MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by twoodfin | 2025-11-01 22:49:48+00:00
I am not an expert in electricity generation or transmission, but it does seem strange that this “data center scare” is happening coincidental with (other?) big jumps in home electricity rates that have nothing to do with data centers.

For example, Massachusetts rates are way up because New England politicians have spent more than a decade fighting natural gas infrastructure, especially pipelines that would bring cheap North American gas vs. LNG that is in short supply post-Russia/Ukraine war.

At the same time, MA politicians created the “Mass Save” program that’s effectively a giant boondoggle where utility ratepayers are subsidizing fly-by-night “energy efficiency” contractors who have no incentive to be efficient at all.
by delusional | 2025-11-01 22:49:51+00:00
His stoicism was mostly turned outward. He believed that the powerless man should accept his place below the powerful man. That submission was not shameful for the man born to submit, and that he ought to submit willingly. Stoicism does not bind the powerful, only the powerless.

I didn't even get 2 pages I to meditations before I could tell it was the philosophy of a very powerful man.
by mjevans | 2025-11-01 22:49:59+00:00
Food -> 'basic needs'... so yeah, Shelter, food, etc. That's why most of us drive. You are also correct to separate Philia and Eros ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love ).

A job is better if your coworkers are of a caliber that they become a secondary family.
by kace91 | 2025-11-01 22:50:31+00:00
I don’t understand how offline interviewing is needed to catch ai use, not counting take homes.

Surely just asking the candidate to lean a bit back on the web interview and then having a regular talk without him reaching for the keyboard is enough? I guess they can have some in between layer hearing the conversation and posting tips but even then it would be obvious someone’s reading from a sheet.
by casey2 | 2025-11-01 22:50:56+00:00
I'd prefer a more honest tutorial. Who is this editor for? and show the kinds of problems it was designed to solve, nobody makes generalist text editors anymore and nobody needs a generalist editor. Like are you really trying to convince poets to use this? Of course not, this tutorial relies on some domain expert seeing it and mapping the functionality show in the examples to their problem.

Also the utility of these kinds of editors goes way down when you aren't doing many quick edits of arbitrary files ( which points to a larger workflow problem though perhaps unavoidable for some )
by deemkeen | 2025-11-01 22:52:18+00:00
I built a simple TUI that shows live unified diffs whenever files change. It’s useful for TDD, debugging config changes, and watching AI/agents touch the filesystem in real time.

Repo: https://github.com/deemkeen/diffwatch

Install:

brew install deemkeen/tap/diffwatch # or go install github.com/deemkeen/diffwatch@latest

Try it quickly:

# start the TUI diffwatch -r . # in another shell: echo "hello" >> demo.txt; sleep 1; echo "world!" >> demo.txt

Why this vs. other watchers? Most watchers tell you that something changed. diffwatch shows what changed, instantly, in a minimal TUI.

Roadmap / looking for feedback: --ignore-from=.gitignore, --word-diff, --context N, export (--record, --save-patch), hooks (--cmd "…")

GIF in the README. Would love feedback, issues, PRs—especially on ignore patterns and diff ergonomics.
Show HN: KeyLeak Detector – Scan websites for exposed API keys and secrets
by amaldavid | 2025-11-01 22:52:22+00:00
I built this after seeing multiple teams accidentally ship API keys in their frontend code.

The problem: Modern web development moves fast. You're vibe-coding, shipping features, and suddenly your AWS keys are sitting in a <script> tag visible to anyone who opens DevTools. I've personally witnessed this happen to at least 3-4 production apps in the past year alone.

KeyLeak Detector runs through your site (headless browser + network interception) and checks for 50+ types of leaked secrets: AWS/Google keys, Stripe tokens, database connection strings, LLM API keys (OpenAI, Claude, etc.), JWT tokens, and more.

It's not perfect, there are false positives but it's caught real issues in my own projects. Think of it as a quick sanity check before you ship.

