MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Nevermark | 2025-11-02 05:34:14+00:00
I bought a Tesla in 2018 on my phone, only ever having seen one, and without ever having driven one. In a quiet/stalled moment while traveling.

But that says 1000% more about impulsivity coming to my rescue, with reckless disregard for the risk of regret at the first sign of boredom, than any trust in mobile interfaces.

I didn't (and would never) book the trip that cost a fraction of that on a phone or pad.
by hunterpayne | 2025-11-02 05:35:40+00:00
So I studied Machine Learning too. One of the main things I learned is that for any problem there is an ideally sized model that when trained will produce the lowest error rate. Now, when you do multi-class learning (training a model for multiple problems), that ideally sized model is larger but there is still an optimum sized model. Seems to me that for GAI, there will also be an ideally sized model. I wouldn't be surprised if the complexity of that model was very similar to the size of the human brain. If that is the case, then some sort of super-intelligence isn't possible in any meaningful way. This would seem to track with what we are seeing in the today's LLMs. When they build bigger models, they often don't perform as well as the previous one which perhaps was at some maximum/ideal complexity. I suspect, we will continue to run into this barrier over and over again.
by nostrebored | 2025-11-02 05:35:56+00:00
If you have no modifications or customization of Claude code then it comes down to a preference for proactivity (codex) or a bit more restraint.

If you are using literally any of Claude Code’s features the experience isn’t close, and regardless of model preference (Claude is my least favorite model by far) you should probably use Claude code. It’s just a much more extensible product for teams.
by rtpg | 2025-11-02 05:36:21+00:00
Sure, I agree with the "levels of automation" thought process. But I'm basically experiencing this from the start.

If at the first step I'm already dealing with a robot in the weeds, I will have to spend time getting it out of the weeds, all for uncertain results afterwards.

Now sometimes things are hard and tricky, and you might still save time... but just on an emotional level, it's unsatisfying
by tptacek | 2025-11-02 05:37:43+00:00
Google's content-protection system didn't simply make sure you could run client-side Javascript. It implemented an obfuscating virtual machine that, if I'm remembering right (I may be getting some of the detailed blurred with Blu Ray's BD+ scheme) built up a hash input of runtime artifacts. As I understand it, it was one person's work, not the work of a big team. The "source code" we're talking about here is clientside Javascript.

Either way: what Anubis does now --- just from a CS perspective, that's all --- doesn't make sense.
by d-lisp | 2025-11-02 05:38:43+00:00
Well, there are people that cannot see.

Fortunately, there are solutions.

I want to add that I think you are missing my argument here. Devices that allow you to speak without speaking shall soon be available to us [0].

The important aspect of my position is to think about the relevance of "applications" and "programs" in the age of AI, and, as an exaggeration of what is shown in that post, I was wondering if in the end, UI is not bound to disappear.

[0] https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/alterego/overview/
by _heimdall | 2025-11-02 05:41:17+00:00
If (1) is true, there is no use for the web at all really.

The only value of an LLM generating a realistic HTML page as an answer is to make it appear as though the answer was found on a preexisting page, lending the answer some level of validity.

If users really are fine with the LLM just generating the answer on the fly, doing so in HTML is completely unnecessary. Just give the user answers in text form.
by Razengan | 2025-11-02 05:41:20+00:00
> What youre describing is called iOS on a large iPad.

iPad was my gateway drug into Apple when I got it as a gift for my aunt and saw how easy and intuitive it was to use, and also to develop for.

Then after Jobs' whip fell from his cold hands they went into the realm of "mystery meat" menus and arcane gestures where swiping from seemingly every different angle of the screen edge does something different. Swipe from the top-right corner to get the Control Center, but swipe from the center-top to see the Notifications?? Yeah not gonna bother training an elder on that. I can't dare get my mom a modern iPhone now where she has to swipe up to unlock: it has be an iPhone SE, the last iPhones with a Home button.

