MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mattzito | 2025-11-12 19:48:30+00:00
I think you have to go market by market to make that statement. In NYC, for example, it was explicitly illegal for yellow cabs to accept radio/pickup calls, which was the domain of the livery cabs (black cars). The tradeoff was that only yellow cabs could do street hails. That worked for everybody for years - yellow cabs did a volume business, livery cabs were for outer boros or luxury/business travel and would sneakily try to pick up street hails.

In those days if you needed a car to take you someplace, aside from the outer boro examples, it was always faster to get a yellow cab. The car services could maybe get there in 45 minutes if you were lucky - big companies would often have deals with car service companies to have a few cars stationed at their buildings for peak times, so execs didn't have to wait for a car.

The yellow cab operators were essentially all independent - many rented their medallion/vehicle, either from a colleague or an agency, but they worked their own schedules and their own instincts on where to be picking up fares at given times.

No one expected something like uber - what is essentially a street hail masquerading as a livery cab. This basically destroyed yellow cabs and the traditional livery cab companies, but some of it is attributable to the VC spend, lowering prices (yellow cab fares are set by the city, livery cab fares are market-regulated) and incentivizing drivers. They made it so lucrative to drive an uber that you had thousands of new uber drivers on the road, or taxi drivers who stopped leasing their medallions and started driving uber.

At some point, though - the subsidies dried up, prices went up, and now its often faster to get a yellow cab than an uber/lyft. This is anecdata, but I take cabs a lot, and I've spoken with ~6 taxi drivers in the last year who either started with driving uber and shifted to driving a taxi, or went taxi-uber-taxi. Then I've had a lot more taxi drivers where they need passengers to put the destination into the driver's waze or google maps, even for simple things like intersections - I suspect they're uber drivers who became depedent on the in-app directions and native language interactions.

But the broader point I'm making is that in NYC, the drivers themselves were essentially unable to do anything about the changing market. The only power they had was to shift between the type of fares they were getting. And today when you order an uber, sometimes you get a yellow cab.
by cess11 | 2025-11-12 19:48:52+00:00
Are you sure about that?

"The share of Technical Help declined from 12% from all usage in July 2024 to around 5% a year later – this may be because the use of LLMs for programming has grown very rapidly through the API (outside of ChatGPT), for AI assistance in code editing and for autonomous programming agents (e.g. Codex)."

Looks like people moving to the API had a rather small effect.

"[T]he three most common ChatGPT conversation topics are Practical Guidance, Writing, and Seeking Information, collectively accounting for nearly 78% of all messages. Computer Programming and Relationships and Personal Reflection account for only 4.2% and 1.9% of messages respectively."

Less than five percent of requests were classified as related to computer programming. Are you really, really sure that like 99% of such requests come from people that are paying for API access?
by TechRemarker | 2025-11-12 19:49:07+00:00
Interesting, this seems to be "less" ideal. The problem lately for me is it being to verbose and conversational for things that need not be. Have added custom instructions which helps but still issues. Setting the chat style to "Efficient" more recently did help a lot but has been prone to many more hallucinations, requiring me to constantly ask if they are sure and never responds in a way that yes my latest statement is correct, ignoring it's previous error and showing no sign that it will avoid a similar error further in the conversation. When it constantly makes similar mistakes which I had a way to train my ChatGPT to avoid that, but while adding "memories" helps with somethings, it does not help with certain issues it continues to make since it's programming overrides whatever memory I make for it. Hoping some improvements in 5.1.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-12 19:49:11+00:00
> And even 4k streaming is under 100Mbit normally

Are you talking "4k streaming" as the current streaming providers do it, with trash bitrate, or "4k streaming" as you would do it if you had ripped your own blu-ray disks and you want to stream it from a NAS somewhere else in your house to your living room?
by 1970-01-01 | 2025-11-12 19:49:22+00:00
Speed, accuracy, cost.

Hit all 3 and you win a boatload of tech sales.

Hit 2/3, and hope you are incrementing where it counts. The competition watches your misses closer than your big hits.

Hit only 1/3 and you're going to lose to competition.

Your target for more conversations better be worth the loss in tech sales.

