MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andrew_ | 2025-11-27 17:10:45+00:00
It's virtue signaling plain and simple. People who crafted their identities around the current thing in ~2017 are religiously attached to having to be part of the in group and can't let it go, and it inevitably bubbles up like this.

This will no doubt rankle those who align with that group, but they are a pathetic remnant of a terrible period of rampant sociopathy.
by Lapel2742 | 2025-11-27 17:11:06+00:00
They seem to artificially create filter bubbles, echo chambers and rage. They do that just for the money. They divide societies.

For example:

(Trap of Social Media Algorithms: A Systematic Review of Research on Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Their Impact on Youth)

> First, there is a consistent observation across computational audits and simulation studies that platform curation systems amplify ideologically homogeneous content, reinforcing confirmation bias and limiting incidental exposure to diverse viewpoints [1,4,37]. These structural dynamics provide the “default” informational environment in which youth engagement unfolds. Simulation models highlight how small initial biases are magnified by recommender systems, producing polarization cascades at the network level [2,10,38]. Evidence from YouTube demonstrates how personalization drifts toward sensationalist and radical material [14,41,49]. Such findings underscore that algorithmic bias is not a marginal technical quirk but a structural driver shaping everyday media diets. For youth, this environment is especially influential: platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube are central not only for entertainment but also for identity work and civic socialization [17]. The narrowing of exposure may thus have longer-term consequences for political learning and civic participation.

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/11/301
by vayup | 2025-11-27 17:11:13+00:00
The strongest arugument made is that hybrid is more complex, more work and therefore more risky.

As someone who has been implementing such systems for 20 years, I don't buy this. In my mind, it's equivalent to saying "Seatbelts add complexity to the safety system, and it's more work. So let's get rid of it."

In this argument, the benefits of hybrid/seatbelts are not factored in adequately.
by Spooky23 | 2025-11-27 17:11:59+00:00
What a bizarre case. I’m a technology person and late Gen-X. The only tech in my school were lab computers and Ti-81/82 calculators, and I’ve been increasingly leery of the technology in schools since about 4th grade. Before that, they occasionally used iPads for a few things.

Now that my son is in 8th grade, the whole Chromebook phenomenon is something I find gross. Kids don’t read books. The various assessment products are gross and stress inducing, and the tools used for math, especially graphing, make trivial assignments incredibly difficult.

I hate to sound like an old man. But between worse educational products, corporate surveillance tools applied to children and cheap, hard to use devices, I miss books.
by edstarch | 2025-11-27 17:12:08+00:00
>I really, truly don't understand. This isn't just about manners, mores, or self-reflection. The inability or unwillingness to think about your behavior or its likely reception are stupefying.

Shower thought: what does a typical conversation with an LLM look like? You ask it a question, or you give a command. The model spends some time writing a large wall of text, or performing some large amount of work, probably asks some follow up questions. Most of the output is repetitive slop so the user scans for the direct answer to the question, or checks if the tests work, promptly ignores the follow-ups and proceeds to the next task.

Then the user goes to an online forum and carries on behaving the same way: all posts are instrumental, all of the replies are just directing, shepherding, shaping and cajoling the other users to his desired end (giving him recognition and a job).

I'm probably reading too much into this one dude but perhaps daily interaction with LLMs also changes how one interacts with other text based entities in their lives.
by bearjaws | 2025-11-27 17:12:30+00:00
I am certain if I had the estimated $4,000,000,000 it took to get Voyager 1 launched, I could get some microservices to function regardless of all scenarios.

The reality is, its only worth it to build to 99.9999% uptime for very specific missions... There is no take-backsies in space. Your company will survive a microservice outage.
by mystraline | 2025-11-27 17:12:57+00:00
I guess learning "someone elses' computer isn't yours" is a lesson best taught early on?

I know fellow millenials that use their work computers for personal reasons. And thats some of the stupidest things you can do. Dont use work or school hardware for personal reasons.

I'd also say, if you're running Windows you're also surveilled to hell and back as well. Linux is basically the only platform thats not.

