MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jwr | 2025-11-02 18:10:46+00:00
I just use my laptop. A modern MacBook Pro will run ~30B models very well. I normally stick to "Max" CPUs (initially for more performance cores, recently also for the GPU power) with 64GB of RAM. My next update will probably be to 128GB of RAM, because 64GB doesn't quite cut it if you want to run large Docker containers and LLMs.
by aeve890 | 2025-11-02 18:11:02+00:00
>The ways LLMs fail (and the techniques you have to use to account for that) have more in common than physical engineering disciplines than software engineering does!

Ah yes, the God given free parameters in the Standard Model, including obviously the random seed of a transformer. What if just put 0 in the inference temperature? The randomness in llms is a technical choice to generate variations in the selection of the next token. Physical engineering? Come on.
by neom | 2025-11-02 18:11:15+00:00
Probably good for mom and pop shops, and super useful for someone who has a couple of restaurant locations or a few small grocery stores. I know a lot of places don't update their IG or whatever with specials for the week or basically anything because it's time and effort, if someone was running a campaign for a week of say a free side with a burger, but wanted to do a different side every day you could pick for free, you could churn stuff like that out super fast with this.

I tried it. I used it first for my stuff and thought wow I'd never use this for my stuff, but my stuff isn't a mom and pop burger joint with the kids working on weekend etc, I will show it to the lady who has the pho shop next door, maybe she will update her IG with her specials more often than "whenever I remember".
by echelon | 2025-11-02 18:11:22+00:00
> I like merge commits because they preserve the process of the review.

I appreciate that, but I still can't square it with my world view.

GitHub or whatever tool you use preserves all the comments and feedback and change history if you ever need to go back and reference it. Such instances are limited, and in my experience it's mainly politics and not technical when this happens. The team's PR discussion itself isn't captured in git, so it's lossy to expect this type of artifact to live in git anyway. It's also much less searchable and less first class than just going back to GitHub to access this.

Ultimately, these software development artifacts aren't relevant to the production state of the software you're deploying. It feels muddled to put an incomplete version of it into your tree when the better source of truth lives outside.
by leptons | 2025-11-02 18:11:40+00:00
I manage a team of developers, and I don't think any of us squash commits, and I really don't care. It's been working fine for 8 years at this job.

We keep our git use extremely simple, we don't spend much time even thinking about git. The most we do with git is commit, push, and merge (and stash is useful too). Never need to rebase or get any deeper into git. Doing anything complicated with git is wasting development time. Squashing commits isn't useful to us at all. We have too much forward velocity to worry that some commit isn't squashed. If a bug does come up, we move forward and fix it, the git history doesn't really figure into our process much, if at all.
by chillingeffect | 2025-11-02 18:12:30+00:00
Started off ok, but revealed themselves when talking abt trans like this:

>The bodies featured in porn are parodies of nature: women with enormous breast and butt implants; male “chicks with dicks”. A taste for sissy porn, in which men are degraded by being forcibly feminised, is central to many trans-identifying men’s belief that they are really women.

And egads: >trans-identifying male journalist Andrea Long Chu,

Ouch! This is just another "porn is extreme" panic with no insight.
by f311a | 2025-11-02 18:12:50+00:00
I've used bisect a few times in my life. Most of the time, I already know which files or functions might have introduced a bug.

Looking at the history of specific files or functions usually gives a quick idea. In modern Git, you can search the history of a specific function.

>> git log -L :func_name:path/to/a/file.c

You need to have a proper .gitattributes file, though.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-02 18:12:59+00:00
> The tests do not appear to simulate the queue in Loom, which would be a very, very good idea.

Loom is apparently this: https://github.com/tokio-rs/loom I've used tokio a bit in the past, but wasn't aware of that tool at all, looks really useful and probably I'm not alone in never hearing about it before. Any tips&tricks or gotchas with it one should know beforehand?
by saubeidl | 2025-11-02 18:13:33+00:00
> None of them resulted in a higher quality of life for the people.

