MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by asdfman123 | 2025-11-14 17:53:21+00:00
I'm an atheist too. I grew up in the church, rejected it in my teens. The problem with organized religion was the "organized" part -- the centralized, inflexible human authority.

I'm increasingly convinced that spirituality is a vital part of the human experience and we should embrace it, not reject it. If you try to banish basic human impulses, they just resurface in worse, unexpected forms somewhere else.

We all need ways to find deep connection with other humans and the universe around us. We need basic moral principles to operate on. I think most atheists like myself have quietly found this or are in the process of finding this, but it's ok to say it out loud.

For me it means meditation, frugality, and strict guidelines on how I treat others. That's like a religion, I guess. But that's OK. I embrace it. By owning it and naming it, you have mastery over it.
by anoncareer0212 | 2025-11-14 17:53:44+00:00
This is all about OpenAI, not about AI being subsidized...with some sort of directive to copy/paste "OpenAI" for all the big AI providers? (presumably you meant s/OpenAI/$PROVIDER?)

If that's what you meant: Google. Boom.

Also, perhaps you're a bit new to industry, but that's how these things go. They burn a lot of capital building it out b/c they can always fire everyone and just serve at cost -- i.e. subsidizing business development is different from subsiziding inference, unless you're just sort of confused and angry at the whole situation and it all collapses into everyone's losing money and no one will admit it.
by Merinov | 2025-11-14 17:53:45+00:00
Good point. You can currently search for topics (search bar), but I see what you mean, dedicated topic filters/tags would be even more intuitive than having to type.

Interesting idea about using AI to auto-tag articles with topics. What specific topics would be most useful for you? (Thinking: AI/ML, Funding, Privacy/GDPR, Regulation, Open Source, etc.)

Topic filtering could work well alongside the current audience/source filters. Will add this to the roadmap for sure, thnks! :)
by runarberg | 2025-11-14 17:53:54+00:00
Arguments in isolation are usually poor. The water usage arguments usually (always?) comes along with a bunch of other arguments, including power consumption, workers rights, consumer protection, public safety, enshittifcation, etc.

When evaluating the economical cost or morality of a thing, (just like when training a machine learning model) the more data you consider the more accurate the result (although just like statistical modelling it is worth to be wary of overfitting).
by sgarland | 2025-11-14 17:54:07+00:00
There are Americans who have open sewage in their yards [0], because their counties are predominantly Black or Latino, and their state deprioritizes any infrastructure work. It’s structural racism.

Even better, the Trump administration canceled [1] an attempt to right that wrong, citing that it was “DEI.”

0: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sanitation-open-sewers-black-...

1: https://apnews.com/article/justice-department-environmental-...
by jiehong | 2025-11-14 17:54:19+00:00
I once saw people start their month with 0 on their bank account, and live in the negative monthly credit their bank allows.

Them having a job (luckily), means they just about manage to fill that debt back at the end of the month, covering the debt and the small bank interest.

They end up paying the bank money bit by bit every month, yet they stay locked in that negative money pit.

It’s like being permanently broke, and it all started with one a bad month of extra payments…
by krick | 2025-11-14 17:54:28+00:00
> 3-6 months

Wow, you are an optimist. I do feel "it's close", but I wouldn't bet this close. But I wouldn't argue either, I don't know. Also, when it really pops, the consequences will be more disastrous than the bubble itself feels right now. It's literally hundreds of billions in circular investing. It's absurd.
by netsharc | 2025-11-14 17:54:35+00:00
Too many people buy the American dream of "If you just work hard enough, you'll be successful.". If you believe this, then you'd have to believe the opposite: "If you're poor and unsucessful, that means you didn't work hard enough, you must be lazy.".

And too many trust-fund kids or kids from rich parents who could afford to send them to expensive schools (or rich enough to live in a district with a well-funded school) dismiss their luck and believe "I'm successful, that must mean I've been a diligent and smart worker.".

Also, beware of survival bias, most of people in here will have similar paths (born with smarts, good education, high-paying IT job, great success) and probably have similar beliefs about hard work and luck...

This 2+ hour documentary partly talks about it, in particular from ~28m: https://youtu.be/t1MqJPHxy6g?t=1584
by MangoToupe | 2025-11-14 17:54:40+00:00
> Each language is a lossy approximation of all conceivable thought

I'm not quite sure I understand this—I do have mental sensations/processes sans language, but I would not characterize them as "thoughts". To me, a thought is inherently linguistic, even if they relate to non-linguistic mental processes. So to me, learning a new language is very literally learning how to think differently.
by Spivak | 2025-11-14 17:54:41+00:00
You can't monopolize a market where there is no market. Nintendo can be anticompetitive in the wider games industry, but there is no market for software that runs on a Switch.