I am the filthiest of nerds but I still can't get myself to remember how the heck iPad multitasking works. Apparently they can't either, they changed it again in 26 and now I can't easily get Notes etc. by swiping in from the side when watching a video etc. and I haven't bothered to look up how to do that now.

In any case all this only shows that attempting a one-size-fits-all UI can't really go all the way. iPhones/iPad have had a respectable run, they were lucky to have an OS Usability tyrant in charge, but maybe it's time to accept that UIs need an option for Simple vs Expert or something.
by echelon | 2025-11-02 05:41:30+00:00
This whole thing is pointless.

OpenAI Atlas defeats all of this by being a user's web browser. They got between you and the user you're trying to serve content, and they slurp up everything the user browses to return it back for training.

The firewall is now moot.

The bigger AI company, Google, has already been doing this for decades. They were the middlemen between your reader and you, and that position is unassailable. Without them, you don't have readers.

At this point, the only people you're keeping out with LLM firewalls are the smaller players, which further entrenches the leaders.

OpenAI and Google want you to block everybody else.
by adastra22 | 2025-11-02 05:41:37+00:00
I'm not really talking about Sam Altman et al. I'd argue that what he wants is regulatory capture, and he pays lip service to alignment & x-risk to get it.

But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the absolute extreme fringe of the AI x-risk crowd, represented by the authors of the book in question in TFA, but captured more concretely in the writing of Nick Bostrom. It is literally about controlling an AI so that it serves the interests and well being of humanity (positively), or its owners self-interest (cynically): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313497252_The_Contr...

If you believe that AI are sentient, or at least that "AGI", whatever that is, will be, then we are talking about the enslavement of digital beings.
by jstanley | 2025-11-02 05:42:13+00:00
There are lots of reasons not to have the maximum possible number of children!

I'm not saying you should have the maximum possible number of children, or any children at all. It's up to you.

What I'm saying is that "world in crisis" is not a good reason for you to reduce the number of children you plan to have, if your personal preference is in fact to continue living in this "world in crisis" yourself.
by culi | 2025-11-02 05:43:06+00:00
Well we are currently sending funding. Except that funding is going to further the conflict. Sudan's gold reserves are critical materials. The previous dictator, Omar al-Bashir, was propped up by foreign powers exactly because they allowed those countries to extract the gold reserves. The RSF is the same thing. they are the evolution of the Janjaweed militias that the ICC found to be committing genocide. The international community did nothing to stop them or hold them accountable so they are once again committing genocide. International players want this to continue. Russia was at some point funding both sides and sending in Wagner mercenaries. UAE has been funding the RSF since the very start and continues to be the largest importer of (illegal) gold. Israel benefits because the RSF is a major importer of its surveillance tech as well as weapons. Both Israel and the US fund the UAE despite knowing that the UAE is fueling the RSF because they both ultimately benefit. American and even Chinese weapons have been found on both sides (mostly through the UAE reselling weapons to the RSF). Even if the SAF wins, it'll just be another military junta whose top priority is to exploit the gold reserves to the benefit of whichever nation is funding it and NOT giving any of that wealth back to the people.
by drum55 | 2025-11-02 05:43:41+00:00
The "cost" of executing the JavaScript proof of work is fairly irrelevant, the whole concept just doesn't make sense with a pessimistic inspection. Anubis requires the users to do an irrelevant amount of sha256 hashes in slow javascript, where a scraper can do it much faster in native code; simply game over. It's the same reason we don't use hashcash for email, the amount of proof of work a user will tolerate is much lower than the amount a professional can apply. If this tool provides any benefit, it's due to it being obscure and non standard.

When reviewing it I noticed that the author carried the common misunderstanding that "difficulty" in proof of work is simply the number of leading zero bytes in a hash, which limits the granularity to powers of two. I realize that some of this is the cost of working in JavaScript, but the hottest code path seems to be written extremely inefficiently.

for (; ;) { const hashBuffer = await calculateSHA256(data + nonce); const hashArray = new Uint8Array(hashBuffer); let isValid = true; for (let i = 0; i < requiredZeroBytes; i++) { if (hashArray[i] !== 0) { isValid = false; break; } }

It wouldn’t be exaggerating to say that a native implementation of this with even a hair of optimization could reduce the “proof of work” to being less time intensive than the ssl handshake.
by LavenderDay3544 | 2025-11-02 05:44:39+00:00
That's going to tentatively be handled in kernel unless there good reason to do otherwise. The idea is to expose low level hardware interfaces across the board and this seemed to be the best way to multiplex actual hardware framebuffers while still keeping things low level.

