MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by thewebguyd | 2025-11-07 22:37:48+00:00
> It’s the product ladder with artificial limitations like low fps screens

This one really pisses me off as someone who just had to upgrade their 2018 iPad Pro. The air would've been great, if it had a 120hz screen. I really don't need any other "pro" feature but I refused to tolerate 60hz in 2025 when every other device I own including my big desktop monitor is 120hz or more. But no, I have to spend an extra $500 for a higher refresh rate. I didn't even want the pro, I want a 120hz air so I can get the colors I want.

Nonetheless, because my screen was broken and I needed a new iPad, I forked over the money for the pro. Conveniently, they use two different magic keyboards so now that I'm "locked in" to the pro ecosystem, I'm forever stuck buying iPad pros unless I also want to have to buy a new magic keyboard that works with the Air line if they ever release a 120hz air.

Apple can easily differentiate the air from the pro in numerous other ways besides refresh rate, and yet they still continue to ship 60hz screens.
by rdtsc | 2025-11-07 22:37:49+00:00
> Not odd at all; it is to remove an obvious bias of recognizing race.

It is odd because that means they already had to separate the dataset into various races, and we know how well that works. What specific shade of skin are they picking for their threshold. Are they measuring skull sizes to pick and choose? Isn't that back to "phrenology" and eugenics. Then, how do they define "men" and and "women"? Maybe someone is neither but now they are stuck labeled in a category they do not want to be in.
by rdm_blackhole | 2025-11-07 22:38:35+00:00
Let me address your points here and to make it more explicit, let me use Meta/Facebook Messenger as an example.

> You see, a judge, required for a detection order to be issued. That's how the judge will be involved BEFORE detection. The authority cannot demand detection without the judge approving it.

Your interpretation of the judge's role is incorrect. The issue is not if a judge is involved, but what that judge is authorizing.

You are describing a targeted warrant. This proposal creates a general mandate.

Here is the the reality of the detection orders outlined by this proposal:

1: A judicial authority, based on a risk assessment, does not issue a warrant for a specific user John Doe who may be committing a crime. 2: Instead, it issues a detection order to Meta mandating that the service Messenger must be scanned for illegal content. 3: This order legally forces Meta to scan the data from all users on Messenger to find CSAM. It is a blanket mandate, not a targeted one.

This forces Facebook to implement a system to scan every single piece of data that goes through them, even if it means scanning messages before they are encrypted. Meta has now a mandate to scan everyone, all the time, forever.

Your flawed understanding is based on a traditional wiretap.

Traditional Warrant (Your View): Cops suspect Tony Soprano. They get a judge's approval for a single, time-limited wiretap on Tony's specific phone line in his house based on probable cause.

Detection Order: Cops suspect Tony “might” use his house for criminal activity. They get a judge to designate the entire house a "high-risk location." The judge then issues an order compelling the homebuilder to install 24/7 microphones in every room to record and scan all conversations from everyone (Tony, his family, his guests, his kids and so on) indefinitely.

That is the difference that I think you are not grasping here.

With E2E, Meta cannot know if CSAM is being exchanged in a message unless it can see the plain text.

To comply with this proposal, Meta will be forced to build a system that bypasses their own encryption. There is no other way.

This view is shared by security experts, privacy organizations, and legal experts.

You can read this opinion letter from a former ECJ judge who completely disagrees with your view here:

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Vaj...

I am sorry if you think that I am arguing in bad faith. I am not.

While there is nothing I can do to make you like my arguing style, just know that I am simply trying to make you understand your misconceptions about this law.
by wafflemaker | 2025-11-07 22:38:36+00:00
So why shouldn't I use the windows 11 on the other partition that I use for games that don't run on Linux or run with degraded performance?

(Yeah, it's Nvidia, no, I didn't do my homework and bought Nvidia for a Linux PC).