And as to larger surveillance, its pervading everywhere. Work. School. Driving (Flock). Commercial web. "Free" services.

I'm glad I grew up in one of the last generations that wasn't habitually online. I did loads of "troublesome behavior", that never followed me. Now, some thing will be captured with a smartphone and memorialized forever. And that... Alas. (Old man yelling at cloud, I guess?)
by UniverseHacker | 2025-11-27 17:13:54+00:00
All languages have things like that, but from my experience developing a number of widely used scientific software packages for both Python and R, those sort of bugs happen a lot more in Python. Rs copy on write, for example makes it a much more functional language without unintended side effects- Python is very inconsistent in that regard, with different variable types and data structures behaving entirely different in identical situations.
by tucnak | 2025-11-27 17:14:42+00:00
> Exposing yourself to things you dont agre with is what helps us all question our own beliefs and prejudeces, and grow as people.

I have another wise-sounding soundbite for you: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." —Voltaire. All this sounds dandy and fine, until you actually try and examine the beliefs and prejudeces at hand. It would seem that such examination is possible, and it is—in theory, whereas in practice, i.e. in application of language—"ideas" simply don't matter as much. Material circumstance, mindset, background, all these things that make us who we are, are largely immutable in our own frames of reference. You can get exposed to new words all the time, but if they come in language you don't understand, it's of no use. This is not a bug, but a feature, a learned mechanism that allows us to navigate massive search spaces without getting overwhelmed.
by rcxdude | 2025-11-27 17:14:53+00:00
The issue is that it's not symmetric: the algorithm is biased towards rage-baity content, so it will use any tiny level of engagement with something related to that content to push it, but there's not really anything you can do to stop it, or to get it to push less rage-baity content. This is also really bad if you realise you have a problem with getting caught up in such content (for some it's borderline addictive): there's no tools for someone to say 'I realise I respond to every message I see on this topic, but really that's not good for me, please don't show me it in the first place'.
by ben_w | 2025-11-27 17:15:16+00:00
Almost everything about The Culture will be immediately apparent from stuff Musk talks about, but only about half of it would look like he's understood it.

The only real crimes are reading/writing someone's brain without permission (at which point others may call you names and stop inviting you to social events) or destroying a consciousness without backups (where you'll get permanent supervision to make sure you don't do it again). Most biological citizens have a full-brain computer interface for backups and general fun, called a "neural lace".

The AI Minds in charge of everything give themselves fanciful names, which Musk has used for his SpaceX drone ships.

For the reverse:

Almost every biological citizen is gender-fluid, can change physical gender by willing it, and there's a certain expectation that you try things both ways around so you know how to be a good lover. They dislike explosive population growth regardless of if it's organic or machine reproduction, and as everyone can get pregnant if they want to (because everyone can be a woman if they want to and it all works), it's considered quite scandalous to have more than one child.

It's sufficiently post-scarcity that money is considered a sign of poverty. They mostly avoid colonising planets, instead living on ships, or on habitats so large that if one was located at any Earth-Sun Lagrange point (including the one on the far side of the sun), we could see it.
by necovek | 2025-11-27 17:16:27+00:00
It happens because cybersecurity teams do not design for efficiency and believe that security trumps everything else. If they understood that security, just like anything else, is there to drive the business, they'd perhaps sit down with people doing the work. And then figure out how hard it is to share a simple file or a photo, take it to the print shop as one can't plug in their private USB stick, or how annoying it is to develop Linux IoT firmware on WSL, or how annoying it is to get logged out every 2h.

Because unless you do, people will adopt behaviour that makes them productive, and instead of increasing security, your policies will drive it down.

This is not a result of "bad employees": this is a result of bad security policies.
by ethmarks | 2025-11-27 17:17:04+00:00
Perhaps you misunderstood my comment. I'm not advocating for vibe-coded AI-generated PRs, and I do think that blanket banning them is pretty reasonable for the reasons you stated.