Faster? Meh. Doesn't seem faster.

Smarter? Maybe. Maybe not. I didn't feel any improvement.

Cheaper? It wasn't cheaper for me, I sure hope it was cheaper for you to execute.
by Grimblewald | 2025-11-12 19:49:24+00:00
Meta has made some fantastic llm's publically avliable many of which continue to outperform all but the qwen series in real world applications.

LLMs cannot do any of the major claims made for them, so competing at the current frontier is a massive resource waste.

Right now a locally running 8b model with large context window (10k tokens+) beat google/openAI models easily on any task you like.

why would anyone then pay for something that is possible to run on consumer hardware with higher token/second throughput and better performance? What exactly have the billions invested given google/oai in return? Nothing more than an existensial crisis I'd say.

Companies aren't trying to force AI costs into their subscription models in dishonest ways because they've got a winning product.
by throwup238 | 2025-11-12 19:49:27+00:00
Projection. Projection. Projection.

You’re literally viewing the law as a precise programming language, whereas I’m arguing that the reality is that laws are written in natural language that contains not only semantic ambiguity, but temporal ambiguity where one law is not coherent with another because they were created by different people at different times with different incentives.

You also didn’t bother responding to the meat of my argument, but hey you do you. Personally I’ve found that anyone who refers to other human beings as “NPCs” is void of any substance.
by davedx | 2025-11-12 19:49:49+00:00
I'm working on a lightweight next.js alternative named after my dog: https://github.com/davedx/dex.ts/

It's going fairly well, I'm more or less as feature complete as I want to be. I might do something addon-like at some point to make scaffolding apps with shadcn, tailwind, prisma and friends a single command. Like shadcn does with components.

Feedback welcome!
by hexbin010 | 2025-11-12 19:49:51+00:00
Also, electricity bills going up is partly to blame - our bills in the UK now contain even more tax to write off energy bad debt ! So more people who default, the more bailing out, the more tax in our energy bills...

There are various other taxes hidden in the energy bills, which also have VAT applied to them !:

- Writing off debt of failed energy suppliers

- A £150 energy handout for poorer households and pensioners

- Funding a scheme that encouraged people to get solar panels

- A tax to fund the stupid smart meter roll-out (they get away with calling them 'free' but then you pay ~£15-20/year for it)

Instead of using general taxation, now there are now extra taxes even for the people who can afford it the least. Strikes me as pretty insane.
by dragonwriter | 2025-11-12 19:50:07+00:00
> So everything's going to be $1.03 or $1.04.

Rounding would apply on the total transaction, not individual items (because otherwise the individual posted item prices would just be false.) So, if there is an abuse route with round-half-down, it is that optimizing buyers would structure purchase to always total $x.01 or $x.02, possibly splitting planned purchases into multiple purchases to achieve that.

But even that isn't realistically a significant issue.
by rsync | 2025-11-12 19:50:50+00:00
"It's crazy to me that rsync.net is buying mission-critical enterprise drives on Amazon."

We don't.

"At rsync.net we have trusted suppliers with verified supply chains and a long history of providing reliable service."

...

"However, from time to time, it is expedient to purchase parts from Amazon - something we do with care and suspicion."

... and that care and suspicion takes the form of physical and logical inspections and extended part burn-in.

As you can see, this QC process caught these mis-labeled parts.
by alwa | 2025-11-12 19:50:59+00:00
And, specifically, frictionless perfect enforcement. Kind of like CCTV you can pull on request after a crime, vs proactive permanent ubiquitous surveillance (looking at you, Flock Safety).

It feels healthier for the enforcement apparatus to have a budget, in terms of material personnel or time, that requires some degree of priority-setting. That priority-setting is by its nature a politically responsive process. And it’s compatible with the kind of situation that allows Really Quite Good enforcement, but not of absolutely everything absolutely all the time.