I didn't say I liked the ruling, just that it's correct. The opposite conclusion would be absurd, that you can invent a market where there isn't one and claim a company has a monopoly over it. You would be asking the court to declare that every computing device is a de facto marketplace for software that could run on it and that you can't privilege any specific software vendor. I would love if that were true but you can hopefully agree that such a thing would be a huge stretch legally.
by f1shy | 2025-11-14 17:54:41+00:00
That does not answer the question: how is that relevant in this forum?

I do not want the world to exist to any whim. I just made a remark, with a personal opinion. Sorry to see, such is not welcome here, but mere political news which have absolutely nothing to do with hackers, computers, technology or science are very well received.

And BTW, I was bot so wrong, it got flagged. So there is that for your whim.
by dpark | 2025-11-14 17:55:18+00:00
My read on the whole Google Plus thing was that they drastically underestimated the difficulty of convincing people to actually use it. They clearly had the expertise to build it, and they had some interesting ideas with their circles of friends or whatever they called them (though I think they missed the mark on how they used them). But they couldn’t convince anyone to actually use it.

Maybe I’m wrong and internally they knew they had a major uphill battle, but I don’t think so. So many of the choices they made were needlessly user hostile (e.g. real name requirements) that it seems like they assumed it would be a given that people would want to use it. When they later realized their error they tried to cram it down everyone’s throats with stuff like YouTube comments only working from Google Plus accounts.
by nerdponx | 2025-11-14 17:55:22+00:00
I agree with you that the headline really needs to be qualified with these details. So there's an aspect of being unsurprising here, because that particular set of details is exactly where LLMs perform very well.

But I think it's still an interesting result, because related and similar tasks are everywhere in our modern world, and they tend to have high importance in both business and the public sector, and the older generation of machine learning techniques for handling these tasks we're both sophisticated and to the point where very capable and experienced practitioners might need an R&D cycle just to conclude if the problem was solvable with the available data up to the desired standard.

LLM's represent a tremendous advancement in our ability as a society to deal with these kinds of tasks. So yes, it's a limited range of specific tasks, and success is found within a limited set of criteria, but it's a very important tasks and enough of those criteria are met in practice that I think this result is interesting and generalizable.

That doesn't mean we should fire all of our data scientists and let junior programmers just have at it with the LLM, because you still need to put together a good day to say, makes sense of the results, and iterate intelligently, especially given that these models tend to be expensive to run. It does however mean that existing data teams must be open to adopting LLMs instead of traditional model fitting.
by rekabis | 2025-11-14 17:55:45+00:00
> Stocks account for 21% of the country’s household wealth—about a quarter as much again as at the height of the dotcom boom.

This gives a wildly inaccurate picture of the investing landscape.

The bottom 50% of all American households account for less than 1% of all stocks and shares held.

The bottom 90% hold only 10% of all stocks and shares.

It’s the top-10% of households that hold the other 90% of all stocks and shares.

The peak of the stock-investing bell curve isn’t even a bell curve - it’s an asymptote that only rises the further you go up the wealth ladder.

The Working Class will feel almost nothing from any stock market crash. It’s the Parasite Class who will feel almost 100% of it.
by qdotme | 2025-11-14 17:55:53+00:00
Oddly, the article does not talk about "why"!

So - let me shoot my guess. Uber didn't invent a new category. There were already taxi dispatchers, and there were already "radio-taxi" and "mini-cab" dispatchers - private driver fleets, who weren't licensed to be flagged down curbside, but otherwise operated as Uber. You placed a call, the operator gave you a quote and wait estimate, and told you the license plate of the car to expect.

Uber just put a fancy app on this.
by pixl97 | 2025-11-14 17:56:06+00:00
>Immigrants arrive here

This is a massively broad brush with a huge filter bias applied.

1. Many immigrants not from the contiguous countries next to yours were actually rather wealthy and education in relation to where they came from.

2. Immigrants from close countries typically are the ones that are more motivated in the first place (bias filter). It's also common they have relations and contacts in the country they are going to as a means to gain a foothold in the place they are going.
by fellowniusmonk | 2025-11-14 17:56:16+00:00
I climbed out of extreme adolescent poverty (for the U.S.) brought on by my mother's cancer diagnosis pre-ACA to become a top 1% earner in my cohort.

Practically speaking as a 15 year old teenager I started 30k (56k) in today's dollars in the hole per year or my family went homeless and hungry.

The complete stupidity of people who think poverty and homelessness are in any way indicative of moral fiber, work ethic, discipline, etc. is undeniable.

Having now spent many years with the intelligencia, cocaine, DMT and crypto gambling class I must say.

