MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GMoromisato | 2025-11-26 18:47:39+00:00
The Voyagers are just the beginning.

We can't see it yet, stuck as we are, in the present moment, filled with strife, failure, and disappointment. But the years and centuries to come will see us colonize the solar system, bringing new opportunities for millions, while easing the drain on Earth's ecosystem.

How can I be so sure? Because in the long arc of history that is what we've always done. We went from Africa to Asia to Europe and all the way to the Americas, founding cities and developing technology every step of the way. We launched into the Pacific, exploring island after island, eventually finding a new world in Australia. We have outposts on Antarctica and in low-Earth orbit. And I'm certain that, this decade, humans (Americans, Chinese, or both) will once again walk on the moon.

The people who launched the Voyagers believed that the future would come--they built a machine that would last for decades, knowing that people would benefit from its discoveries. Without that belief, they would have never tried it.

That's my lesson from the Voyagers: we have to believe the future will be better than the past, so that we can build that future. That what we've always done. We are all voyagers, and always have been.
by andersmurphy | 2025-11-26 18:47:43+00:00
You mean the last 5 year plan? VCs seem to lack so much imagination and are so prone to group think. That we effectively have a top down command economy with 5 year plans in tech. Interestingly VR seems to punctuate every 15 year cycle.

VR -> Cloud -> Crypto -> VR -> AI -> ?
by rothos | 2025-11-26 18:47:44+00:00
> The U.N.'s report highlighted what areas are expected to be the next megacities and surpass the 10 million mark, including:

> [...]

> - Hajipur, India.

Estimated population of Hajipur in 2025 is 213k people. Not sure why it's on the list. Throws the rest of the article into question for me.
by smollOrg | 2025-11-26 18:48:03+00:00
I assume this is a dimwitted attempt to trigger and/or push for chat control.

If I assume the story is true, then this bit is just some outlets attempt to polarize and trigger.

It's a fucking lawsuit and OpenAI has to say a bunch of shit that is just fact.

I am not going to dig into the kid's life but the question arises whether OpenAI and/or it's LLM should have signaled that someone's having a bit of a moment that might escalate in the worst way, but that probably happens tens of thousands of times.

Suicide is a common theme. If I remember correctly, "being a suicide survivor" is a theme some people talk about when describing what really triggered the jump start of their career as an artist and whatnot. Ok, but can we say with certainty that that is actually true? Nope. It's just a feeling that draws legitimacy from a post-fucked up mindset.

But that's completely beside the point.

I hate the idea of chat control and polarizing bits like that are just mid-term strategy fuel so I am quite certain that's what it's really about, which it shouldn't be, because some have a looooooooooooooooooooooot of wealth that was mined by the people and should have relieved their lives of a lot of stress but didn't, so, if you want to blame someone: blame Wall Street and Magic Money People, because a) they can take it and b) can do a looooooot about shit like that without jeopardizing the stability of the system. (sidelook)

It's a lawsuit.

OH and BTW, maybe the kid didn't kill himself but there was a MITM who saw a chance to do something reaaally fucked up.

So here's another question: what are the many things ISPs, SWEs, companies and corporations can do to protect customers from MITM without infringing on their rights to privacy?
by Sanzig | 2025-11-26 18:48:05+00:00
It's 2025. The first heavier than air flight was barely more than a century ago. The first human in space was less than 70 years ago.

These enabling technologies are very, very hard. No doubt about it. That's why we can't do this today, or even a century from now.

But the physics show it's possible and suggest a natural evolution of capabilities to get there. We are a curious species that is never happy to keep our present station in life and always pushes our limits. If colonizing the solar system is technically possible, we'll do it, sooner or later, even if it takes hundreds or even thousands of years to get there.

> I like how you treat "the fusion problem" with a throwaway, "Yeah, we'd have to solve that" as if we just haven't sufficiently applied ourselves yet.

If you'd read my comment, you'd see I didn't say that. Fusion rockets would help, but we don't need them. Nuclear pulse propulsion or fission fragment rockets could conceivably get us to the 0.01-0.05c range, and the physics is well understood.

