MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by energy123 | 2025-11-17 02:14:40+00:00
The argument only makes sense under certain assumptions: you can't protect the IP from being copied (leading to competition and eroding economic rents), or the government will place a price ceiling (price controls).

Otherwise, the demand will be highly inelastic, so you cannot really invent a better business model. The pricing power you would wield as the monopoly provider of life & death would be tremendous.

It would be fruitful to put the example in the article under closer scrutiny.
by lamontcg | 2025-11-17 02:14:44+00:00
They seem to be in the wayback machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100528044501/http://www.router...

https://web.archive.org/web/20100328035939/http://routergod....

Along with Gunney Sgt Hartmann:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100508022721/http://www.router...
by Forgeties79 | 2025-11-17 02:15:28+00:00
> you will have similar efforts to maintain the spaces and with potential similar water usage.

For more people across a broader socio-economic background. I mean come on let’s just acknowledge the elephant in the room: golf is a rich sport for upper-income/rich people that requires a massive amount of space that then often has a deleterious effect on surrounding real estate (i.e. inflates it and prices people out).
by mvkel | 2025-11-17 02:15:57+00:00
It's from a video interview with him in 1980:

“I read a study that measured the efficiency of locomotion for various species… The condor came in at the top. Humans came in about a third of the way down. But when a human rides a bicycle, we blow the condor away. That’s what a computer is for me: a bicycle for the mind.”
by amarant | 2025-11-17 02:16:34+00:00
P2P and federation tech is really cool stuff! I feel like ipfs is what most non-tech people thought the cloud was, perhaps even what it should've been.

I'll admit I'm a bit out of the loop though. Say I wanted to publish a blog on this.. Let's call it web 4, for lack of a better term..

How would I do it? How would people find it? Last I checked there wasn't really a good solution for that(or at least I didn't find one) but it's been nearly a decade, so things might've changed!
by zero-ground-445 | 2025-11-17 02:17:27+00:00
Modern software development went through several cycles of escaping complexity only to recreate it in a different form. In the early days, low level languages like C gave developers full control over memory, layout, and performance, but this freedom came with high risk. Memory corruption, data races, buffer overflows, and undefined behavior were common. Later, languages like Java and C# pushed developers toward safer abstractions. Then Python and JavaScript made the runtime even more forgiving. Today, Rust and Go promise a return to predictability with strict memory models, type safety, and clear concurrency rules. Yet something interesting is happening beneath the surface. Even in languages designed for safety and simplicity, new forms of unpredictability, performance traps, and abstraction-driven risks have emerged. This does not mean these languages are unsafe in the traditional sense, but the hidden costs of modern abstractions create behaviors that developers cannot always reason about.
by d3Xt3r | 2025-11-17 02:17:46+00:00
There's still leftovers. For me, it's not about space problem, but more of wanting to run a tight ship. Most recently, I tried running all the stuff on the wiki[1] but I still had leftovers that wouldn't go away no matter what (these were some CUDA dependencies, if it makes a difference). In the end I ended up blowing away my entire Nix install, manually deleting the store and reinstalling Nix - which isn't exactly ideal - considering that the whole point of Nix is to be deterministic and reproducible and all that jazz... so to me it doesn't make sense that it dirties the host and doesn't clean up after itself. Since then I've gone back to using containers as at least they don't pollute the host, and I feel like I'm in greater control over the entire environment.

[1] https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Cleaning_the_nix_store
by pier25 | 2025-11-17 02:18:29+00:00
> what stopped you from calling validation yourself explicitly?

Error messages. Even with the validation in .NET 10 you can't get the actual JSON property to display in the error message, instead you get the C# property.

FastEndpoints fixes this but uses Fluent so now you need to rely on a couple more dependencies.

