MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by roadside_picnic | 2025-11-03 21:26:10+00:00
> inference is in principle as powerful as human thinking

There is currently zero evidence to suggest that human thinking violates any of the basics principles of the theory of computation nor extend the existing limits of computability.

> Which is not at all a boring question.

It is because you aren't introducing any evidence to theoretically challenge what we've already know about computation for almost 100 years now.
by dmezzetti | 2025-11-03 21:26:28+00:00
You can make it even simpler and not bother with any of this. With even something as large as 100M vectors, you can just use Torch or GGUF with compression. Even NumPy can take you a long way. Example below.

https://github.com/neuml/txtai/blob/master/examples/78_Acces...
by tonetegeatinst | 2025-11-03 21:26:32+00:00
I have a question for folks who handle pumps regularly. Almost all pumps are made for water, or sewage. How do you identify if a pump is rated to handle liquid metal or hot fluids (heated chemicals, or contents under extreme pressure)

I have never heard of a standard class of pumps for this....other than basically finding a manufacturer who specialized in these sort of pumps.
by grim7reaper | 2025-11-03 21:27:08+00:00
Ha, yeah, I remember reading about your project back in April (I think someone shared it on the GeoRust Discord). Really cool stuff you have here!

Can't say I understand all the math behind it, as it's not my forte (even for H3, for the more numerical parts, I rely on the work of the original authors: I could never have come up with this myself), but your doc is really great!

For the follow-up article, I hope I can get to it eventually. But spare time is a rare currency ^^
by pogansrun | 2025-11-03 21:27:13+00:00
I wanted something cleaner than all the ad-filled comparison sites, so I made my own using GitHub Pages and a $2 IONOS domain.

It overlays two screen sizes so you can instantly see how much bigger one really is (by area, not just diagonal).

Hosted free on GitHub Pages, free SSL through Github, analytics via Plausible. Total cost: $2/year.

Open to suggestions/improvements.
by probably_wrong | 2025-11-03 21:27:14+00:00
Location: Germany

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Deep Learning (PyTorch), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Python, PostgreSQL, Linux System Administration.

Résumé/CV: https://7c0h.com/cv_villalba.pdf

Email: probably_wrong_hn@7c0h.com

I've been in the software world for 20+ years, from Linux system administration and software development (both independent and as an employee) to academic research and consulting. I'm currently finishing a Postdoc position using NLP (both traditional and LLMs) to identify early markers of schizophrenia and looking forward to a new challenge.
by scruple | 2025-11-03 21:27:21+00:00
I've only been put under once and it was when I was very, very young (3 for hernia surgery, I'm in my mid-40s now) and I had a similar experience, except I came to ~half way through and picked up my head, wondering what the fuck was happening to me, before promptly being put under again. It's my earliest memory but it's also one of the only strong memories I have before 6-7 years old.
by Marshferm | 2025-11-03 21:27:44+00:00
There’s no sense of the pain or grief or joy (etc) the evolutionary magnetism that revolves around short wave ripples (memories) and torsional coherence cycles (focus) that crafts innovation from the tinkering of evolution (and hence imaginative, non linear creativity). Nothing in the musical existence prior to Charley Patton could invent his off beat mistiming, funky error ridden choruses, refrains, breaks because they sounded alien, strange, discordant, etc. And we know this from studying how long it took for Patton to reach T-Bone to the Everly Bros where it finally re-emerged in Richards. none of this leading edge is available to AI, and it shows in the slop I study coming out of these models. There’s nothing here but maladaption.
by shiomiru | 2025-11-03 21:28:05+00:00
Sixel came earlier, and already fulfilled the basic requirement of "put pixels on screen in a single well-defined format" (something not even iTerm2's protocol does.)

Kitty is a lot more complex: it accepts five different encodings, has three different ways to load the data, supports animations, etc. So it's no wonder only a few terminal developers had time to implement it.

See also: https://github.com/veltza/st-sx/issues/1#issuecomment-190272... 5000 lines (Kitty) vs 1000 lines (Sixel) even though the Kitty patch is just a "subset".
by imiric | 2025-11-03 21:29:20+00:00
This[1] is an up-to-date fork with sixel support, and a few other patches.

IMO it's unfair to compare barebones `st` with fully-featured terminals. The entire point of `st` is for users to apply their own patches to it, which does make it difficult to compare, since there's no standard version of it.

`st` is a pretty great terminal. I switched to `foot` when I migrated to Wayland a few months ago, but not for any practical reasons other than wanting to rely less on Xwayland.

[1]: https://github.com/veltza/st-sx
by striking | 2025-11-03 21:29:30+00:00
From the PEP (https://peps.python.org/pep-0810/):

> The choice to introduce a new `lazy` keyword reflects the need for explicit syntax. Lazy imports have different semantics from normal imports: errors and side effects occur at first use rather than at the import statement. This semantic difference makes it critical that laziness is visible at the import site itself, not hidden in global configuration or distant module-level declarations. The lazy keyword provides local reasoning about import behavior, avoiding the need to search elsewhere in the code to understand whether an import is deferred. The rest of the import semantics remain unchanged: the same import machinery, module finding, and loading mechanisms are used.