> And even if we solve the issue of accelerating a human being to acceptable speeds to reach another star, the next closest star is 4 light years away. That means light takes 4 years to reach. Even if you could average half the speed of light, that's 8 years, one way. Anything you send is gone.

Getting to 0.5c is essentially impossible without antimatter, and we have no idea how to make it in any useful quantity. Realistically, we're going there at less than 0.1c, probably less then 0.05c. Nobody who leaves is ever coming back, and barring huge leaps in life sciences, they probably aren't going to be alive at the destination either. It'd be robotic probes and subsequent generation ships to establish colonies. But if you get to the point where you are turning the asteroid belt into O'Neill cylinders, a multi-century generation ship starts to sound feasible.
by sholain | 2025-11-26 18:48:11+00:00
There are quite large 'switching costs' from moving a solution that's dependent on on model and ecosystem, to another.

Models have to significantly outperform on some metric in order to even justify looking at it.

Even for smaller 'entrenchements' like individual developers - Gemeni 3 had our attention for all of 7 days, now that Opus 4.5 is out, well, none of my colleagues are talking abut G3 anymore. I mean, it's a great model, but not 'good enough' yet.

I use that as an example to illustrate broader dynamics.

Open AI, Anthropic and Google are the primary participants here, with Grok possibly playing a role, and of course all of the Chinese models being an unknown quantity because they're exceptional in different ways.
by echelon | 2025-11-26 18:48:14+00:00
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46060907

Copying this so you see it too -

The Cloudflare outage was a multi-billion dollar outage. I have personally been involved in multiple hundred million dollar outages at fintechs, so forgive me for being passionate about this.

Several of the outages I've been involved in were the result of NPEs or incorrectly processing runtime data. Rust has tools to enforce safety here, but it doesn't have tools to enforce your use of them. If also doesn't have a way to safeguard you from others deciding the behavior for you.

There is potentially a very easy set of non-onerous features we could build that allow us to prevent this.
by orwin | 2025-11-26 18:48:22+00:00
No, because EUCJ still have power to interpret the laws, or to declare the laws illegal. And the EUCJ, while incredibly pro-consummer, seems to really, really dislike the police state.

It will happen only if the council manage to defang the EUCJ (it does try, regularly, to reduce the judiciary power by forcing it to make unpopular statements on obviously illegal laws, so it might be a long term goal).
by idontwantthis | 2025-11-26 18:48:51+00:00
> It also estimates that LLM companies will capture 2% of the digital advertising market, which seems kind of low to me.

This cannot all be about advertising. They are selling a global paradigm shift not a fraction of low conversion rate eyeballs. If they start claiming advertising is a big part of their revenue stream then we will know that AI has reached a dead end.
by venturecruelty | 2025-11-26 18:49:14+00:00
Investors don't "expect" AI to soar, they NEED AI to soar. Why are we still engaging in this absolutely ridiculous kabuki theatre? This entire cracking edifice is propped up by fictitious capital and pipe dreams, and the music is about to stop. Turns out, you can't charge $20 a month for something no one wants and expect to get a trillion dollars out of it. Shocker!
by rvnx | 2025-11-26 18:49:21+00:00
My close friends got showered so much with money poured down by investors that it is indecent.

Just because they happened to be in the right place, at the right time, and idling, gets paid 10M USD+ due to stock options vetting.

Sounds like crypto^2; money is spread completely irrationally and unfairly (lucky folks who launched a ponzi get rewarded instead of jailed) and completely disconnected from actual efforts.

In the long-term this can only lead to a very unhealthy society.

Good that we won't need money anymore, thanks to AGI right ?
by KaiserPro | 2025-11-26 18:49:32+00:00
But whats the USP of that though?

> indistinguishable from what it was before. Just now the margin is much higher.

In both music and TV/film there has been an explosion in productivity. A kid in a bedroom with a mediocre microphone can produce something that sounds 95% as good as something that took a team of ten to do at a big studio. The same with VFX. If you compare "the golden compass" from 2006 to the series in ~2020 the quality of the TV show is much higher, at a higher resolution and has more VFX shots in it.