Use case: Run it on staging before deploying, or audit your existing sites. Takes ~30 seconds per page.

MIT licensed, for authorized testing only.

https://github.com/Amal-David/keyleak-detector
by vladms | 2025-11-01 22:52:25+00:00
> The problem is identifying _untrustworthy_ authors.

Is it though? Should we care about authors or about the work? Yes, many experiments are hard to reproduce, but isn't that something we should work towards, rather than just "trust" someone. People change. People do mistakes. I think more open data, open access, open tools, will solve a lot, but my guess is that generally people do not like that because it can show their weaknesses - even if they are well intentioned.
by Razengan | 2025-11-01 22:53:07+00:00
> Why write code if the LLM can

I mean, I'll do the stuff I'm confident I can do, because I already can.

I'll let the AI do the stuff where I'm confident it can't fuck shit up.

I tried Xcode's built-in ChatGPT integration and Claude for some slightly-above-basic stuff that I already knew how to do, and they suggested some horribly inefficient ways of doing things and outdated (last year) APIs.

On the other hand, what I presume is Xcode's local model is nice for a sort of parameterized copy/paste or find/replace though: Slightly different versions of what I've already written, to reduce effort on bothersome boilerplate that can't be eliminated.
Ask HN: Why are certain communities like Reddit so anti-AI?
by ronbenton | 2025-11-01 22:53:27+00:00
I was surprised to get such a negative reaction in the programming subreddit when I made a comment about AI being a productivity boon for me. I went searching for some AI-related discussion in that subreddit and it’s strongly negative. Additionally, Reddit-wide the sentiment appears to be very negative. Is there some kind of phenomenon that results in communities like Reddit being unreceptive to AI whereas places like hacker news are more receptive (or at least open)?
by tstrimple | 2025-11-01 22:54:59+00:00
Naw. You’re exactly the sort of credulous fool that people like Musk depend on. You have an infinite amount of excuses and justifications for outright awful behavior. “He’s working on it! He promised!” As if we should take those statements at face value given all the other mountains of evidence that we are dealing with people without morals or any real values other than enriching themselves. But sure. Keep believing that FSD is right around the corner and Tesla will own the robotaxi ecosystem entirely despite all actual evidence. Keep making excuses for fascists as they do their best to ruin this country.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-11-01 22:54:59+00:00
Some alts to the single, pinched photo in the article

https://runway-media-production.global.ssl.fastly.net/us/ori...

https://preview.redd.it/0nksx97h598b1.jpg?width=960&crop=sma...

Also this blog: https://cruise.blog/2024/09/photos-show-dismantled-cruises-c...
by 1659447091 | 2025-11-01 22:55:15+00:00
> ...once you have more than a small number of options it’s basically impossible (or feels so) to analyze and compare all options to make what seems like a rational and logical decision.So some people will just get frustrated and pick one arbitrarily, or give up and pick none.

In this context (non-work related decisions) I find the “analysis paralysis” stems from a person not knowing themselves well enough or knowing themselves but not sure how to assert it without coming off in an off-putting way.

For the latter, “which restaurant should we go to tonight?” I take that as whatever I pick is it so I pick what I want (as long as I know the other people dont have allergies to the place or something) and that's it. When people ask for a place to pick they usually mean it (from my experience), and they are happy to tag along whereever -- otherwise they will suggest something and ask others opinion, I take that to mean they want to go there but don't want to seem bossy or some other weirdness, and so we go there unless I have a problem with it that I'll voice and suggests something similar.

For the former, I think people are too worried about coming off as "selfish" (and avoid learning themselves). It makes sense because some people really are, and being around them makes decent people really not want to be that. But knowing what you like and want especially when it's not what you have been told to like and want is the biggest hurdle to getting past the “analysis paralysis” here. If you know you and what you like and want than there is really not much to analysis, the analysis should be happening everyday of your life so when these big things come up you have a solid foundation to go on. Otherwise, a lot of it is trying to figure out what the best option is according to outside guidelines you've been given -- which is great for work, but not so much for oneself.