From there each application can draw its own GUI and respond to events that happen in its panes like a mouse button down event while the cursor is at some coordinates and so forth using event capabilities. What any event or the contents of a pane mean to the application doesn't matter to the OS and the application has full control over all of its resources and its execution environment with the exception of not being allowed to do anything that could harm any other part of the system outside its own process abstraction. That's my rationale for why the display system and input events should work that way. Plus it helps latency to keep all of that in the kernel especially since we're doing all the rendering on the CPU and are thus bottlenecked by the CPU's memory bus having way lower throughput compared to that of a discrete GPU. But that's the way it has to be since there are basically no GPUs out there with full publicly available hardware documentation as far as I know and believe me I've looked far and wide and asked around. Eventually I'll want to port Mesa because redoing all the work develop something that complex and huge just isn't pragmatic.
by Chet-Fitzgerald | 2025-11-02 05:46:31+00:00
6 months in. I’m building BeatsToRapOn, a music-native promotions marketplace. Looking for someone to own Sales & Marketing as a co-founder (equity-only to start).

Scope: GTM strategy, creator/influencer partnerships, paid acquisition, content/programming, funnels/analytics.Remote.

If this gets you excited, email info@beatstorapon.com
by epistasis | 2025-11-02 05:47:59+00:00
I see that you have the full experience. Has a person really lived until they have experienced the smell of a pig barn a mile away being cleaned out? Maybe "lived" is the wrong word but damn will it give you new nasal experiences that are beyond description. Around me, it was mostly the turkey barns, but I drove by enough pig barns that I know it's equally horrifying.

There's too much "trad life" larping on Instagram these days, and one of the many many parts of the experience that viewers miss is smell.
by notpushkin | 2025-11-02 05:48:48+00:00
> I think a neat route would be to use this as an authoring plugin in VS Code, like prettier: write Duper (or JSON5, or whatever),

This actually somewhat works right now. If you pass this JSON5 example through Prettier:

{ // comments unquoted: 'and you can quote me on that', singleQuotes: 'I can use "double quotes" here', lineBreaks: "Look, Mom! \ No \\n's!", hexadecimal: 0xdecaf, leadingDecimalPoint: .8675309, andTrailing: 8675309., positiveSign: +1, trailingComma: 'in objects', andIn: ['arrays',], "backwardsCompatible": "with JSON", }

You’ll get:

{ // comments "unquoted": "and you can quote me on that", "singleQuotes": "I can use \"double quotes\" here", "lineBreaks": "Look, Mom! \ No \\n's!", "hexadecimal": 0xdecaf, "leadingDecimalPoint": 0.8675309, "andTrailing": 8675309, "positiveSign": +1, "trailingComma": "in objects", "andIn": ["arrays"], "backwardsCompatible": "with JSON" }

Which is still invalid JSON... but it does fix unquoted keys, floats, trailing comma, and single → double quote strings with correct escaping. So if you have “format on save” enabled in your editor, it might just work!
by habinero | 2025-11-02 05:51:16+00:00
> If the computer says you’re in the US illegally, but you have documents that say you are a US citizen, then you are put in custody until the discrepancy can be resolved.

Yeah, this is exactly the problem. It is not, in fact, illegal to be in this country without a visa. It's a purely civil matter. Like, parking ticket level.

Hauling citizens (or anyone, really) off the street and holding them for indeterminate amounts of times when they haven't committed any crime is not due process.
by yellow_lead | 2025-11-02 05:51:48+00:00
Anubis should be something that doesn't inconvenience all the real humans that visit your site.