While it may make sense for others, I don't find system that can lock up for 11 hours for updates suitable for anything other than occasional gaming. But why shouldn't I use it for it? I already think twice before getting any game that doesn't run on Linux and gave EA WRC Rally a downvote after they rug pulled Linux users. (A game that run on Linux on the beginning got borked with anticheat. A racing game, so you don't cheat your friends by having 1s less on that race you all compete on).
by tadfisher | 2025-11-07 22:39:12+00:00
Back in the 90s, Apple had zero brand or reputation. It had a few die-hard Mac fans and a bunch of inherited deals with public school district purchasing departments from when the Apple II dominated. They licensed Mac OS to clone manufacturers like Microsoft did with Windows. They were essentially already destroyed and waiting for the eviction notice.

Jobs, with Mac OS X and the iMac, absolutely created the unassailable perception of quality and user experience Apple is known for today. The term "reality distortion field" was used a lot in relation to how much Jobs sold Apple and the Mac in keynotes.

So it's completely fair to use his well-known positions against the company's current practices.
by zzzeek | 2025-11-07 22:39:13+00:00
using LLMs for creative purposes is terrifying. Because why? learning the craft is the whole reason you do it. however using LLMs to get work done, I just had Claude rewrite some k8s kuttl tests into chainsaw, basically a complete drudgery, and it nails it on the first try while I can stay mentally in EOD Friday mode. Not any different from having a machine wash the dishes. because it is, in fact, nuclear powered autocomplete. autocomplete is handy!
by FloorEgg | 2025-11-07 22:39:58+00:00
Okay I will agree with the "Yes and No". I initially clicked the source in the article, which is a broken link to wikipedia and rolled my eyes at it.

After reading your comment I navigated to it directly and found the first two sentences:

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias that describes the systematic tendency of people with low ability in a specific area to give overly positive assessments of this ability. The term may also describe the tendency of high performers to underestimate their skills.

Unsatisfied that this was the authority, I dug up the original paper here:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10626367/

And sure enough, the emphasis in the abstract is exactly as you say.

So while I stand by that the principle behind the "effect" is how confidence and competence evolve over time as someone discovers and masters a domain, I will concede that the original authors, and most people, assign the name for it to primarily the first phase.

Here I was thinking the OP Author was DKing about DK, but in reality I was DKing about them DKing about DK.
by kazinator | 2025-11-07 22:40:13+00:00
TXR Lisp:

$ txr -i version.tl 1> (equal (new (app-ver "1.2.003")) (new (app-ver "1.2.3"))) t 2> (equal (new (app-ver "1.2.003")) (new (app-ver "1.2.4"))) nil 3> (less (new (app-ver "1.2")) (new (app-ver "1.2.3"))) t 4> (greater (new (app-ver "1.2")) (new (app-ver "1.2.3"))) nil 5> (tostringp (new (app-ver "1.2.3.4"))) "1.2.3.4" 6> (tostring (new (app-ver "1.2.3.4"))) "#S(app-ver str \"1.2.3.4\" vec (1 2 3 4))"

Code:

(defstruct (app-ver str) () str vec (:postinit (me) (set me.vec (flow me.str (spl ".") (mapcar int-str)))) (:method equal (me) me.vec) (:method print (me stream pretty-p) (if pretty-p (put-string `@{me.vec "."}` stream) :)))
by serf | 2025-11-07 22:40:21+00:00
Feels like you could make a similar argument with any tool that is leaps and bounds better or makes your job 'easy'.

Dreamweaver was Dunning-Kruger as a program for HTML-non-experts. Photoshop was Dunning-Kruger as a program for non-airbrushers/editors/touchup-artists.

(I don't actually believe this, no they weren't.)

Or, we could use the phrase Dunning-Kruger to refer to specific psych stuff rather than using it as a catch-all for any tool that instills unwarranted confidence.
by int_19h | 2025-11-07 22:40:46+00:00
The reason why functional languages like linked lists so much is because they are very easy to make immutable without a lot of pain all around. If you implement an immutable vector in a straightforward way, though, you basically need to do a lot of copying for any operation that needs to construct one (the rigmarole with immutable strings, and existence of hacks such as StringBuilder, is a good illustration of the problem).