Otherwise ossification feels like exactly the word, as you said, stavros: if it costs nothing for the system to enforce stuff that was important in the hazy past but is no longer relevant, nobody wants to be the one blamed for formally easing restrictions just in case something new bad happens; 20 years later you’re still taking off your shoes at the airport. (I know, I know, they finally quit that. Still took decades. And the part that was cost-free—imaging your genitalia—continues unabated.)
by toast0 | 2025-11-12 19:51:10+00:00
I certainly could have arrived 10 minutes later, but I wouldn't say that arriving 10 minutes later would result in a better experience in every way. It might result in a hypothetically safer experience (in the instance, there were no collisions so safety was achieved) or a morally better experience (according to the HN consensus morals that deem me a psychopath for either taking a cab at all or because I did not intervene and let the cab driver drive as he saw fit). Up to you what criteria you judge the overall trip on, I'm just pointing out that if the trip time is longer, the trip is not better in every way; at least absent an unusual requirement such as if you wanted to see the sights on the way, a shorter but less scenic trip would be a negative; or if you had a timing constraint that you must not arrive before a certain time, a shorter trip might infringe that constraint and would be a negative --- no such constraint was mentioned.

I don't know that any life was endangered either. I would accept an argument that property was endangered, certainly the margin between vehicles was very close, but at speeds where a collision would not have been injurious.
by cycomanic | 2025-11-12 19:52:00+00:00
I seriously doubt that was the problem. The issue was always that these things were essentially a walking aid for the price of a motorbike/small car and were particularly useless in Europe where you had to transverse cobble stone roads or take one onto the metro (good luck with that).

They were a complete hype product, their projections that they would essentially replace walking and pushbikes were just crazy. I don't think I know anyone who wanted one for more than as a toy.

As a side note, at a ee department where I was teaching around 10 years ago, one student build one as his final year project. Pretty awesome, he essentially did everything himself from software to all the mechanics/electronics... Worked very well as well.
by bluGill | 2025-11-12 19:52:09+00:00
I expect that Waymo will have standards. In theory Uber does as well, but since the drivers own their own cars they can't enforce them. A 15 year old car that has been well maintained is still safe to have on the road (within the limits of the safety systems on board), while a 6 year old car with a lot of miles that hasn't been maintained can be deadly.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-12 19:52:29+00:00
What's the point of arguing like this? You're asking for experiences from people, then when people give you proper answers it glides off with "well no one I know plays those anyways". Isn't the discussion larger than your personal and private experiences, if you're discussing in public like this?

You seemed to have some initial claim that "all games actually work perfectly fine, prove me wrong" but then you don't seem to actually want to engage faithfully anyways.
by DonaldPShimoda | 2025-11-12 19:52:44+00:00
This is like arguing that we shouldn't try to regulate drugs because some people might "want" the heroin that ruins their lives.

The existing "personalities" of LLMs are dangerous, full stop. They are trained to generate text with an air of authority and to tend to agree with anything you tell them. It is irresponsible to allow this to continue while not at least deliberately improving education around their use. This is why we're seeing people "falling in love" with LLMs, or seeking mental health assistance from LLMs that they are unqualified to render, or plotting attacks on other people that LLMs are not sufficiently prepared to detect and thwart, and so on. I think it's a terrible position to take to argue that we should allow this behavior (and training) to continue unrestrained because some people might "want" it.
by raffisk | 2025-11-12 19:53:25+00:00
Empirical study on LLM output consistency in regulated financial tasks (RAG, JSON, SQL). Governance focus: Smaller models (Qwen2.5-7B, Granite-3-8B) hit 100% determinism at T=0.0, passing audits (FSB/BIS/CFTC), vs. larger like GPT-OSS-120B at 12.5%. Gaps are huge (87.5%, p<0.0001, n=16) and survive multiple-testing corrections.

Caveat: Measures reproducibility (edit distance), not full accuracy—determinism is necessary for compliance but needs semantic checks (e.g., embeddings to ground truth). Includes harness, invariants (±5%), and attestation.

Thoughts on inverse size-reliability? Planning follow-up with accuracy metrics vs. just repro.
by apsurd | 2025-11-12 19:53:52+00:00
Came here to say something critical because modern front-end dev is a self-inflicted hellscape.

I watched the video and "deving from the UI" makes sense! Instantly get the value. Pretty cool!