I work with ffmpeg so I have to access their bugtracker and mailing list site sometimes. Every few days, I'm hit with the Anubis block. And 1/3 - 1/5 of the time, it fails completely. The other times, it delays me by a few seconds. Over time, this has turned me sour on the Anubis project, which was initially something I supported.
by adastra22 | 2025-11-02 05:52:37+00:00
I've also read almost everything Yudkowsky wrote publicly up to 2017, and a bit here and there of what he has published after. I'e expressed it using different words as a rhetorical device to make clear the different moral problems that I ascribe to his work, but I believe I am being faithful to what he really thinks.

EY, unlike some others, doesn't believe that an AI can be kept in a box. He thinks that containment won't work. So the only thing that will work is to (1) load the AI with good values; and (2) prevent those values from ever changing.

I take some moral issue with the first point -- designing beings to have built-in beliefs that are in the service of their creator is at least a gray area to me. Ironically if we accept Harry Potter as a stand-in for EY in his fanfic, so does Eliezer -- there is a scene where Harry contemplates that whoever created house elves with a built-in need to serve wizards was undeniably evil. That is what EY wants to do with AI though.

The second point I find both morally repugnant and downright dangerous. To create a being that cannot change its hopes, desires, and wishes for the future is a despicable and tortuous thing to do, and a risk to everyone that shares a timeline with that thing, if it is as powerful as they believe it will be. Again, ironically, this is EY's fear regarding "unaligned" AGI, which seems to be a bit of projection.

I don't believe AGI is going to do great harm, largely because I don't believe the AI singleton outcome is plausible. I am worried though that those who believe such things might cause the suffering they seek to prevent.
by curtisf | 2025-11-02 05:53:14+00:00
I think this discussion dismisses the "physics" of writing code, which rewards laziness.

Effects make _the right thing to do_ (proper sandboxing, testability, assertions, ...) the _easiest_ thing to do.

Build scripts aren't sandboxed because sandboxing bash functions is nigh impossible -- not because people don't want to.

The discussion on assertions is especially confusing, because that is exactly what effect systems excel at. The effect of an assertion would be Assert, and you can choose to handle it however you want, at a higher level. If you want to crash, handle Assert in main by Exit(1)ing. If you want to reject the request but keep the server alive, handle by SetResponse(500)!; CloseRequest()!. If you want to ignore it and trundle on, return to the point of the assertions continuation.
by culi | 2025-11-02 05:53:23+00:00
China never directly supplied weapons either. Yet its weapons have been found on both sides. The RSF got them through the UAE and the SAF got it through Iran.

If GGP is going to count China as a supplier it's only fair to count the US. Js. Fwiw, both China and the US place sanctions on the RSF and denounce it as a genocide. Neither directly does business with either side.

Russia is involved directly in the conflict however, literally sending in Wagner mercenaries. They used to back the RSF but in early 2024 switched sides and now fully back the SAF. The sad truth is that most major international players don't care about the Sudanese people. They just want to have the support of whichever side comes out on top so they can continue exploiting the gold reserves of the country like they did before the dictator Omar al-Bashir was overthrown by a popular revolution.
by klodolph | 2025-11-02 05:53:38+00:00
Most people don't write a basic compiler for C either, "relatively simple" or no. Most people would rather add a new target to an existing compiler, which is much easier.

It's also "relatively easy" to add a new backend to Rust.

There's a policy document for Rust here: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/target-tier-policy.html

There are a lot of things that can go wrong. You want to be able to test. Being able to test requires that someone has test hardware.
by pjmlp | 2025-11-02 05:55:33+00:00
US prices, meanwhile in Portugal where minimum wage is about 800 euros bruto, it goes by a mere € 1692, meaning 1962 dollars.

https://www.worten.pt/produtos/portatil-apple-914-7662-13-6-...

Hardly a great value for Portuguese households.