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

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-35073966

https://www.plenglish.com/news/2025/10/14/cubas-urban-reform...

And this is just in Cuba alone. Imagine what would've been possible without the blockade! Don't believe the propaganda you've been fed.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-11-02 18:14:13+00:00
> Then what?

Then you use the profuse records these folks leave in their wake to back through to everyone who profited from or otherwise aided and abetted this Gestapo. Down to the individual agents and “forward deployed” engineers.

(To be clear, I support stricter immigration enforcement. ICE blowing the military budget of Saudi Arabia to deport fewer than Obama did with a tenth of a budget isn’t immigration enforcement, it’s a partisan militia. I don’t use the term Gestapo lightly.)
by clanky | 2025-11-02 18:14:49+00:00
China and Cuba were also both unquestionably improvements over the status quo. The neoliberal turn in Russia in the 1990s, meanwhile, was an unmitigated humanitarian disaster, and the removal of the USSR as an alternative on the world stage unshackled Western capital to the current relentless pursuit of advantage that has yielded today's K-shaped economy and all the instability, misery, and scapegoating of powerless groups like migrants that has come with it.
by pdpi | 2025-11-02 18:15:11+00:00
First, the average quality of candidates we were getting was pretty good. She stood out, and definitely gave a memorable performance on the technical level, but it wasn't some colossal blow to our org that we didn't make the hire.

Second, she wasn't interviewing for a "money goes in, code comes out" code monkey-type role. Whoever took that role was expected to communicate with a bunch of people.

Third, the ask was "explain this to a layperson", her performance was "a senior technical person can barely keep up". It wasn't a matter of not performing satisfactorily, it was a matter of completely failing. I really liked her as a candidate, I wanted to make the hire happen, and I'm cautious about interview nerves messing with people, so I really tried to steer the conversation in a direction she could succeed, but she just wouldn't follow.
by thomastjeffery | 2025-11-02 18:16:12+00:00
And yet, the premium features are overtly aligned against user success!

I believe you that these app devs think they are optimizing for user success, but that doesn't change the incentives that frame their work.

The greatest utility of a dating app should be that it provides a higher number of opportunities. This feature is explicitly broken by the most popular dating apps. Often, it is put behind a paywall, which has the same effect as being broken.
by CamperBob2 | 2025-11-02 18:16:21+00:00
Their fancy computer is the tip of a trillion-dollar spear, forged by our precursors who were trying to invent new and innovative ways to blow up half the world while keeping that half from blowing our half up.

There are no clean hands here. Any attempt to claim the moral high ground by dictating how other people should spend their money (or their machine cycles) will meet with the usual degree of success.
by TacticalCoder | 2025-11-02 18:16:33+00:00
> - and what a fantastic new path for pathogen transmission.

on the bright side and if history is of any help, as long as future-to-be-debarred "experts" aren't doing gain-of-function research on bat viruses while lying about it, we don't have much to fear.

Official US Congress report, mandated under Biden and whose results came under Biden, says the virus has "characteristic not found in nature" and that a lab-leak is the most likely source:

https://oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-selec...

And Peter Daszak has been debarred, defunded and prevented from ever receiving funding from the US again.

I'm more worried about humans lying and humans siding with lying humans to then lie some more, worldwide, to the public --for years before the truth finally came up to light-- much more than I'm about rats attacking bats.
by hyghjiyhu | 2025-11-02 18:16:36+00:00
This is an important analysis to perform but it's far from a sure thing. Motives can be murky and hard to assess. Maybe there is one particular scientist that has a baby on the way and fears he is about to be laid off unless he can get a sensational article published asap. A little helping hand from ai could be just the thing, and it's based on a true story just touched up a little bit and besides it's not like the readers will suffer any real harm from this tiny little transgression. Just one little shortcut one little time off course after that it's right back to honest science.
by riskable | 2025-11-02 18:17:22+00:00
With all the LLM coding assistants, you have to get a feel for each model and which extension/interface you're using with them. Not only that, but it's also dependent on your project!