It's another hurdle as to whether I'm really going to pay the switching cost of changing my dev flow, but it is a very intuitive and compelling proposition. well done.
by gu009 | 2025-11-12 19:53:53+00:00
Thanks very much for these replies, I really appreciate the advice.

I hadn't even thought of the point most of you have raised, that $0.99 would signal "this is crapware". My thinking had entirely been "well it's a 1 trick pony, that 1 trick can't be worth more than $0.99 to people", and I expected the responses to be more along the lines of "for $0.99 you shouldn't bother with the Mac App Store and just use Gumroad".

After reading these responses, my thinking is now this:

1. Upgrade it to 2 or 3 tricks - I've already started doing this and it's going pretty nicely. The things I'm adding might have occurred to me to add eventually, but the responses to this post helped spur me on to add them now, so thank you.

2. Aim for a price point of ~$10-$15. In the audio / video production software world, that is still quite cheap for a utility app, but the 2nd and 3rd tricks I'm adding should put it in the realm of good value at that price point (I think).

3. Still up for debate whether Mac App Store is worthwhile - putting $99 per year into ad spend is potentially a better use of that money, but I already have a grasp on some more targeted avenues to get the word out to its target audience. Plus the seamless auto-update aspect of the Mac App Store suits this app & its target audience well also
by the_real_cher | 2025-11-12 19:54:09+00:00
A tiny, high-signal TL;DR:

• OpenAI (gpt-image-1): The wild artist. Best for creative, transformative, style-heavy edits—Ghibli, watercolor, fantasy additions, portals, sci-fi stuff, etc. But it hallucinates a lot and often distorts fine details (especially faces). Slowest.

• Gemini (flash-image / nanoBanana): The cautious realist. Best for subtle, photorealistic edits—fog, lighting tweaks, gentle filters, lens effects. Almost never ruins details, but sometimes refuses to do artsy transformations, especially on human photos.

• Seedream: The adventurous middle child. Faster, cheaper, and often surprisingly good at aesthetic effects—bokeh, low-poly, ukiyo-e, metallic sheen, etc. Not as creative as OpenAI, not as conservative as Gemini. Can hallucinate, but in fun ways.

Bottom line: • Creative prompts → OpenAI • Realistic photo edits → Gemini • Budget-friendly, balanced option → Seedream

If you’re planning an automated pipeline, routing “artistic” prompts to OpenAI and “photorealistic” ones to Gemini (with Seedream as a wildcard) matches their own conclusion.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-12 19:54:18+00:00
Yeah, I'm sure you're right overall, they've been at it for a long time. I think it's worth keeping in mind that all of the SteamOS'es before Steam Deck were pretty much nothing like the current (3.0) iteration. If I recall correctly, I think they were based on Ubuntu or Debian, compared to the current Arch Linux distribution.
by hmokiguess | 2025-11-12 19:54:23+00:00
Hey, sorry, I tried to write my feedback with a little more empathy but I guess I should have been upfront to clarify my point.

What I meant to say is, I can't see this competing with the current state of the art as it comes to local development. As for remote development, we are quite lacking there IMO, and this seems to be a great potential candidate to solve that problem.

I do a large portion of my development locally, it's great, I love it. This product is trying to get me to change my workflow there and asking me to do it from the browser only. Why would I work on a browser only if I have a full suite of tools locally, terminals, IDEs, text-editors, rich LSP / plugins / Agents / etc.
by rwyinuse | 2025-11-12 19:54:25+00:00
Industrial revolution was all right as long as you owned the farm, as most farmers did. The losers were those farm workers who weren't needed in as great numbers anymore, and they weren't paid well in the first place. I agree on labour conditions though, there industrialisation was a clear downgrade for many.

What worries me about AI is how it's not obvious which new jobs it may create. Younger farm workers and children of farmers could just move and work in factories, where the employers mostly took care of their training. I can't see such opportunities here. I believe whole world needs either UBI, or governments paying for jobs that previously weren't seen worth paying for. Otherwise the economy will collapse due to mass unemployment and resulting lack of demand.
by Grimblewald | 2025-11-12 19:54:26+00:00
Care to share a prompt that works? I've given up on mainline offerings from google/oai etc.

the reason being they're either sycophantic or so recalcitrant it'll raise your bloodpressure, you end up arguing over if the sky is in fact blue. Sure it pushes back but now instead of sycophanty you've got yourself some pathological naysayer, which is just marginally better, but interaction is still ultimately a waste of timr/productivity brake.
by derefr | 2025-11-12 19:54:44+00:00
Huh, I had just been trying to look into whether there existed a "mini PC but with a GPU in it that's at least as good as the ones in game consoles."