> I can work faster with writing tests

For Blazor and Razor?
by rayiner | 2025-11-17 02:18:44+00:00
But what’s your non-religious basis for saying that those actions were bad? You pointed to empathy above. But empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Animals and humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the indigenous people of America. So what’s your basis for saying that, e.g., colonization was bad?
by spaqin | 2025-11-17 02:18:55+00:00
The style is the easiest thing to catch for people; GP has said that the technical issues can be more difficult to find, especially in longer texts; there are times where it indeed are caught.

Passing even correct information through an LLM may or may not taint it; it may create sentences which on first glance are similar, but may have different, imprecise meaning - specific wording may be crucial in some cases. So if the style is under question, the content is as well. And if you can write the technically correct text at first, why would you put it through another step?
by ehnto | 2025-11-17 02:19:43+00:00
Especially for online games, these aspects are actually quite core to long term play. I am pretty casual as far as time invested goes, but many online games have to cater to both me and the Die Hards who play their games 10x more than other players.

To the die hard players, the infinite grind is a feature, treadmills help them reach whatever insane goals the developers have to keep cooking up so that they're satisfied.

Watching Arc Raiders evolve recently is a great example. It's trying to cater to casual players. It is going well now, but the die hards are going to ruin that experience I can promise. Then the die hards will be all that remain, and they'll have to cater to them.

The difference between a casual player and a die hard can be, 30hrs in a year played. And 5000 hrs in a year played. Some people play like it's their job.
by theamk | 2025-11-17 02:21:22+00:00
Don't see why would LEO satellites replace IP protocol? All the servers are on the ground and wired to each other, and this will never change. Satellite internet is just another way to achieve "last mile", it never has a chance to be its own thing.

And if you don't like DNS/CA/IP ownership, there are always overlay networks - this can give you "non-IP global networking" today. The amount of people participating in them should show how much of the problem existing technologies really are...
by johnfn | 2025-11-17 02:22:36+00:00
Because site site explicitly says:

> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices.

If the site would have said something like "We use AI to clean up our prose, but it was all audited thoroughly by a human after", I wouldn't have an issue. Even better if they shared their prompts.
by 0xWTF | 2025-11-17 02:22:52+00:00
Depends on the market. Everyone dies eventually. Every near-fatal illness you suffer is a windfall for the medical system and ensures another windfall later.

For all other businesses, it's a little more complicated. If the patient/employee's knowledge, connections, etc, are valuable enough, then keeping them alive and mentating appropriately is inherently good for the business. The question then is "How do you measure 'enough'?"
by rhines | 2025-11-17 02:24:21+00:00
I watched this interview when I first heard about Alexandr Wang. I'd seen he was the youngest self made billionaire, which is a pretty impressive credential to have under your belt, and I wanted to see if I could get a read on what sets him apart.

Unfortunately he doesn't reveal any particular intelligence, insight, or drive in the interview, nor does he in other videos I found. Possibly he hides it, or possibly his genius is beyond me. Or possibly he had good timing on starting a data labelling company and then leveraged his connections in SV (including being roommates with Sam Altman) to massively inflate Scale AI's valuation and snag a Meta acquisition.
by triceratops | 2025-11-17 02:25:12+00:00
50 or 100 years from now we may run out of solar and wind resources to tap. We may consume a couple order of magnitudes more energy than now. Materials science may have unforeseen advances that make nuclear development safer and cheaper.

Nuclear will find its place in the sun - so to speak - at that time. But not now I think. The numbers don't work.
by II2II | 2025-11-17 02:26:06+00:00
Take someone who goes to a doctor asking for advice on how to commit suicide. Even if the doctor supports assisted suicide, they are going to use their discretion on whether or not to provide advice. While a person has a right to seek information, they do not have the right to compel someone to give them information.