Both music and TV, the margins have dropped precipitously.

I just cant see how making it easier will bring up margins.
by ipince | 2025-11-26 18:50:00+00:00
> which I can't say about any other SEA language

maybe this doesn't qualify as "south east asian", but Korean is very easy to learn how to read too. It's not latin alphabet, but you only need to learn 20 symbols, and then everything is phonetic! you can have a lot of fun "reading" all the signs after you study a bit on the plane. Not as many loan words though
by mrguyorama | 2025-11-26 18:50:02+00:00
This is frankly wrong. All the creators I watch make their money from Patreon and use Youtube basically as a way to advertise Patreon to people.

This was such a problem for Youtube that they flirted with banning linking to Patreon or suggesting viewers go to it. Not because it was taking money from google, but because it was money being paid not to google.

Then Google competed by adding their own form of Patreon built into the system, and creators liked that and embraced it, and recently Youtube abused the membership system to pollute non-member's screens with videos they could not watch without paying, and creators did not want this, but Youtube does not care what creators want.

The people who make most of their money from Youtube ad-rev are the worst the platform has to offer. They are beholden to the algorithm, so they have to put out slop every single day, and make the most aggressive A/B tested clickbait they can manage, and even pay to advertise their video on other channels and videos, and they are all better off on TikTok anyway.

It's things like Five Minute Crafts and their made up videos.
by notnullorvoid | 2025-11-26 18:50:20+00:00
I think the important part in that statement is the "most useful information", the size itself is pretty subjective because it's such an abstract notion.

Evolution gave us very good spatial understanding/prediction capabilities, good value functions, dexterity (both mental and physical), memory, communication, etc.

> It's pretty obvious that artificially created models don't have synthetic datasets of the quality even remotely comparable to what we're able to use.

This might be controversial, but I don't think the quality or amount of data matters as much as people think if we had systems capable of learning similar enough to the way human's and other animals do. Much of our human knowledge has accumulated in a short time span, and independent discovery of knowledge is quite common. It's obvious that the corpus of human knowledge is not a prerequisite of general intelligence, yet this corpus is what's chosen to train on.
by TomasBM | 2025-11-26 18:50:21+00:00
If you genuinely hold those views, and aren't just trolling, then I certainly hope you're not responsible for any hiring or people management decisions. If you do interact with people, I'd suggest talking to those you consider adversarial by default, in person. Things seem much more adversarial online.

"Enough of them" really applies to any minority, so if you think Russians are a problem-ethnicity today, there will be plenty more to choose from tomorrow. If you find it difficult to distinguish between manipulation of ethnic conflict, propaganda, and the role of an individual in a society, there's plenty of literature online. It's not blind tolerance or "self-sabotaging liberalism" to maintain a secular state and non-discriminatory employment policies, and to require your employees to leave politics outside the business.

Regarding your interpretation of the parent comment:

1. HQ in Serbia =/= HQ in Russia

2. Controversial use of Yandex =/= Russian influence or support of imperialist policies

3. Hiring of Russian devs =/= Hiring of devs exercising adversarial or imperialist views

And again, I still suggest you do the exercise: find another ethnicity others find controversial and adversarial (but you don't), and switch the terms in your comments. If that fails, at least be open about your views in public, so others can avoid you and your company.

I don't like nor support what the Russian government does, but I don't conflate those actions with those of Russian individuals or the people.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-11-26 18:50:44+00:00
The Associated Press photographers have some powerful images they've captured of this event: https://apnews.com/article/hong-kong-highrise-fire-tai-po-cf...

They're live at https://youtu.be/1dRw2yMmQhk currently.

Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-26/fire-engu... | https://archive.today/pM7BQ

BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c2emg1kj1klt
by kccqzy | 2025-11-26 18:51:10+00:00
I just added a link to the code with a brief comment. Basically, it simplifies the leap year date calculation. If February is the last month of the year, then the possibly-existing leap day is the last day of the year. If you do it the normal way your calculations for March through December need to know whether February is a leap year. Now none of that is needed. You don’t even need explicit code to calculate whether a given year is a leap year: it’s implicit in the constants 146097, 36524, and 1461.
by walterbell | 2025-11-26 18:51:36+00:00
> Each firm knows

In some cases, firm == family, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol

A chaebol is a large industrial South Korean conglomerate run and controlled by an individual or family. A chaebol often consists of multiple diversified affiliates, controlled by a person or group. Several dozen large South Korean family-controlled corporate groups fall under this definition.
by billrobertson42 | 2025-11-26 18:51:48+00:00
I wanted to suggest Fernflower. I have a lot of experience with it, because it's what Jetbrains uses in Intellij. I have only seen it generate sensible code.

I took a quick peek at Vineflower first, and it's a fork of Fernflower. So would recommend that for anyone who might stumble on this in the future who is looking for a decompiler.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-11-26 18:52:10+00:00
It patches the reward center in the brain, which improves everything downstream of that (as mentioned in llm_nerd's sibling comment to yours).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45907422 (citations)

(i am hopefully that probiotics might be a future path to curating gut microbiota that meets an individual's GLP-1 in vivo production needs based on target metabolic outcome, but immediate intervention is welcome for obvious health reasons at scale)
by inhumantsar | 2025-11-26 18:52:14+00:00
imho this is a non-starter for mass market payments.

let's say a customer has found your website and wants to buy something. they first have to install a third party wallet app, fund the wallet by buying coins thru an exchange, then use the app to make a payment to the merchant.

it's the same UX problem crypto has tried (and failed) to work around, but with extra friction since it still depends on local currencies and has an unnecessarily obtuse deposit fees formula that emulates physical coins.
by shagie | 2025-11-26 18:52:24+00:00
Not easily. The tricky part is also in the relative numbers. The Voyager 1 data (and New Horizons data now) is in heliocentric velocity. The bit with NH being the fastest was with Earth centric velocity.

Another part in this is the "the probes are slowing down over time" - and you can see that with the Voyager 1 data that while the velocity after assist is higher than before, its not a line at slope 0 but rather a curve that is slowly going down.

This is further complicated because New Horizons had a launch mass of 478 kg and voyager was a twice as massive at 815 kg.

They also had different mission profiles (Could Voyager 2 taken a redirect from Neptune to Pluto? That trajectory change would have required a perigee inside the radius of Neptune...)

Voyager was done with a Titan III-Centaur rocket (that had a misfire) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_IIIE

> Voyager 1's launch almost failed because Titan's second stage shut down too early, leaving 1,200 pounds (540 kg) of propellant unburned. To compensate, the Centaur's on-board computers ordered a burn that was far longer than planned. At cutoff, the Centaur was only 3.4 seconds from propellant exhaustion. If the same failure had occurred during Voyager 2's launch a few weeks earlier, the Centaur would have run out of propellant before the probe reached the correct trajectory. Jupiter was in a more favorable position vis-à-vis Earth during the launch of Voyager 1 than during the launch of Voyager 2.

Note also in there that a few weeks difference between Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 had different delta V profiles (which is why Voyager 1 is faster)

New Horizons was done with an Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

... and I don't have enough KSP background to do the orbital mechanics for this.
by observationist | 2025-11-26 18:52:25+00:00
Well, for one, the model doesn't take into account various factors, assumes a fixed cost per token, and doesn't allow for the people in charge of buying and selling the compute to make decisions that make financial sense. Some of OpenAI research commitments and compute is going toward research, with no contracted need for profit or even revenue.

If you account for the current trajectory of model capabilities, bare-minimum competence and good faith on behalf of OpenAI and cloud compute providers, then it's nowhere near a money pit or shenanigan, it's typical VC medium to high risk investment plays.

At some point they'll pull back the free stuff and the compute they're burning to attract and retain free users, they'll also dial in costs and tweak their profit per token figure. A whole lot of money is being spent right now as marketing by providing free or subsidized access to ChatGPT.