This functionality is highly desired, and it does appear to actually need a new (soft) keyword. Sorry you don't like it.
by mrdependable | 2025-11-03 21:29:32+00:00
I have no idea what the situation was for people doing the work on mturk, but how far would your logic extend? Would it be okay if Amazon showed up to a refugee camp with supplies, but before you could get your donation, you had to put in hours on mturk? If not, there has to be some ethical relationship between how desperate a worker is and how much you pay them. My hope is that they have to work a similar number of hours to afford what someone in a first-world country would doing the same work. I don't get the feeling that was the situation.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-03 21:29:37+00:00
Yeah, sounds like you got in right before the bridge burned. It's amazing how quickly things torpedoed from there.

My last full time role in June 2022 and then that studio lost funding and laid off in June 2023. I took a few months off because this was my 2nd layoff in 2 years, and when I tried to resume in September I can already feel the difference. You got an offer in October and in that same time I was 6 interviews and over 5 weeks deep into a company that would proceed to ghost me (and I checked weekly with the recruiter who would simply say "yeah we're still evaluating".

Little did I know it was a precursor of the circus that was 2024. By 2025 I would simply give up and grab some part time work just to survive.

It's rough.
by jacquesm | 2025-11-03 21:29:41+00:00
> I've been working with Node.js since it came out and it's my go to language for anything backend-related.

> As you get more familiar with computers you will understand more and more what's going on.

Pot, meet kettle.

And yes, Rust's package management was inspired by Node, and it is one of the major drawbacks of Rust.
by subscribed | 2025-11-03 21:29:57+00:00
So you fail to see the difference between AOSP functionality and proprietary Google services?

So why are we even discussing?

Most of the alleged issues you raised are either untrue or broken *by Google*, by design, and yet you attribute them to GOS.

Somehow you also decided to bundle the functionality broken by Google with the security improvements available without turning on any specific, special mode.

What disabled features are you talking about? Face unlock? :)
by czl | 2025-11-03 21:29:59+00:00
> So how is it therefore not actual thinking?

Many consider "thinking" something only animals can do, and they are uncomfortable with the idea that animals are biological machines or that life, consciousness, and thinking are fundamentally machine processes.

When an LLM generates chain-of-thought tokens, what we might casually call “thinking,” it fills its context window with a sequence of tokens that improves its ability to answer correctly.

This “thinking” process is not rigid deduction like in a symbolic rule system; it is more like an associative walk through a high-dimensional manifold shaped by training. The walk is partly stochastic (depending on temperature, sampling strategy, and similar factors) yet remarkably robust.

Even when you manually introduce logical errors into a chain-of-thought trace, the model’s overall accuracy usually remains better than if it had produced no reasoning tokens at all. Unlike a strict forward- or backward-chaining proof system, the LLM’s reasoning relies on statistical association rather than brittle rule-following. In a way, that fuzziness is its strength because it generalizes instead of collapsing under contradiction.
by HeinzStuckeIt | 2025-11-03 21:30:05+00:00
Yup. Interacting with the Mexican rancheros was really nice. But so many of the American cyclists I shared the BD with were almost caricatures of highly-online, outraged people. Why do I need to hear from people I just met talk about “TERFs”, or other Tumblr- and Twitter-disseminated memes, or be asked to take sides in political races I had never even heard of (because I’m not even from their country and state and don’t follow their local politics)? It was something that we foreign cyclists noted and wanted to get away from.
by thomasahle | 2025-11-03 21:30:59+00:00
Normal Computing | Multiple Roles | New York, San Francisco, London, Copenhagen | ONSITE/HYBRID | Full-time | normalcomputing.ai

Normal Computing is building a new thermodynamic computing paradigm to revolutionize AI reasoning and reliability. We're bridging AI to the world's most sensitive industrial and manufacturing applications, starting with semiconductors.

Funded by top-tier VCs, we're shipping real solutions to customers weekly while pushing the boundaries of AI for hardware. Tech stack: Python, TypeScript, React, AWS, Kubernetes, Terraform, PyTorch, Hugging Face

Open roles:

Full Stack Engineer - Build performant web applications for semiconductor companies. Design visualization tools, diagnostic assistants, and test version control systems. 4-7 years experience, expert in TypeScript/React, backend experience in Python. Bonus: semiconductor industry experience, LLMs, visual design.

AI Engineer - Build production systems that understand chip design specifications and generate code. Ship improvements weekly using LLMs, reinforcement learning, and agentic workflows. Experience with production AI systems, document understanding, PyTorch, prompt engineering. Bonus: mission-critical deployments, RLHF/RLAIF, program synthesis.

Sr DevOps Engineer - Design and operate cloud infrastructure for AI products in semiconductor environments. 5+ years DevOps/SRE experience, AWS, Kubernetes, Terraform, CI/CD pipelines. Bonus: highly-regulated environments, Python/Go, Ansible, ML infrastructure.

Physical Design Engineer - Lead SOC implementation from floorplanning to tape-out for our novel thermodynamic computing architectures. Experience with SOC implementation, Synthesis/PNR/STA, Verilog, physical verification. Bonus: Cadence tools, asynchronous logic, startup experience.