Of course, maybe there are people who can't do the above for whatever, but it's a skill to know what you like and want and a skill to put it into practice without being rude, just like talking to random people or programming. You get better with real world practice/exposure.
by sryanpdx | 2025-11-01 22:55:18+00:00
You're right that reaching full usefulness requires ubiquity, but achieving it requires solving adoption challenges that may be insurmountable. Billions of unauthenticated images already exist, but establishing truth going forward—even if only in certain areas—still has immense value.

Your point that an authenticated image can still be a forgery through staging is correct. However, that's been true for much longer than our current crisis and the results have been far more manageable. Hardware attestation doesn't solve truth, but it's a necessary starting point.

The honest answer: This solves a real problem, but implementation barriers may be insurmountable. I actually first imagined this framework over a year and a half ago and tried shopping it around, hoping a utility patent would motivate implementation. No one was interested in solving a problem with such a big question mark around reaching the end game.

I'm publishing as prior art because if legal/regulatory momentum does emerge, I don't want authentication monopolized. But you're right to be skeptical. The fact you've had these conversations for 20+ years highlights the enormity of the problem. That said, we also haven't had blockchain for that long, and it's remarkably well suited to this application (way more than currency, in my opinion).

If I figure out how to stuff everything back in Pandora's box, I'll let you know where to send the check.
by jostylr | 2025-11-01 22:55:37+00:00
EPR's point is that there is nothing mysterious from a classical perspective of being able to deduce this. They were arguing against the presentation of QM as to there being no fact of the matter about what the momentum is before the measurement and that it randomly becomes whatever it becomes when measured. Their point is that if both particles are randomly collapsing into their choices, then they should disagree at some point unless there is some nonlocal causation happening. Einstein rejected nonlocal causation, reasonable given what he knew at the time, and thus the momentum measurement result must already be preordained by something and it is then like the classical setup.

Bell's work was to show that it had to be the nonlocal causation.

>Do you know some more formal article discussing the proposed experiments?

I do not know of an article, but Maudlin's book Quantum Non-locality and Relativity goes through the various notions of locality and what QM says about it. There is a chapter about signaling and another about causation. It also covers the GHZ scheme which is a non-probablistic version demonstrating non-locality. It is pretty clean.

>Do you know some more formal article discussing the proposed experiments?

I have not read them, but my understanding that Siddhant Das is pursuing these and here is a link to his Arxiv papers which talk about arrival time experiments though I do not know if it is directly about these.

https://arxiv.org/search/advanced?advanced=&terms-0-operator...
by alphazard | 2025-11-01 22:55:41+00:00
Being able to build high quality software alone is a distinct skill from being able to make a group of engineers productive. Neither are soft skills, it comes down to how the software is architected and how well you can produce, understand, and communicate designs with the other collaborators.

I do consider helix to be an impressive piece of software, and I agree that the user base is growing, not necessarily the set of effective maintainers though. The maintainers don't seem to have any aptitude for coordinating engineering effort. That would be fine, if they were honest and direct about it. SQLite is a project which does not accept contributions, I think helix should do the same.

Put differently, I don't expect the large community to have a meaningfully positive effect on the quality of the software, because the maintainers have not demonstrated the competency to effectively utilize that labor. I expect helix to continue slowly improving at whatever rate the maintainers can make important changes themselves.
by reddalo | 2025-11-01 22:57:57+00:00
They're actually planning on migrating to Postgres in a future release:

>[...] it also opens up new possibilities - not officially yet, but soon - for running Jellyfin backed by "real" database systems like PostgreSQL, providing new options for redundancy, load-balancing, and easier maintenance and administration. The future looks very bright!

https://jellyfin.org/posts/jellyfin-release-10.11.0/
by noduerme | 2025-11-01 22:58:36+00:00
I went to a speed dating thing once that tried to incorporate its own (clearly homemade) tech stack into the experience. Every few minutes you'd get a text telling you who to find next... to look for the person in the red scarf or cowboy boots or something. By the time you found them and found somewhere to sit, you had a few minutes to talk.

