smeej | 2025-10-04 15:13:02+00:00
I'm not a scientist on any level, so my theory only went as far as "stop irritating the thing and let it heal itself."

When they started talking about putting me on immune-suppressant drugs during a pandemic, I thought that didn't sound like a very good idea, but maybe my body could sort itself out if I gave it the opportunity.

Not a terribly sophisticated take, but it works for things like not popping blisters or picking at scabs, so it seemed worth a shot.
by alganet | 2025-10-04 15:13:10+00:00
Maybe it's unleveraged potential, I don't know. I am also not entirely convinced that they're next to useless. Sanitizers, for example, are excellent for mitigating all sorts of security issues. Those are traditional static analysis tools (that, by the way, fit the arrangement I described of using these reports as nucleation sites for LLM triage).

I did walked you through how I would do it. Would you change your response if I said I work in this space? It seems like an irrelevant point in this discussion.

You don't need to explain anything. This is on a flagged thread, obscure and unseen. I'm actually surprised by how invested you are in this apparently irrelevant matter.
by yearolinuxdsktp | 2025-10-04 15:13:42+00:00
I think it’s a far cry on the original author’s side to call the use of map().filter().map() an obsession with FP. Underscore.js simply provided super-useful functions over arrays and objects, which IMO makes for more legible code. Often times you can re-use filters with named functions. If you have multiple conditions for iteration exit, it’s clearer to chain filters than it is to have nested ifs or early exits in a for loop — it refactors better.

The real obsession with FP is the pervasive use of immutable state. But in apps, state must be effectively mutated, but now with a copy of the original immutable object. The FP obsession believes that this better than directly mutating the state each and every time.
by kakacik | 2025-10-04 15:13:49+00:00
If you even rarely get into situations you describe, saving on a freakin' key fob and not going via official dealership is supremely... not smart.

What you describe would be exactly reason #1 I would immediately say to anybody on topic of why not saving desperately on such a thing, despite never being in such situation myself.

Sometimes learning from other's mistakes should be enough. No, mostly it should be enough.