However, I don't think that banning all AI-generated code is reasonable. Having an LLM generate a couple of functions or a bit of boilerplate in an otherwise manually coded PR should not invalidate it from being accepted if it's helpful.
by amrocha | 2025-11-27 17:17:19+00:00
Your loss.

Twitter was an incredible place from 2010 to 2017. You could randomly message something and they would more often than not respond. Eventually an opportunity would come and you’d meet in person. Or maybe you’d form an online community and work towards a common goal. Twitter was the best place on the internet during that time.

Facebook as well had a golden age. It was the place to organize events, parties, and meetups, before instagram and DMs took over. Nothing beats seeing someone post an album from last nights party and messaging your friends asking them if they remember anything that happened.

I know being cynical is trendy, but you genuinely missed out. Social dynamics have changed. Social media will never be as positive on an individual level as it was back then.
by anonymouskimmer | 2025-11-27 17:17:29+00:00
A climate scientist I follow uses Perplexity AI in some of his YouTube videos. He stated one time that he uses it for the formatting, graphs, and synopses, but knows enough about what he's asking that he knows what it's outputting is correct.

An "expert" might use ChatGPT for the brief synopsis. It beats trying to recall something learned about a completely different sub-discipline years ago.
by sundarurfriend | 2025-11-27 17:17:45+00:00
Good faith includes the ability to respect and listen to the other person (or in this case, multiple other people who have been working on these projects for years). The attitude he demonstrates has been and remains (this is a quote from him elsewhere on this thread):

> existing open source projects are not ready for this and likely won't ever be.

i.e. he is enlightened and these projects are just not seeing The Way™.
by mold_aid | 2025-11-27 17:18:15+00:00
>How LLMs standardize communication is the same way there was a standardization in empires expanding (cultural), book printing (language), the industrial revolution (power loom, factories, assembly procedures, etc).

Explain to me how "book printing" of the past "standardized communication" in the same way as LLMs are criticized for homogenizing language.
by loeg | 2025-11-27 17:19:17+00:00
In particular, one of the first questions is "What is the fundamental difference between the kernel and a process?" It rejects "The kernel is a special process with elevated privileges" (which is essentially correct) and prefers "The kernel is not a process—it's the system itself that serves processes," which is sort of wrong? The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero), because kernel threads also need scheduling. And it is privileged, obviously.
by Edman274 | 2025-11-27 17:19:21+00:00
A few things; one, even if it's not strictly speaking true that cocaine use always leads to addiction every single time, we know now better than in Victorian era England how often it does, and Doyle not having been a cocaine user may have lost some of the elements of how cocaine is addictive and what it looks like. I hate to say that there is some moral duty to show a protagonist using cocaine as having a problem with its use that needs to be overcome, but I do think it'd be strange too to keep what was effectively this SMBC comic (https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=191) as Holmes' use of coke.

Secondly, the stories that mention coke use are all written from the perspective of Holmes' best friend, who we'd expect to be biased towards writing about his friend in a positive light. I don't think this is accidental. Watson quotes him effectively saying "I just do coke because life is so mundane and boring, and not stimulating enough for me" which is nearly the exact same justification and thought process used by like, every addict and if not a word-for-word quote, then at least very similar for Chris Moltisanti's justification of his own addiction to Tony Soprano.

It may not be an exact rendering of what was in the books but it is extremely natural modification to make, where otherwise we'd have flat Marty Stu character who is talking in ways that seem very consistent with at least problematic use and yet who's not addicted. "Our own times" have dealt with at least 100 years of coke addiction, 50 years of crack so maybe we're just not naive enough to believe that a guy who's saying "my friend just takes it when he's bored, but he's bored all the time because his mind is too sharp for this dull world" isn't a problematic user or addict.
by extra88 | 2025-11-27 17:19:57+00:00
That makes sense, that iPad had 5 years of major OS updates (2013-2018), which included the browser, but Apple provides security updates and critical bug fixes for at least 2 years after major updates end. That model stopped at iOS 12, first released in 2018, which received security updates for an especially long time, 2023.