(Or, to put that another way: fundamentally, I want a game console — a piece of well-integrated consumer electronics that lives unobtrusively in my entertainment center, hooked up to my TV, requiring no maintenance, controlled entirely with a Bluetooth gamepad. But I want it to enable me to run both 1. current-gen games at at-least-equivalent fidelity to the console ports of those games; and also 2. "all the games a Windows PC can run." So, anything on Steam, yes; but also, all the weird little indie games on itch.io that never make it to Steam; and old DOS/Win31/Win95 games (either as polished ports from GOG, or through various forms of virtualization/emulation I'd set up myself); and even the little freeware games floating about on the "old internet", that someone made in Game Maker or RPG Maker 2000 or even as a standalone Flash projector executable, way back when.)

The closest thing I had found to that description so far, that even might work for the use-case, was the ROG NUC.

I wonder how this compares to that?
by pizlonator | 2025-11-12 19:54:48+00:00
> Self modifying code is handled with MMU traps on the writes, and invalidation of the relevant traces. It is very much a slow path though. Ideally heavy self modfying code is able to stay in the interpreter though and not thrash in and out of the compiler.

This might end up having a bad time running JavaScript VM JITed code, which self-modifies a lot.

But all of that makes sense! Thanks!
by giantg2 | 2025-11-12 19:55:06+00:00
"Rewards are taken from merchant fees."

That would be true for credit card fees, but not for stuff like loyalty card discounts.

"Likewise, coupons are almost always funded by the manufacturer who returns those monies to the store."

It doesn't matter. The store is the one charging the customer. As stated, the law says the store cannot charge SNAP recipients more. Thus it would be a violation if we are taking it strictly.
by ajkjk | 2025-11-12 19:55:25+00:00
it's to blame in the sense that there is a counterfactual reality where the AI companies pay for their own power and your bill doesn't go up and we can pass a law to make that counterfactual real. but yeah, blame is supposed to be about assigning responsibility. the change is attributed to AI in the sense that if they didn't exist it wouldn't have gone up, but technically the responsibility here is on policymakers to do something now that we are aware of the attribution, and they deserve to be blamed if they don't. blaming AI companies directly is a contemptuous mindset that blames them basically just for existing. which might be cathartic but it's not useful.
by ranger207 | 2025-11-12 19:55:33+00:00
A couple weeks ago Amazon said something about "we were trying to compete with Steam and even with all our resources nobody noticed" and that made me realize something: ideally, companies with similar products and services compete on features and cost, but nowadays the big tech providers compete more on lock in than anything else. But in the market of video game retail stores the competition _is_ on features and price, because Steam competes on those terms (ref gaben's famous quote "piracy is a service problem"; they're even competing and succeeding against free products)
by scottlamb | 2025-11-12 19:56:06+00:00
This is a weird take. I've never put together this kind of exploit, but still I know enough to not buy this. Do people ever really craft exploits that are perfectly valid except for using the wrong endianness?

> If you’ve ever crafted a perfect shellcode and ROP chain only to have your exploit immediately crash with a SIGSEGV(a signal sent by the operating system to a program when it attempts to access a protected or invalid memory location) or EIP(a 32-bit CPU register in the x86 architecture that holds the memory address of the next machine instruction to be executed) pointing to garbage, you’ve likely met the silent killer of beginners: Endianness.

Aren't there a million other ways to get addresses wrong?

> Using x86/x86_64 gadgets and packers on a MIPS/PowerPC target (different endianness and instruction set) will not work.

"and instruction set" is carrying a lot of weight here.

This isn't like a coin flip thing: even considering architectures with configurable endianness, in 2025 it's overwhelmingly likely both host and target are little-endian. And on old, big-endian platforms, that's just one of many things you have to get right.