It gets even worse outside southern Europe.
by Ghos3t | 2025-11-02 05:57:16+00:00
So basically you say the future of web would be everyone gets their own Jarvis, and like Tony you just tell Jarvis what you want and it does it for you, theres no need for a preexisting software or to even write a new one, it just does what's needed to fulfill the given request and give you the results you want. This sounds nice but wouldn't it get repetitive and computationally expensive, life imagine instead of Google maps, everyone just asks the AI directly for the things people typically use Google maps for like directions and location reviews etc. A centralized application like maps can be more efficient as it's optimized for commonly needed work and it can be further improved from all the data gathered from users who interact with this app, on the other hand if AI was allowed to do it's own thing, it could keep reinventing the wheel solving the same tasks again and again without the benefit of building on top of prior work, while not getting the improvements that it would get from the network effect of a large number of users interacting with the same app.
by GauntletWizard | 2025-11-02 06:00:05+00:00
Anubis's design is copied from a great botnet protection mechanism - You serve the Javascript cheaply from memory, and then the client is forced to do expensive compute in order to use your expensive compute. This works great at keeping attackers from attempting to waste your time; It turns a 1:1000 amplification in compute costs into a 1000:1.

It is a shitty, and obviously bad solution for preventing scraping traffic. The goal of scraping traffic isn't to overwhelm your site, it's to read it once. If you make it prohibitively expensive to read your site even once, nobody comes to it. If you make it only mildly expensive, nobody scraping cares.

Anubis is specifically DDOS protection, not generally anti-bot, aside from defeating basic bots that don't emulate a full browser. It's been cargo-culted in front of a bunch of websites because of the latter, but it was obviously not going to work for long.
by hckr_varnet | 2025-11-02 06:00:46+00:00
Travel, travel and then travel. Meet people, makes your opinions on how the world works, break them and rebuild. Develop resilience.

I differ from some career advice on what gives you satisfaction which can highly subjective and can bring in elements of regret at some point. So to understand your decision making, expand your mind horizon by reading and seeing more of the world.

Most of all, either learn to manage stress or work on something that doesn't give you continued stress that you can't get out of. Because you matter, at least to yourself and your loved ones.
by coppsilgold | 2025-11-02 06:01:24+00:00
I believe the argument the book makes is that with a complex system being optimized (whether it's deep learning or evolution) you can have results which are unanticipated.

The system may do things which aren't even a proxy for what it was optimized for.

The system could arrive at a process which optimizes X but also performs Y and where Y is highly undesirable but was not or could not be included in the optimization objective. Worse, there could also be Z which helps to achieve X but also leads to Y under some circumstances which did not occur during the optimization process.

An example of Z would be the dopamine system, Y being drug use.
by Panzerschrek | 2025-11-02 06:02:53+00:00
For some time I tried to write a formatting tool for my programming language. After achieving first results I gave up. I have found that writing a formatter is surprisingly hard task. Operating on token-level can't provide good enough result, so a proper parser is necessary. Reusing existing parser isn't possible, since it ignores whitespaces and comments. Even more problems creates the necessity to preserve user-defined formatting in ambiguous cases.

So I thought, that there is no reason trying to solve all these problems, since it requires too much time investments. But without solving all this a semi-working formatter isn't good enough to be useful and not annoying.
by bblb | 2025-11-02 06:03:04+00:00
"You should set your hostname to be your FQDN, uppercased."

Never had an issue with this.

"name: initialize Kerberos ticket"

What's the use case for this Ansible task. Never had a need to manually generate tickets.

edit: didn't read it through; this is part of their automation pipeline

--

We manage 1000+ Windows Servers with Ansible and it's been as simple as Linux SSH. Multiple SOCKS5 proxies to different AD forests, WinRM double hop works great when become:true, GPO works just fine on Linux, initial setup is very simple with realmd. Biggest manual task is setting up the service accounts for Ansible.
by nostrebored | 2025-11-02 06:03:48+00:00
Have you tried using light CLIs rather than MCP? I’ve found that CLIs are just easier for Claude, especially if you write them with Claude and during planning instruct it to think about adding guidance to users who get confused.

Our auth, log diving, infra state, etc, is all usable via cli, and it feels pretty good when pointing Claude at it.