For example, if you're writing a command line tool in Python, it doesn't really matter what model you use since they're all really great at Python (LOL). However, if you're writing a complicated SPA that uses say, Vue 3 with Vite (and some fancy CSS framework) and Python w/FastAPI... You want the "smartest" model that knows about all these things at once (and regularly gets updated knowledge of the latest versions of things). For me, that means Claude Code.

I am cheap though and only pay Anthropic $20/month. This means I run out of Claude Credits every damned week (haha). To work around this problem, I used to use OpenAI's pay-per-use API with gpt5-mini with VS Code's Copilot extension, switching to GPT5-codex (medium) with the Codex extension for more complicated tasks.

Now that I've got more experience, I've figured out that GPT5-codex costs way too much (in API credits) for what you get in nearly all situations. Seriously: Why TF does it use that much "usage". Anyway...

I've tried them all with my very, very complicated collaborative editor (CRDTs), specifically to learn how to better use AI coding assistants. So here's what I do now:

* Ollama cloud for gpt-oss:120b (it's so fast!) * Claude Code for everything else.

I cannot understate how impressed I am with gpt-oss:120b... It's like 10x faster than gpt5-mini and yet seems to perform just as well. Maybe better, actually because it forces you to narrow your prompts (due to smaller context window). But because it's just so damned fast, that doesn't matter.

With Claude Code, it's like magic: You give it a really f'ing complicated thing to troubleshoot or implement and it just goes—and keeps going until it finishes or you run out of tokens! It's a, "the future is now!" experience for sure.

With gpt-oss:120b it's more like having an actual conversation, where the only time you stop typing is when you're reviewing what it did (which you have to do for all the models... Some more than others).

FYI: The worst is Gemini 2.5. I wouldn't even bother! It's such trash, I can't even fathom how Google is trying to pass it off as anything more than a toy. When it decides to actually run (as opposed to responding with, "Failed... Try again"), it'll either hallucinate things that have absolutely nothing to do with your prompt or it'll behave like some petulant middle school kid that pretend to spend a lot of time thinking about something but ultimately does nothing at all.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2025-11-02 18:17:26+00:00
> It seems to me that in 2016 people did (have to) play a lot more tricks with the backpropagation than today

Perhaps, but maybe because there was more experimentation with different neural net architectures and nodes/layers back then?

Nowadays the training problems are better understood, clipping is supported by the frameworks, and it's easy to find training examples online with clipping enabled.

The problem itself didn't actually go away. ReLU (or GELU) is still the default activation for most networks, and training an LLM is apparently something of a black art. Hugging Face just released their "Smol Training Playbook: a distillation of hard earned knowledge to share exactly what it takes to train SOTA LLMs", so evidentially even in 2025 training isn't exactly a turn-key affair.
by pas | 2025-11-02 18:18:21+00:00
... if he thinks some WG is making a mistake and he's not welcome there (everyone else seems to be okay with what's happening based on the quoted email on the first link), then - CoC or not - he should then leave, and publicly post distance himself from the outcome.

(Obviously he was never the one to back down from a just fight, but it's important to find the right hill to die on. And allies! And him not following RFC 2026 [from 1996, hardly the peak of Internet bureaucracy] is not a CoC thing anyway.)
Show HN: Namebump – a no-nonsense baby name chooser
by chris_sn | 2025-11-02 18:18:41+00:00
I got tired of 'baby name Tinder' apps being buggy and full of ads, so made my own with Claude Code in a weekend.

Super simple CSS and PHP on LAMP, no JS, no tracking and no signup.

Had a lot of fun making this, would love your feedback!
by CogitoCogito | 2025-11-02 18:18:56+00:00
I have always been very careful with git histories and often rewrite/squash them before final review/merge. Often my rewritten histories have nothing to do with the original history and commits are logically/intuitively separated and individually testable.