If they wanted to maximize exposure, then dial in costs, they could be profitable with no funding shortfalls by 2030 if they pivot, dial back available free access, aggressively promote paid tiers and product integrations.

This doesn't even take into account the shopping assistant/adtech deals, just ongoing research trajectories, assumed improved efficiencies, and some pegged performance level presumed to be "good enough" at the baseline.

They're in maximum overdrive expansion mode, staying relatively nimble, and they've got the overall lead in AI, for now. I don't much care for Sam Altman on a personal level, but he is a very savvy and ruthless player of the VC game, with some of the best ever players of those games as his mentors and allies. I have a default presumption of competence and skillful maneuvering when it comes to OpenAI.

When an article like this FT piece comes out and makes assumptions of negligence and incompetence and projects the current state of affairs out 5 years in order to paint a negative picture, then I have to take FT and their biases and motivations into account.

The FT article is painting a worst case scenario based on the premise "what if everyone involved behaved like irresponsible morons and didn't do anything well or correctly!" Turns out, things would go very badly in that case.

ChatGPT was released less than 3 years ago. I think predicting what's going to happen in even 1 year is way beyond the capabilities of FT prognosticators, let alone 5 years. We're not in a regime where Bryce Elder, finance and markets journalist, is capable or qualified to make predictions that will be sensible over any significant period of time. Even the CEOs of the big labs aren't in a position to say where we'll be in 5 years. I'd start getting really skeptical when people start going past 2 years, across the board, for almost anything at this point.

Things are going to get weird, and the rate at which things get weird will increase even faster than our ability to notice the weirdness.
by ckbkr10 | 2025-11-26 18:52:46+00:00
I am using it for ansible, php, java, c, linux configuration issues or general questions. Preparing excel sheets etc..

It's sped the time I need to produce projects from a usual span of 4-20 days to 1-2 days with another 2-3 Testing. Of course I still bill the time it would have taken me but for a professional it can be a great improvement.

While my country will be slow to adopt, we haven't even adopted to smartphones yet - hooray Germany, it will have to adopt eventually ( in 10 years or so )
by Tiberium | 2025-11-26 18:52:59+00:00
The idea is great; the actual implementation is, frankly, horrible.

First of all, there are only 27 "slop" image examples, but 200 real ones - very bad ratio. And almost all real examples are just dated photographs, paintings, photos of old books - there are genuinely 0 (not joking) modern photos or digital artwork. Also multiple "slop" image examples were actual screenshots of ChatGPT interface or clearly cropped screenshots.

Text is even worse - they somehow present it as if LLMs cannot write factually correct or simple text.

I genuinely believe that they should take this down immediately and do a major rework, because at this stage it will only do harm. It might teach the children or adults who complete this that AI can never write factually correct text or create very realistic-looking photos (good luck with with Nano Banana Pro).

P.S. To see how bad it is, just scrape https://slopdetective.kagi.com/data/images/not_slop/{file} from image_001.webp to 200 and slop/image_001.webp to 027.

Also see https://slopdetective.kagi.com/data/text/slop/l3_lines.json and https://slopdetective.kagi.com/data/text/not_slop/l3_lines.j... for real vs LLM-written text.
by walterbell | 2025-11-26 18:53:12+00:00
"OMEC" (Organization of Memory Exporting Countries) NAND production quotas? https://x.com/jukanlosreve/status/1988505115339436423

> Samsung Electronics has lowered its target for NAND wafer output this year to around 4.72 million sheets, about 7% down from the previous year's 5.07 million. Kioxia also adjusted its output from 4.80 million last year to 4.69 million this year.. SK hynix and Micron are likewise keeping output conservatively constrained in a bid to benefit from higher prices. SK hynix's NAND output fell about 10%, from 2.01 million sheets last year to around 1.80 million this year. Micron's situation is similar: it is maintaining production at Fab 7 in Singapore—its largest NAND production base—in the low 300,000-sheet range, keeping a conservative supply posture.

China YMTC (sanctioned by US) and CXMT are increasing production capacity.