But you can have a data structure that is more like vector under the hood while still supporting efficient copy-with-modifications. Clojure vectors, for example.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-11-07 22:40:46+00:00
> The guy is drawing like 100 quads

I'm curious about this. I always had the impression, mostly from reading Shamus Young, that there's no such thing as drawing something other than a triangle.

Blender guides tell you to divide your model into quadrilaterals. Though I did find one reddit post saying "I imported this model from a console game and it's all triangles. I thought models were supposed to use quads." The answer was "that model is finished, so it's in triangles because that's what you actually draw".

What's going on? Is there such a thing as drawing polygons with more than three sides? Why is the current advice "use quads" to the point that people don't even realize they're drawing triangles?
by pdonis | 2025-11-07 22:40:46+00:00
> Dunning-Kruger effect is more about how confidence and competence evolve over time.

I don't think there is anything about this in the actual research underlying the Dunning-Kruger effect. They didn't study people over time as they learned about new subjects. They studied people at one time, different people with differing levels of competence at that time.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2025-11-07 22:41:14+00:00
I still marvel at people who act and write as if D-K is proven. The debate about whether the effect exists, its scale if it does exist, where it might originate if it is real and where it might originate if it is a statistical artifact ... these all carry on. D-K is not settled psychology/science, even though the idea is utterly recognizable to all of us.
by gyomu | 2025-11-07 22:41:17+00:00
I used VLC until I looked for a backward frame step functionality. I then found this thread on the VLC forums where the maintainers explain (with bad attitude) why this functionality is technically impossible. Everyone points out that mpv supports it, but the maintainers double down and say they’re Doing It Wrong and it shouldn’t be possible.

So anyways, I switched to mpv.

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=120627
by conductr | 2025-11-07 22:41:56+00:00
> I do think that Jobs would have signed off on the motivation behind Liquid Glass. I do not think he would have signed off on Liquid Glass itself.

Agree. Jobs took big swings like Liquid Glass but, perhaps the most important part that’s missing in present Apple, he was obsessive about ensuring the swings were executed to a high standard. He was hands on in this pursuit.

It’s actually weird to me that a company so large, so well compensated, so profitable, so prolific, etc can’t seem to care enough about the details without a Jobs-esque foot on their neck type leader to be afraid of.
by doright | 2025-11-07 22:42:03+00:00
Another source from 6 years ago: https://youtu.be/41XgkLKYuic

It seems like the flat management structure allowed an ad-hoc hierarchy of cliques to form in the office anyway, pitting entrenched teams of old-timers against new hires, but implicitly. When you think of the lack of support for TF2 over the years, this is illuminating.

It's astounding that Valve/Steam are still as successful as they are in spite of this culture.
by lordnacho | 2025-11-07 22:42:35+00:00
I always wonder with that kind of racist explanation, how the line of reasoning goes.

Suppose for the sake of argument, there's a place where everyone has 10 IQ points less, on average, than the West.

The Flynn effect is about 14 points over a few decades.

How do you square those things? Did the West not have a society a few decades ago? Is there some reason you can't have civilization with slightly dumber people? There was a time when kids were malnourished in the west, and possibly dumber as a result. Also, not everyone in society makes decisions. It tends to be very few people, and nobody thinks politicians are intelligent either.

I've never heard an explanation of intelligence that had any actual real-world impact on a scale that matters to society.

The explanation would have to have quite a lot of depth to it, as you have to come up with some sort of theory connecting how people do on a test to whatever you think makes a good society.
by Forgeties79 | 2025-11-07 22:42:58+00:00
I’d say there’s a difference between “being a fool” and “being fooled.” Just because I fool you doesn’t mean you’re a fool. I don’t know why you’re so eager to put down people like this rather than at least somewhat acknowledge that these companies and tools bear some of the responsibility.

I don’t think it’s fair to expect every person who uses an LLM to be able to sniff out everything it gets wrong.
by culi | 2025-11-07 22:43:12+00:00
There wasn't ever a "moment" when they "discovered" the structure of DNA.