The working poor are morally better than all of them and the majority of the homeless are too.

The moral value of the way any of these groups spend their first available 50k chunk in comparison to their wealthy counterparts is just vastly superior.

Maker geeks of all stripes are the only group I've seen that I can distinguish as interacting in a more meaningful ways.

Poverty is a multi factorial societal issue, no amount of mindset is enough to get you out alone but a vastly superior mindset IS required to get out and that's a failure of society because the wealthy are immoral and _don't want the competition and often times do want the cheaper labor._

It's a constant effort to widen the leverage gap.

The poor shouldn't have to have a vastly better mindset, grind, cognitive powers just to get to the baseline in a dead end job, we are crushing the best among us instead of ensuring that their above average capabilities are contributing to society at large, instead they are being used to get out of the hole we made for them.
by switchbak | 2025-11-14 17:56:22+00:00
Not just that, they appear to have 6 kids.

I have a lot of empathy for people that are struggling financially, especially with how hard things are now. I grew up in a way that most would consider to be "poor", though I mostly never felt that way.

I do well for myself now, better than I ever thought I could, and yet still I had to think very hard about the financial implications and compromises that come with choosing to have kids. Making 6 babies then complaining that you're poor, come on man, wtf? If you're going to do that, you have to do absolutely whatever you can to bring resources in for your family. That means working the "boring desk job" if it pays more, even if you prefer to be outside wiring up sprinklers.

Where is the accountability, the locus of self control? Sorry, but I don't buy any of this.
by e28eta | 2025-11-14 17:56:34+00:00
If this is being regenerated every commit, I’d be interested to see the version history and/or being able to see the CodeWiki diff inside a pull request.

Maybe it’s too noisy, if the LLM isn’t stable about the way it’s wording things, or maybe it’s only useful for commits that make significant changes to architecture. However, I do think it’d be interesting to see how the documentation changes over time, as well as seeing how any specific PR changes it.

Also, I looked at golang, and I was definitely expecting a multi-page architecture with lots of cross references, not just one long scrolling field of content.
by rectang | 2025-11-14 17:56:40+00:00
From the article:

> Being poor is you already did all those things. You cancelled all your streaming services years ago. You make all your food from scratch all the time. You never go to fucking Starbucks. You fix everything yourself. You already stretch everything to the limit. That is how you have to live every day of your life, for eternity, with no relief in sight.
by tracker1 | 2025-11-14 17:56:59+00:00
While I get it, I disagree with some of the premise... especially the idea of working two jobs. My dad has worked multiple jobs at a time when I was growing up... I've worked multiple jobs at a time as recently as this year. Now, I'm getting old (50yo) and really couldn't handle it as well as I could in my 20s, but I still did it.

It's not a permanent solution, but it's not a bad thing to do when you need to in order to pull ahead. For that matter, self study and personal advancement. It's hard to get into some jobs as an autodidact... I've been a software developer for going on three decades without a formal education. There are plenty of times I can't get through the HR screening alone. That doesn't mean you don't try, or don't put in effort to improve your position in life or yourself.

I get being broke and poor... I grew up relatively poor. It sucks. I also worked very hard to get where I am. It's not always where I want to be, but that's life to an extent. My opinions don't always align with everyone else though... I just don't like the idea of giving up, or not putting in extra effort when it's an option to pull you ahead.

I say this having spent about a year out of the past 3 years without regular income and massively in debt with medical issues I cannot cover, and cannot currently afford insurance (due to debt payments). It sucks, and I can't change the past... I can only put in the effort I need to improve the future.
by bobmcnamara | 2025-11-14 17:57:21+00:00
I really just want the software time to be as good as the underlying hardware clock...

...rather than setting a rather awful minimum performance spec of 10ppm smearing over a leap second day.

Three lies: Universal - multiple smear implementations, linear vs cosine off the top of my head.

Coordinated - whose in charge here? Google? Facebook?

Time - doesn't even try for 1s/s

UTC is, for all intents and purposes, yet another human readable time zone. And should be treated as such. The underlying hardware problems I have and understand. Don't need the software making it worse.
by noisy_boy | 2025-11-14 17:57:23+00:00
They can add features that help with browsing. E.g. they can steal the workspaces idea from Vivaldi. Or the side by side split window idea which is great for comparisons. Or adding a light weight mode which is somewhere between full fledged and text reader modes.