In that era, Safari added new features, including adding support for web standards, in the major update and in a .1 update about 6 months later, Safari 12.1 came out in March 2019.
by Aurornis | 2025-11-27 17:20:23+00:00
> Maybe OP is young or didn't frequent other communities before "social networks", but on IRC, even on Usenet you'd see these behaviors eventually

I’m not exactly old yet, but I agree. I don’t know how so many people became convinced that online interactions were pleasant and free of ragebait and propaganda prior to Facebook.

A lot of the old internet spaces were toxic cesspools. Most of my favorite forums eventually succumbed to ragebait and low effort content.
by zkmon | 2025-11-27 17:20:31+00:00
Infact, the opposite is true. There is tech inflation. Coding will get easier, but that doesn't mean tech is getting easier. It will only get more complex and will drive more segregation.

Tech is dividing the society and driving a wedge deeper. There is a huge population that are being thrown wayside by the high-speed tech highway. Which means the tech is getting more and more unreachable.

AI assistants are only going to make this worse, by removing the direct touch between users and the tech. Tech becomes just unmanageable for average person.

Just like how you were able to do all repairs for your bike, as a kid. But you can't do the same for your car now. Tech never gets easier or reachable.
by a4isms | 2025-11-27 17:20:36+00:00
I used DeckSet for years. I love this concept.

https://www.deckset.com

To answer your question directly, I am already all-in on Markdown and lightweight markup languages in general. Adopting such a thing is an exercise in a certain form of minimalism. In Markdown I can theoretically do anything by dropping into HTML, but the entire point (to me) is to focus on what I'm trying to write and not on every presentation and every slide being unique objects.

It's the same thing with my blog. I could use any number of tools that give me arbitrary control over text and images appearing wherever I want. But I choose not to want that in exchange for the simplicity and constraints guiding me to focus on what I'm trying to say rather than how I'm trying to say it.

I have found a local maximum for me, and tools like this are a good fit for that. You may be elsewhere enjoying a different kind of local maximum.
by giardini | 2025-11-27 17:20:39+00:00
All this assumes that LLMs are the sole mechanism for AI and will remain so forever: no novel architectures (neither hardware nor software), no progress in AI theory, nothing better than LLMs, simply brute force LLM computation ad infinitum.

Perhaps the assumptions are true. The mere presence of LLMs seems to have lowered the IQ of the Internet drastically, sopping up financial investors and resources that might otherwise be put to better use.
by oasisaimlessly | 2025-11-27 17:20:39+00:00
G^n curvature solely depends on the geometry of the curve, while C^n continuity also depends on how you parameterize the curve. So, G^n is what you want if you're talking about a purely geometric shape rather than an (x(t), y(t)) trajectory.

* reference: section 2.1 of https://graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs348a-21-winter/Reade...
by skrebbel | 2025-11-27 17:20:45+00:00
You misunderstand my point. I made no remark about whether big tech bosses behave harmfully or not (and in fact I believe that many do). My point is about blaming “nerds” or “Silicon Valley” for power grabs by a few asshole billionaires.

As a nerd running a startup, I dislike the tendency of many journalists to blanket blame “nerds” for the behavior of nutjobs like Musk. It’s pure “us vs them” thinking, blaming the group for the behavior of a few.
by toast0 | 2025-11-27 17:20:52+00:00
I dunno, the kiddo went from a 1650 Super to a 3060 and it's a lot nicer looking, I don't think frame gen and what not is enabled. Sure, that's up a notch on the SKU list and tons more VRAM. The 1650 Super was working with most of the games he tried, but Marvel Rivals was terrible (haven't seen him play it with the new card though)

It does help that he has a small screen and regular DPI. Seems like everyone wants to run with 4x the pixels in the same space, which needs about 4x the GPU.
by whou | 2025-11-27 17:21:01+00:00
Cool curiosities! The chocolate quake source port is great as well. I've always wondered why there wasn't a chocolate doom equivalent for quake. It was nice to see its announcement earlier this year, so I've been quietly following its development ever since. The guy behind it did a great job, now we just need a crispy doom equivalent for quake!