The people who have created LLMs with guardrails have decided to use their discretion on which types of information their tools should provide. Whether the end user agrees with those restrictions is not relevant. They should not have the ability to compel the owners of an LLM to remove the guardrails. (Keep in mind, LLMs are not traditional tools. Unlike a hammer, they are a proxy for speech. Unlike a book, there is only indirect control over what is being said.)
by aw1621107 | 2025-11-17 02:27:11+00:00
> A bug in Rust component that could have led to Windows kernel compromise

I don't think this bug could have led to a kernel compromise unless you count a DoS as a kernel compromise, which I'm a bit skeptical of. From the article:

> Notably, the system crash was triggered by this new kernel component designed to improve security, as suggested by the name of the panic_bounds_check() function referenced in the stack trace shown in Figure 2.

Later:

> When the region_from_path_mut() function converts a path into a region it represents the outline as a singly linked list of edge blocks. The program detects the out-of-bounds memory access via core::panicking::panic_bounds_check() and triggers a SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION.

And from Microsoft's assessment of the bug:

> “the Rust code correctly catches an out-of-bounds array access and triggers a panic, resulting in a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD), as expected”

Furthermore, from the implementation of core::panicking::panic_bounds_check() [0]:

#[lang = "panic_bounds_check"] // needed by codegen for panic on OOB array/slice access fn panic_bounds_check(index: usize, len: usize) -> ! { ... }

So you have an attempted OOB access, but since (safe) Rust guarantees OOB accesses will panic I don't think there's a path to escalate the DoS to a full kernel compromise short of an optimizer bug and/or the use of unsafe, for which there doesn't appear to be evidence for either.

[0]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/src/core/panicking.rs.html
by leric | 2025-11-17 02:28:37+00:00
The neuroscience here hints at something that current AI systems still lack: a direct, internal positive signal tied to closing a reasoning loop.

Transformers learn almost everything through language-like supervision. Wrong token = small penalty, right token = small reward. That’s great for pattern induction, but it means the model treats a correct chain-of-thought and a beautifully phrased but wrong chain-of-thought as almost the same kind of object—just sequences with slightly different likelihoods.

Human reasoning isn’t like that. When a logic chain closes cleanly, the brain fires a strong internal reward. That “Aha” isn’t just emotion; it’s an endogenous learning signal saying: this structure is valid, keep this, reuse this. It’s effectively a structural correctness reward, orthogonal to surface language.

If AI ever gets a similar mechanism — a way to mark “self-consistent causal closure” as positively rewarded — we might finally bridge the gap between language-trained reasoning and true general learning. It would matter for:

fast abstraction formation

reliable logical inference

discovering new concepts rather than remixing old ones

Backprop gives us gradient-based correction, but it’s mostly negative feedback. There’s no analogue of the brain’s “internal positive jolt” when a new idea snaps together.

If AGI needs general learning, maybe the missing piece isn’t more scale — it’s this reward for closure.
by pixl97 | 2025-11-17 02:28:41+00:00
>They can make their own site if they're that keen

Which curves back into discoverability. How is anyone going to find it? A search engine? They typically have to profit somehow, so they'll gladly link to a site with your same data that has ads on it first.

Site just for fun, we have that now. Either nobody knows they exist, or you suddenly find you're sticking it behind cloud flare to keep your traffic costs reasonable from the mass amount of junk hitting sites.

Nothing is solved, we are back to the original problem in the article.
by PostOnce | 2025-11-17 02:29:12+00:00
I wasn't aware the satellites also beamed down power, and that all ATMs were connected to satellites instead of cellular networks or wires.

It would also take quite a lot of refilling when everyone in a city needs to use the ATM.

We still need to be able to function during weeklong post-storm/flood power outages, which happen with quite some regularity. Here in New Zealand, the most recent weeklong outage in Southland was only last month, primarily due to 200kph winds.

Let us not sacrifice everything to the gods of convenience.
by antonvs | 2025-11-17 02:29:53+00:00
> I think six dev teams is small in terms of kube.

I don't doubt it. By "larger" I just meant larger than something like "running my servers on FreeBSD/OpenBSD and jails or VMM respectively" above, which sounds like a one-person operation.