The closest thing is Franklin's Photograph 51 which took about 100 hours to compile and then took another year to do all the calculations to confirm the position of each atom.

Watson and Crick (without the consent of Franklin) saw this Photograph, did some quick analysis, and came up with a couple of models that could match Franklin's photograph. Watson and Crick were already at work trying to crack the model of DNA, but once they got access to Franklin's work, it became the entire basis of their modeling. After about 2 months of this they finally found the double helix structure that matched Franklin's findings.

I doubt Crick was on LSD for an entire 2 months. Perhaps he was tripping when he first viewed the photograph?
by mulmen | 2025-11-07 22:43:45+00:00
Microsoft had so many opportunities that they just failed to execute. How did they miss on everything?

Home servers

Media streaming

Smartphones

Touchscreens

Tablets

They even had media production with MSNBC.

All of this was available from Microsoft in the XP era. How did they fail at literally all of it? There has to be a lesson.
by recursivedoubts | 2025-11-07 22:44:01+00:00
while I think there is a lot to this criticism of AI (and many others as well) I was also able to create a TUI-based JVM visualizer with a step debugger in an evening for my compilers class:

https://x.com/htmx_org/status/1986847755432796185

this is something that I could build given a few months, but would involve a lot of knowledge that I'm not particularly interested in taking up space in my increasingly old brain (especially TUI development)

I gave the clanker very specific, expert directions and it turned out a tool that I think it will make the class better for my students.

all to say: not all bad
by basisword | 2025-11-07 22:44:33+00:00
>> Modern iPhones don't come with a music player. They come with a music store, that you happen to be able to put your own music into. But it's not structured to help you play your music, it's structured to sell you what they want to sell you.

I would have argued against this in the past. But in iOS 26 they introduced the ability to 'pin' 6 favourite playlists or albums to the top of your library. Really useful. If you don't have a subscription (to Apple Music or iTunes Match) you don't get the feature. There is zero reason to do this other than to milk people for more money when they've already spent over $1k on the device and likely spent hundreds purchasing the music from iTunes Store.
by LMYahooTFY | 2025-11-07 22:44:44+00:00
Having been a member of the Teamsters union, I completely agree.

It seems likely the vast majority of HN has never been a member of a union themselves given the audience, so the obsession feels like a savior complex IMO.

Yeah, unions accomplished a lot of good things many decades ago. But if you think they haven't morphed over those decades and are still automatically a net positive for all workers, I could probably sell you a bridge.

For my experience at Teamsters, there was zero incentive for employees to actually perform. Everything was done by senority across the board, and you're literally just aging and waiting your turn.

The insurance was good, the wages were average, and the incentive to do better was non-existent. And yes, firing people unless they did something egregious was much, much harder.
by cossatot | 2025-11-07 22:45:06+00:00
There were no alphabets in the Americas before European contact. Mayan had written mathematics and hieroglyphics, and some Quechuan speaking peoples had string that had symbolic knots that had some mathematical representation (I don't know if it allowed arithmetic or was just record keeping).

Sequoia developed the Cherokee syllabary (where symbols represent syllables instead of vowels/consonants) in the 1800s after seeing white men reading, and figuring out what they were doing (he spoke little English and could not read it). This is the first real written indigenous language in the Americas.

The Skeena characters shown here are obviously derived from European characters, as was the Cherokee syllabary. I think most written forms of native languages in the Americas are similar.

The Cree have a script which is far from European characters but was nonetheless developed for the Cree by a missionary in the 1800s. The Inuit have modified it for their language.

I don't know much about indigenous languages in the rest of the world.
by janalsncm | 2025-11-07 22:45:45+00:00
The problem isn’t tools making someone better. An excavator will make me a superior ditch digger than if I just have a shovel. That’s progress.

The issue is making someone feel like they did a good job when they actually didn’t. LLMs that make 800 line PRs for simple changes aren’t making things better, no matter how many “done” emojis it adds to the output.
by bsder | 2025-11-07 22:46:41+00:00
I really wish people would quit pushing "functional". People equate that with "My programming is now always a recursive logic puzzle."