I also wonder where is that tortoise texture from. Seems such a small thing to have the effort to create art for during development.
Show HN: MXP – A2A-compatible agent protocol, 37x faster than JSON
by ferasawady | 2025-11-27 17:22:06+00:00
I've been building MXP, a high-performance protocol for AI agent communication.

Benchmarks (verified, reproducible):

256-byte message encode: 60ns (MXP) vs 2,262ns (JSON) Built-in trace IDs in every message (no OpenTelemetry instrumentation needed) Native streaming for LLM tokens Written in Rust, MIT/Apache-2.0 licensed, public domain spec.

Looking for feedback on:

The "enabler not competitor" positioning What SDKs to prioritize (JS is next, then Python) Whether A2A compatibility matters to you Repo: https://github.com/yafatek/mxp-protocol
by losvedir | 2025-11-27 17:22:07+00:00
Heh, I tried to follow the link to the Codeberg repo at the top of the blog post and it is failing to connect. Maybe HN hug of death? In any case it makes the rest of the post and its criticisms of GitHub hit a little differently.

edit: I say as a GitHub sponsor of Zig for the past few years. I do see that I'll have to move that, and maybe I will, but I don't love having yet another account with saved credit card info and subscription to manage...
by Aurornis | 2025-11-27 17:22:36+00:00
> By a not-for-profit community organization that has 0 connect/interest in any for-profit enterprising that represents the stable wellbeing of society with a specific mandate to do so.

Then you get situations like the school board stacked with creationists who believe removing the science textbooks is important for the stable wellbeing of society.

Or organizations like MADD that are hell bent on stamping out alcohol one incremental step at a time because “stable wellbeing of society” is their mandate.

Or the conservative action groups in my area that protest everything they find indecent, including plays and movies, because they believe they’re pushing for the stable wellbeing of society.

There is no such thing as a neutral group pushing for a platonic ideal stable wellbeing of society. If you give a group of people power to control what others see, it will be immediately co-opted by special interests and politics.

Singling out non-profit as being virtuous and good is utopian fallacy. If you give any group power over what others are allowed to show, it will be extremely political and abused by every group with an agenda to push.
by anonymouskimmer | 2025-11-27 17:22:50+00:00
> Characters in traditional plays only get to say exactly what the author wants them to say

But the human actors sometimes adlib. As well as being in control of intonation and body language. It takes a great deal of skill to portray someone else's words in a compelling and convincing manner. And for an actor I imagine it can be quite fun to do so.
by femiagbabiaka | 2025-11-27 17:24:11+00:00
> I personally dont feel like an ultra filtered social media which only shows me things I agree with is a good thing. Exposing yourself to things you dont agre with is what helps us all question our own beliefs and prejudeces, and grow as people.

You are the one who gets to control what is filtered or not, so that's up to you. It's about choice. By the way, a social media experience which is not "ultra filtered" doesn't exist. Twitter is filtered heavily, with a bias towards extreme right wing viewpoints, the ones it's owner is in agreement with. And that sort of filtering disguised as lack of bias is a mind virus. For example, I deleted my account a month or so ago after discovering that the CEO of a popular cloud database company that I admired was following an account who posted almost exclusively things along the lines of "blacks are all subhuman and should be killed." How did a seemingly normal person fall into that? One "unfiltered" tweet at a time, I suppose.

> To me, only seeing things you know you are already interested in is no better than another company curating it for me.

I curate my own feeds. They don't have things I only agree with in them, they have topics I actually want to see in them. I don't want to see political ragebait, left or right flavoured. I don't want to see midwit discourse about vibecoding. I have that option on Bluesky, and that's the only platform aside from my RSS reader where I have that option.

Of course, you also have the option to stare endlessly at a raw feed containing everything. Hypothetically, you could exactly replicate a feed that aggregates the kind of RW viewpoints popular on Twitter and look at it 24/7. But that would be your choice.