It felt a bit unnecessary. In any case, maybe it was just how totally random in age and interest the people there were, but the result wasn't like cramming 15 online dates into the span of a single one. It was more like 15 conversations with people I would never have had the slightest impulse to contact via an online dating app. Most of the conversations had what felt like a comfortable mutual vibe of "we both understand we could not plausibly be attracted to each other." Then again, in online dating, I've come to realize that most guys incessantly swipe right, while I almost always swipe left.
by el_jay | 2025-11-01 22:58:38+00:00
Expectations do not spring sui generis into hearts and minds. I don’t know about you, but AFAICT approximately sane and rational folks (ha! Ha!) at least try to derive their expectations from reality.

When most people’s reality is substantially human-defined and abstracted from nature - including a global advertising industry exists to create mass expectations, of economic significance for its clients, often enough to the detriment of their target markets - you can absolutely point the finger at “reality” for pissing on your leg while varieties of Stoic, Buddhist, and HN poster tell you it’s raining.

It’s good to start with ourselves when trying to create change, as that is where the locus of control should lie… but sometimes “reality” is absolutely the reasonable and proximate cause of negative emotion. Saying otherwise feels like anticipatory victim-blaming.
by krackers | 2025-11-01 22:58:39+00:00
I wonder why this is such a surprise, this is in fact what you would naively expect given the way the residual stream is structured no?

Each attention block adds to the residual stream. And we already know from logit-lens type work that the residual stream roughly remains in the same "basis" [1], which I vaguely remember is something that resnet architectures explicitly try to achieve.

So maybe it's my armchair naivety but in order for both of these to hold while the LLM being able to do some sort of "abstraction", it seems like it is natural for the initial token embedding to be projected into some high-dimensional subspace and then as it passes through different attention blocks you get added "deltas" on top of that, filling out other parts of that subspace.

And looking at the overall attention network from an information passing perspective, encoding and having access to the input tokens is certainly a nice thing to have.

Now maybe it could be argued that the original input could be lossily "converted" into some other more abstract representation, but if the latent space is large enough to not force this, then there's probably no strict reason to do so. And in fact we do know that traditional BPE token embeddings don't even form a subspace (there's a fixed vocab size and embeddings are just a lookup table, so it's only just a bunch of scattered points).

I wonder if this work is repeated with something like vision tokens, whether you will get the same results.

[1] https://nitter.poast.org/khoomeik/status/1920620258353610896
by noir_lord | 2025-11-01 22:58:56+00:00
There are people on here who are negative about AI as well.

I'm not negative about AI within the things it's currently useful for and the constraints of what LLM's can help with.

I'm pretty negative about the massive over-hyping of AI with wild assertions and completely underwhelmed by the current implementations of it - I also half suspect they are going to crash the financial markets when reality and hype catch up with each other.

Who knows, I might be wrong, they might discover machine intelligence and make AI actually be AI in the next 5-10 years which would be quite the achievement since we don't have a good grasp of what intelligence even is including our own.

It's not really anything new though, hot new technology gets early adoption, salespeople move in, becomes massively over hyped, will change everything turns out to not change everything but be useful for some things, gets used for those things and the world continues.

I'm even old enough to remember when OOP was spoken about as "The Next Big Thing That Will Change Everything".

Gartner even has a name for it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle
by neilv | 2025-11-01 22:59:08+00:00
> Interviewing has always been a big can of worms in the software industry. For years, big tech has gone with the LeetCode style questions mixed with a few behavioural and system design rounds. Before that, it was brainteasers.