Talk about "immutable by default". Talk about "strong typing". Talk about "encapsulating side effects". Talk about "race free programming".

Those are the things that programmers currently care about. A lot of current Rust programmers are people who came there almost exclusively for "strong typing".
by pdonis | 2025-11-07 22:46:56+00:00
> when we learn an overview about our new topic our confidence (in understanding) greatly exceeds our competence, then we learn how much we don't know and our confidence crashes below our actual competence, and then eventually, when we reach mastery, they become balanced.

As a description of what Dunning and Kruger's actual research showed on the relationship between confidence and competence (which, as I've pointed out in another post in this thread, was not based on studying people over time, but on studying people with differing levels of competence at the same time), this is wrong for two out of the three skill levels. What D-K found was that people with low competence overestimate their skill, people with high competence underestimate their skill, and people with middle competence estimate their skill more or less accurately.

As a description of what actually learning a new subject is like, I also don't think you're correct--certainly what you describe does not at all match my experience, either when personally learning new subjects or when watching others do so. My experience regarding actually learning a new subject is that people with low competence (just starting out) generally don't think they have much skill (because they know they're just starting out), while people with middling competence might overestimate their skill (because they think they've learned enough, but they actually haven't).
by observationist | 2025-11-07 22:47:03+00:00
The key conditional is a question that is answered in the research already done, and it's "yes, sexuality correlates to facial features." The more facial features you track, the better the granularity, the more you'll be able to correlate. How you smile, your gaze, your presentation, and so forth all plays into facial features. These are going to culturally tie into expression of sexuality, and you might as well wear a sign for AI proclaiming your sexual preferences. Changes in facial features from genetics, hormonal levels in development, environmental factors, and other peripheral effects will correlate with sexuality as well, but not as strongly as the behavioral ones. The inherent features are context against which the behavioral features play.

It's not a physiogonomy trope or a statement that straight people have different fundamental facial features, that they grow differently - it's the macro and micro expressions, the behaviors, the style and presentation choices, and how those intentional active features play out on the substrate of the individual's facial structure. A small video snip is going to communicate a very large amount of information. TikTok could do this - and then create another model that inferred psychology and sexuality based on watch patterns, and yet another model that describes how different types interact and network, and yet another model that describes how information propagates through various networks, and so on, and so forth. Through differential analysis and repeated refinement of various models, you get to some very intrusive and scary places.

Anyway, /ramble. We need a digital bill of rights.
by bloppe | 2025-11-07 22:47:42+00:00
A recent Stanford grad just told me "it's all just bots talking to bots", referring to students who use ChatGPT to do all their homework, and teachers who use ChatGPT to grade the work that was submitted by ChatGPT. And because of the pandemic, somehow people think it's now reasonable to do standardized testing in private with internet access. It's an anecdote, but she was really dissatisfied with her experience there. And that's one of the most prestigious schools in the country.

Do you have a different experience in academia recently?

Adopting LLMs is easy. I use Claude code for tons of stuff, but I'm very grateful it wasn't around when I was in school and starting out in the industry.
by pfisherman | 2025-11-07 22:48:00+00:00
This is pretty ridiculous, just stupid enough for a bit of silly Friday watercooler conversation.

I have questions. How do facial expression, clothes, and hairstyle impact the model’s predictions? How about Facetune and insta filters? Would putting a clickbaity YouTube thumbnail at the top of my resume make me more employable?

This lines up with what I once heard “second hand” from faculty at a business school about publishing in academic business journals. It was something along the lines of being a bunch of dancing monkeys pumping out entertaining, to readers of HBR and such, content.
by o11c | 2025-11-07 22:48:19+00:00
Unfortunately for right now, KDE has recently released major version 6, which is also about as stable as Windows (meaning, very not). This is reminiscent of the KDE 4 transition and much worse than the KDE 5 one.

For example, half the time I try to log in or unlock the screen, it just ignores my password. Fortunately, I have discovered that pressing Escape triggers a crash, and I have to deliberately trigger a segfault by pressing Escape, in hopes that next time the password will be accepted.