There are so many improvements that can make the browsing experience significantly better. I wish they picked at least some of these things instead of stuffing AI in yet another sidebar.
by ajkjk | 2025-11-14 17:57:30+00:00
they hate it because all the news about it is bad, and falls cleanly into the unignorable modern narrative that "everything is being corrupted and turning against users over time". Embedding corporate interests in a browser that was supposed to be for people (see: all the examples of them doing that) is morally disgusting and everyone hates it. The repulsiveness of it is more about the trend that it represents than the feature itself. We are soooooooo fucking tired of good things becoming bad and being unaccountable for it. To win our confidence, the right number of "betrayals of user trust" is absolutely zero, and it's not right now... and since they're ostensibly non-profit/open source the dissonance of "pretending to win trust" and then "betraying it" is especially jarring. When Google does something evil every day you're not surprised, just resigned; when Mozilla does something evil you're truly disappointed because they have no reason to; they were supposed to be good the good guys.
by etchalon | 2025-11-14 17:57:34+00:00
Growing up with a single mother we've vacillated between being poor, broke and "getting by".

It was always a reverse slide down.

First, we'd go broke. The meager savings she'd put together would get wiped out. It was generally an impossible crisis that would do it. Something that shouldn't have broken, did. Something that shouldn't have happened, did. Something that should have only cost X cost Y.

If the crisis was a single instance event that year, we'd slowly return to "getting buy". Small savings would get restored. Some debt written off. A windfall from something or other that put our heads above water.

But sometimes, it was too many things at once. We'd go from being broke, to being poor. Every dollar was a trade-off. There was no "even" or "reduced". There was just "no". The water bill couldn't get paid. The mortgage had to be late. The credit card was going to default. There were no options to shave or save. The bare minimum was still too expensive.

The answer is just ... luck.

When you're broke, you're on borrowed time. For some people, at some point, that debt comes due and can never be repaid. For some people, the debt comes due but something balances it. For others, the debt just never gets called in.
Ask HN: Question for the Math and Engineering Community
by Patternician | 2025-11-14 17:58:08+00:00
As LLMs become stronger, we’re seeing a new situation:

A human discovers a mathematical method or result, but the formal proof is generated (and even cross-verified) by multiple LLMs—even if the original author can’t fully reproduce the proof themselves.

Should such AI-generated proofs be considered valid and publishable?

What standards should apply when the idea is human-created, but the proof is AI-derived?

Curious to hear opinions from mathematicians, engineers, researchers, and journal editors. This feels like an important shift in how we think about proofs and authorship.
by vidarh | 2025-11-14 17:58:26+00:00
It's managing the desktop too, so I'm not sure that'd work unless running Xwayland in "rootful" mode, in which case I might just as well run X.

The VR stuff is a poor excuse - just fail on that scenario. Nobody that cares about window positioning will have an issue with that.

My file manager defaults to re-opening a window for any directory to a previously snapshotted location, like the Amiga Workbench did. And, yes, I wrote my own. It's a few hundred lines of of a quick and dirty Ruby hack talking directly to a pure Ruby X11 binding, which is anothe reason I stick with X - I can throw things together quickly for X. The amount of ceremony, or big additional dependencies, needed for Wayland is ridiculous.
by barbazoo | 2025-11-14 17:58:29+00:00
> People thinking that "poor is a mindset" are lacking in that.

I have never even considered people thinking like that. Is that real? Early in life I realized that the biggest factor of how you end up seems to be luck, where you're born, what's in your genes, how did parents raise you. Later in life I realized that most of the rest is mental health which you also don't have the greatest influence over the first 2 decades of your life or so.
by jmpman | 2025-11-14 17:58:30+00:00
About 10 years ago my AC failed. Decided it was time to replace both my units including the air handler. Bought the equipment online from Alpine Air and it arrived in a few days. Then I put an ad on Craigslist for a AC installation. Paid $1000 for each unit to be installed. Watched a bunch of YouTube videos to learn what “good” looked like, and just watched over the guys shoulder the whole time, asking him questions about how he was measuring the vacuum etc. Saved around $10k compared to the quotes I’d received from Home Depot and Lowe’s. Would do it again.
by potato3732842 | 2025-11-14 17:58:32+00:00
I know it makes a nice clean narrative that's especially appealing to the kind of people who would be in these comments but it probably wasn't suburbs that did this. That sort of community existed and probably still exits the most in places where the population is the least dense.

I'm not gonna speculate on what other things could have been more responsible but I have my suspicions.
by mehulashah | 2025-11-14 17:58:33+00:00
He right. I’ve seen poverty in India, but I misunderstood it.

There was a 12 year old kid who guided our boat down the Narmada after we spread my Dads ashes. He was not in school because he wanted money.

I told him I’d pay him double and continue to pay him for his days work, if he’d go back to school during the day and only row boats at night.

He said no. Just give me what you owe me.

He had no hope that education in the government schools would meaningfully change anything for him. Poverty is not a single static state. It’s a negative feedback loop that requires systemic change to get out of.