That said, very few people seem to be like me. Most people have no concept of what a clear commit history is. I think it's kind of similar to how most people are terrible written communicators. Few people have any clue how to express themselves clearly. The easiest way to deal with people like this is to just have them squash their PRs. This way you can at least enforce some sanity at review and then the final commit should enforce some standards.

I agree on rebasing instead of straight merging, but even that's too complicated for most people.
by nixpulvis | 2025-11-02 18:18:57+00:00
Usually the merge commit is what has the link to the PR/MR. So it's the best way to actually find it.

> Ultimately, these software development artifacts aren't relevant to the production state of the software you're deploying. It feels muddled to put an incomplete version of it into your tree when the better source of truth lives outside.

You could make the same claim about the entire history. Git is a development tool, production just needs a working cut of the source.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-11-02 18:18:59+00:00
MaryBeth Lewis’s desire to be a new mom again, at 65 years old, led to a custody battle like no other. MaryBeth was 25 when she married a pilot named Bob Lewis. The couple had five daughters. In her late 40s, she used in vitro fertilization to give birth to twin girls. she kept going, and going, eventually giving birth to her 13th child at the remarkable age of 62. to bring this last set of twins into the world, MaryBeth ... she tricked an I.V.F. clinic, a judge and even her own husband.

The last birth was surrogate-birthed twins and they were taken away in the hospital.

The story is really complex and I haven't unpacked it all. I can't suss the harm done from the charges because the charges are stacked (hinting at an overzealous prosecutor) and at a quick glance, some of the laws seem technical or regulatory.
by rahimnathwani | 2025-11-02 18:19:22+00:00
I love this. Two things I noticed and liked:

- the README is extremely detailed and clear: all the commands are explained with examples and the why to use each one

- you're using Anki Connect to edit decks in-place, instead of trying to edit or generate an apkg file. This simplifies things and avoids issues such as needing to create custom note types or avoiding creating two note types with the same field

When my son and I have discussed a topic in response to a question, ideally I would evaluate whether there's something he should remember forever and, if so, I would create one or more Anki notes for that piece of knowledge. But right now it's too much effort, unless I'm at my desk. Even then, I need to copy and paste card fields from a chat interface into the Anki UI. That means I rarely do it.
by chillingeffect | 2025-11-02 18:19:27+00:00
Id like to point out submitter, binning, has no comments and no favorites. Only a string of sexually conservative submissions with very low karma.

I submit that this user is not a hacker, nor has no intention of being part of the hacker community. They are clearly just using this resource as an outlet for their propaganda and it's not resonating with this community.
by _flux | 2025-11-02 18:20:55+00:00
Hmm.. On my Debian ps axuw|grep Xorg says

root 34595 2.7 0.4 26146280 532248 tty4 Sl+ Nov13 783:33 /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg vt4 -displayfd 3 -auth /run/user/1000/gdm/Xauthority -nolisten tcp -background none -noreset -keeptty -novtswitch -verbose 3
by tapoxi | 2025-11-02 18:21:19+00:00
I think the issue isn't that you downloaded random hostile software, but that other software you do use has some sort of vulnerability (recent Unity vulnerability, browser sandbox escape, etc) and an issue like this would allow for privilege escalation.

Wayland doesn't need X11's vulnerability as its only argument, Wayland is a much simpler design that is easier to iterate on because it doesn't assume the client and server are on different machines. The fact that it moves privileged APIs like screen capture behind portals is a bonus.
by mikeyouse | 2025-11-02 18:21:29+00:00
Not necessarily a new path, but a previously unknown path. Any place that bats directly interact with ‘land mammals’ leads to a mess of viral recombination and reassortment… hence why the agriculture/wild interface in China is the site of so many spillovers. Rats especially carry similar viruses with many features that increase tropism, so the fact that rats are feeding on bats means we’re going to get a ton of crossover viruses especially well suited for transmission in mammals.