> I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s close to the perfect size to move onto kube and create and adopt a standard set of platform idioms.

My previous position was at a company about 5x the size, with many loosely related enterprise and government products that they sold into markets in at least 20 countries. They also used k8s quite effectively.

But, I think the key is that you mentioned "the kube team". Having a single team responsible for everything k8s-related at a large org is likely to make it difficult to be effective.

For supporting individual dev teams I think you need people on those teams who have at least some of the necessary knowledge, so they're not entirely dependent on a central team. Even a watered-down version of what devops was supposed to be about is better than nothing.
by geuis | 2025-11-17 02:30:11+00:00
Is there a single repo that has all of these "aha" images? I could see the clown right away, and the vines/plants in the 2nd example were what I thought first but organic shapes are harder to be sure about.

That also brings to mind that first exposure to this dataset affects the effectiveness of the rest of the dataset. If you're doing initial exposure, you'll definitely get the "aha" moment. But if all of the images in the dataset are of the same type, your brain quickly learns the pattern and the "aha" moment vanishes.

If they did their study on all of the images per test subject, the results after maybe the first 5 are basically useless for any definitive conclusions.
by spacechild1 | 2025-11-17 02:34:12+00:00
Check out the other examples presented in this thread or read some of the chapters. I'm pretty sure the author used LLMs to generate at least parts of this text. In this case this would be particularly outrageous since the author explicitly advertizes the content as 100% handwritten.

> Would the book be any more or less useful if somebody used AI for writing it?

Personally, I don't want to read AI generated texts. I would appreciate if people were upfront about their LLM usage. At the very least they shouldn't lie about it.
by pixl97 | 2025-11-17 02:34:34+00:00
No, I mean farmers. I come from a family of farmers that have been doing it long before corporations owned the world (yea, even the east India company). When poisons came out and massively increased crop yield they used that because it increased profits. When grain prices were high they'd till marginal land that was at risk of erosion because more money is better than less. Spraying huge amounts of fertilizer was fine because it more than paid for itself at the time, who cares if the rivers turn green.

We get regulations because both individuals and corporations tend to maximize the short term while intentionally neglecting or being ignorant of the long term consequences. Farmers reaped the rewards of the green revolution, but it came at a pretty great cost.
by throwaway81523 | 2025-11-17 02:34:57+00:00
I don't use Rust at all, but if compiler warnings are set to maximum, I'd want subtracting anything from a usize to give a warning unless the compiler can verify that the result is a valid usize. BTW, OEIS A014979 gives a linear recurrence for triangular-pentagonal numbers, so filtering for hexagonals gives a much faster way to do this problem. There may be a recurrence that does all three at once, not sure.
by rekabis | 2025-11-17 02:35:01+00:00
Who under the age of 70 still knows how to write in shorthand, much less at talking speeds?

And how many of us know how use a stenographer’s machine?

Writing is ideal in principle. Even when learning, writing out lecture notes “in your own words” after the fact does a lot for comprehension.

But in practice fails “in the moment” unless everyone speaks 4-6× slower. And reality doesn’t have a pause or “slow forward” button, much less a rewind button so that you can go back and confirm who said exactly what, when, and in what order.
by Ingon | 2025-11-17 02:37:45+00:00
Tunneling p2p with relay fallback is essentially what connet [1] aspires to be. There are a lot of privacy/security benefits exposing endpoints only to participating peers. You can either run it yourself or use hosted version [2].

[1] https://github.com/connet-dev/connet

[2] https://connet.dev
by neilv | 2025-11-17 02:38:18+00:00
Before anyone has a lighthearted Sunday night moment of humor sharing: you probably don't want to link to this site in your employer's Slack watercooler channel.

Different people might deconstruct the humor of the site's gimmick different ways. Some innocuous, some not.

But no need to do any literary analysis and critical thinking this time, because...

Today most people will immediately realize that something like the "Booble" search form on that page is probably a bad idea for a welcoming modern work environment.