Before Google, AFAIK, it was ad hoc, among good programmers. I only ever saw people talking with people about what they'd worked on, and about the company.

(And I heard that Microsoft sometimes did massive-ego interviews early on, but fortunately most smart people didn't mimic that.)

Keep in mind, though, that was was before programming was a big-money career. So you had people who were really enthusiastic, and people for whom it was just a decent office job. People who wanted to make lots of money went into medicine, law, or financial.

As soon as the big-money careers were on for software, and word got out about how Google (founded by people with no prior industry experience) interviewed... we got undergrads prepping for interviews. Which was a new thing, and my impression is that the only people who would need to prep for interviews either weren't good, or were some kind of scammer. But then eventually those students, who had no awareness of anything else, thought that that this was normal, and now so many companies just blindly do it.

If we could just make some other profession be easier big money, maybe only people who are genuinely enthusiastic would be interviewing. And we could interview like adults, instead of like teenagers pledging a frat.
by jbv027 | 2025-11-01 22:59:37+00:00
Also technology provider is important. I doubt that government is able to self host face recognition. So the most common implementation would be microsoft (or any big corp good at lobbying in this part of the world) owning technology and data to preserve their vendor lock in. So there is high probability that those data will be used for other purposes (you can easily imagine standard corporate excuses if someone finds out).
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-11-01 22:59:41+00:00
It works extremely well. I have a couple of Pencil Pros (both generations), and a couple of iPads.

I haven't used the Wacoms, though, so I have no comparison points.

I find that it works almost miraculously. I'm an artist (as is my wife), and we find it's almost perfect.
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-11-01 22:59:56+00:00
So, Deepseek 3.1 from their own platform:

Input $0.28 / 1M tokens cache miss Output $0.42 / 1M tokens

Via synthetic (which otherwise looks cool):

Input $0.56/mtok Output $1.68/mtok

So 2-3 better value through https://platform.deepseek.com

(Granted Synthetic gives you way more models to choose from, including ones that don't parrot CPC/PLA propaganda and censor)
by freetime2 | 2025-11-01 23:00:07+00:00
I get 1,700 Mbps on Ookla with my iPhone 17 Pro. This is on 6ghz with line of sight to the AP, with MLO turned off.

I haven't experienced any issues with 6ghz enabled, although honestly there isn't much noticeable benefit on an iPhone either in real-world usage. MLO was causing some issues for my non-WiFi 7 Apple devices - since WiFi credentials are sync'd in iCloud, I found that my laptop was joining the MLO network even though I never explicitly told it to - so I have disabled MLO.
by hectormalot | 2025-11-01 23:00:20+00:00
I have 1Gbit at home, but almost never reach those speeds when downloading games. It’s one of those cases where it makes sense (I want to play now!), but I’m under the impression the limit is upstream (at steam most likely), rather than on my connection. (I do get those speeds on speed tests, doesn’t seem to be my setup).
by joatmon-snoo | 2025-11-01 23:00:28+00:00
No, this is the unfortunate reality of “ffmpeg is maintained by volunteers” and “CVE discovered on specific untrusted input”.

Google’s AI system is no different than the oss-fuzz project of yesteryear: it ensures that the underlying bug is concretely reproducible before filing the bug. The 90-day disclosure window is standard disclosure policy and applies equally to hobby projects and Google Chrome.
by rainsford | 2025-11-01 23:00:38+00:00
It would be helpful to drive an actual discussion if you were explicit about what you find so objectionable about Krugman's argument. Is it that he dares to criticize someone behind Substack using Substack? If so, that seems overly simplistic. One can appreciate the platform and look to benefit from it while thinking other activities of the person behind the platform are worth of criticism.

Or is your problem that Krugman criticized Andreessen's foray into monetizing monkey JPGs, despite Krugman presumably lacking appropriate monkey JPG industry credentials? Again, if so, it would be more helpful to outline why you think Krugman is wrong instead of substituting umbrage for argument.