One such study’s key paragraph…

> While uncommon for coronaviruses of bats, furin cleavage sites are commonly found in coronaviruses of rodents and it is perhaps fitting to note that proteolytic processing of the coronavirus spike protein was first recognized in the model rodent coronavirus, murine hepatitis virus, MHV-A59 [53], with later analyses demonstrating the importance of furin for the proteolytic cleavage and function of its spike protein [54].

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235277142...
by echelon | 2025-11-02 18:22:25+00:00
Bats are one of the largest disease reservoirs on the planet for all kinds nasty novel viruses that could potentially jump to humans.

Bats have crazy immune systems that let them harbor all kinds of nasty stuff without it killing them on account of their unclean communal living habitat. Bats are in close contact where waste and bodily fluids are constantly coming into contact with other members, and these all carry pathogens.

Bat immune systems evolved as a defense mechanism. Bat viral loads are high, and the viruses get to evolve rapidly, come into contact with other virus genomes, and essentially explore the state space of potential virus genomes quickly. Constantly evolving novel glycoproteins, etc. Bats are essentially a virus optimization battleground.

These rats are an invasive species (to the cave) that also live in close proximity to humans. They've just been discovered hunting bats, meaning they're coming into close contact with bat viruses and potentially serving to introduce these into rat and, possibly subsequently, human populations.

Additionally, if the viruses can jump to rats, they're in a state where they could already be primed to infect us.

Bat viruses are no joke. Since our immune systems aren't familiar with novel viruses, and the viruses aren't adapted to not kill their human hosts at first, novel bat viruses can do a lot of harm.
by georgeburdell | 2025-11-02 18:22:28+00:00
Lots of things are baked into that 95% number. Sometimes the power would go out. Data recipients were careless about checking whether their computers were powered on and had a static IP assigned, but I’d certainly hear about it if they didn’t get their data. Network engineers would futz with settings and do poorly announced infrastructure upgrades. Rather than try to fix all these issues, I just wrote the code assuming we were working from a 3rd world country.
by pm2222 | 2025-11-02 18:22:29+00:00
“The biggest issue we are now having is not a compute glut, but it’s a power and… the ability to get the builds done fast enough close to power,” he said. “My problem today… it’s not a supply issue of chips. It’s actually the fact that I don’t have warm shells to plug into.”

This is concerning about chip makers NVIDIA/AMD and the alike
Show HN: Chat with Your Production Logs
by prastik | 2025-11-02 18:23:28+00:00
Hi, Prastik & Gaurab here. We’re building Jod(https://jodmcp.com), a project that grew out of our own frustration with current troubleshooting and observability workflows. Jod lets you chat with your logs to debug issues, generate on-demand dashboards, analyze service health, and monitor with ease, all from a single chat window.

You can ask things like:

- “Why did latency spike last night?” - “Show me 5xx errors from the payments service.” - “Create a time series graph showing error counts for the last 6 hours.”

..and Jod will pull, summarize, or even visualize the answers for you.

We’d really appreciate your feedback on this. Thank you.
by ethin | 2025-11-02 18:23:54+00:00
Wayland devs for the longest time thought implementing what was needed for accessibility (mainly, global keyboard hooks for Orca to work) was a security problem. Nevermind the fact that nobody hacks X servers, or your wayland compositor, because if I wanted to hook your keyboard with a keylogger, I'd hook it through evdev. And then you wouldn't even know let alone be able to do much about it if I did it properly.
by bikelang | 2025-11-02 18:24:09+00:00
Git bisect was an extremely powerful tool when I worked in a big-ball-of-mud codebase that had no test coverage and terrible abstractions which made it impossible to write meaningful tests in the first place. In that codebase it was far easier to find a bug by finding the commit it was introduced in - simply because it was impossible to reason through the codebase otherwise.

In any high quality codebase I’ve worked in, git bisect has been totally unnecessary. It doesn’t matter which commit the bug was introduced in when it’s simple to test the components of your code in isolation and you have useful observability to instruct you on where to look and what use inputs to test with.

This has been my experience working on backend web services - YMMV wildly in different domains.