(Related: for the same less-welcoming reason, it's maybe not a great idea on HN.)
by tptacek | 2025-11-17 02:40:44+00:00
I didn't say "murder investigations". We have a very small number of detectives, who do not conduct traffic stops, but the overwhelming majority of our force (and of all the police work done here) is patrol, all of which do conduct stops.

We don't control this data! It's good to want things, but whether or not you think it's good that LEADS isn't good enough for real-time enforcement, it is not.
by ChadNauseam | 2025-11-17 02:41:22+00:00
Yeah. You'd think nuclear power would be incredibly popular, given that "our product is dangerous" is a apparently genius marketing strategy. After all, if it can make a whole region of ukraine uninhabitable and be weaponized to turn people into shadows on pavement, it can surely power your fridge. Yet oddly companies making nuclear reactors always market them as being very safe instead of leaning into the danger.
by anonnon | 2025-11-17 02:41:45+00:00
> NK applied to leave the NPT immediately after they deemed the US untrustworthy in 2003

They started the Korean War by launching an unprovoked invasion of the South (after securing Stalin's reluctant blessing), and continued to wage a campaign of terror against them in the decades after:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimpo_International_Airport_bo...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangoon_bombing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Flight_858

And they got caught digging infiltration tunnels under the DMZ, in violation of the 1953 armistice:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Demilitarized_Zone#Incu...

And they're known to have kidnapped thousands of South Koreans, and scores of other foreign nations, including Japanese citizens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_abductions_of_Sou...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_abductions_of_Jap...

Yet it's the US that's untrustworthy? And why do they supposedly even care what the US thinks, considering that China already intervened militarily once (during the Korean War) to preserve their independence and has been pretty clear that it will do so again if needed?
by diego_moita | 2025-11-17 02:41:48+00:00
> empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community.

Speak for yourself. I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights. This is my moral basis.

> humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans.

Tribalism, again. You don't get past that, do you?

> Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the indigenous people

Yep, but neither did religion and those countries were very, very Christian. And, btw, even today the U.S. is the most religious among rich countries and, at the same time, the most imperialist. If religion is so good how come the most Christian country is so bad to the rest of the world? (I am from South America, btw).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
by tptacek | 2025-11-17 02:42:39+00:00
No, this is the basic naive argument I'm responding to. It's nice to have long-term recurring revenue, but customers have a very strong preference for a cure, which means the owners of cures will outcompete the owners of subscription treatments. And then to say those cure-owners are in a "bad business", again, is like saying you'd go "aw shucks" if you happened on an enormous seam of gold.
by theamk | 2025-11-17 02:43:02+00:00
Author proposes a weird primitive: MonotonicList, the almost-immutable list which you can only append to _and you cannot tell the size of_. Author does not mention it, but presumably there should be no other way to tell the size of list as well - for example "out of bounds" error should immediately terminate program instead of emitting catch-able exception.

This means in practice, users have to share (list, size) pairs - and these describe immutable sequences. So... what's the point of forcing user to keep those separately? A structure like "ImmutableListWithFastAppends" (which may be _backed_ by a mutable shared append-only list, but only as an implementation detail) seems much nicer to use - easier to understand, reason about, and is compatible with existing code.

(Author mentions "CALM principle" as a motivation for monotonic collections, but from I can see, they are simply wrong. The original Bloom paper in CIDR'11 is all about monotonic _programs_ - a very restricted programming model. Adding monotonic collections to a regular language like Java or Kotlin brings no benefits, and just makes a convoluted immutable version)
by brianwawok | 2025-11-17 02:43:04+00:00
With that logic curing someone of a deadly disease at 10 is good for society because they have much to contribute, but curing someone at 80 is bad for society because their best contributions are behind - and they are a net resource drain. That’s not a good path to head down. (Cure a doctor he generates value, don’t cure a prisoner he drains value).