Apply on https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/Normal%20Computing%20AI
by JDM95AUS | 2025-11-03 21:31:10+00:00
This is not "AI-enhanced." It is human-ingenuity-executed.

The Faust Baseline is a $150 PDF of philosophical ideas.

The Open Source Terracore is a manufacturing-ready blueprint of 200+ pages, 17,880+ lines of code, and a public repository with 391 clones.

One is a theory sold for money. The other is a finished product, given freely.

Do not confuse the two.
by rv888 | 2025-11-03 21:31:21+00:00
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: A wide range but lately: Django, FastAPI Python, React, AI ~ Anthropic / OpenAI / ChatGPT / Runway, Roku Brightscript, Linux, React, and various cloud services like AWS, Google Cloud Platform, and Digital Ocean. Streaming and broadcasting using Ant media server.

Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanvinson/

Email: info@ryanvinson.com

Who I am:

Fractional CTO and Director of Technology with 25+ years of layered experience across a multitude of technology solutions. I've often been called a Swiss army knife of technology solutions. I've consulted executives on the best approaches, interviewed and hired their staff, lead and managed teams of developers for quick turnaround projects as well as more in depth ongoing products. Language experience with Mandarin Chinese (advanced) and Khmer (basic).

What I am looking for:

I'm looking for projects that need a part time Fractional CTO or director of technology. I especially excel working with multimedia and entertainment related companies.
by m463 | 2025-11-03 21:31:31+00:00
This reminds me of when I was learning perl.

At first, I thought it looked like line noise. $var on the left of the = sign? Constructs like $_ and @_? more obscure constructs were worse.

But I had to keep going and then one day something happened. It was like one of those 3d stereograms where your eyes have to cross or uncross. The line noise became idioms and I just started becoming fluent in perl.

I liked some of it too - stuff like "unless foo" being more a readable/human of saying if not foo.

perl became beautiful to me - it was the language I thought in, and at the highest level. I could take an idea in my mind and express it in perl.

But I had some limits. I would restrain myself on putting entire loops or nested expression on one line just to "save space".

I used regular expressions, but sometimes would match multiple times instead of all in one giant unreadable "efficient" expression.

and then, I looked at other people's perl. GAH! I guess other people can "express themselves in perl", but rarely was it beautiful or kind, it was statistically worse and closer to vomit.

I like python now. more sanity, (somewhat) more likely that different people will solve a problem with similar and/or readable code.

by the way, very powerful article (even if I intensely dislike the code)
by darkwater | 2025-11-03 21:31:37+00:00
> The only basis I have for assuming you are sentient according to that definition is trust in your self-reports

Because the other person is part of your same species so you project your own base capabilities onto them, because so far they shown to behave pretty similarly to how you behave. Which is the most reasonable thing to do.

Now, the day we have cyborgs that mimic also the bodies of a human a la Battlestar Galactica, we will have an interesting problem.
by observationist | 2025-11-03 21:32:10+00:00
I dunno, drones and missiles are probably the most cost effective way. I was in favor of diplomacy 10 and 20 and 30 years ago, but I'm completely and totally done pretending diplomacy and education and hearts and minds type campaigns have any value, anymore.

I also think it's worth going to war over. The threat of killing the oceans is a pretty drastic and permanent threat to the entire world, and it can cascade into apocalyptic conditions.

Having a coherent frame of rules that allow conservation actually increases the fish yield, but China's treating it like a zero sum game. It's gotta be stopped, since they're entirely and brazenly unwilling to stop. The same drones used against the venezuelan drug boats could be targeted at the exploitative fishing boats, and a consistent year or two could force international agreements and some sort of collaborative enforcement. Drone platforms and satellite monitoring could even make it mostly autonomous.
by standardly | 2025-11-03 21:32:18+00:00
I'm also guilty of what they accuse you of. Sometimes my internet comments are not made for the purpose of sparking discussion, but more of a "vent" where I know my take is not popular but I feel the need to throw it out there anyway. The comment is more for "me" than anyone else. And, yeah.. that makes it a bad comment lol.

I also just love playing devil's advocate, and I'm adverse to hivemindy-feeling opinions (even when I share them). Maybe this all describes you, too.
by triclops200 | 2025-11-03 21:32:22+00:00
Because that's how the rules of the system we exist within operate more generally.

We've done similar experiments with more controlled/simple systems and physical processes that satisfy the same symmetries needed to make that statement with rather high confidence about other similar but much more composite systems (in this case, humans).

It's more like saying, in principle, if a bridge existed between Mexico and Europe, cars could drive across. I'm not making any new statements about cars. We know that's true, it would just be an immense amount of effort and resources to actually construct the bridge. In a similar vein, one could, in principle, build a device that somehow stores enough information at some precision needed to arbitrarily predict a human system deterministically and do playback or whatever. Just, some levels of precision are harder to achieve than others in terms of building measurement device complexity and energies needed to probe. At worst, you could sample down to the uncertainty limits and, in theory, reconstruct a similar set of behaviors by sampling over the immense state space and minimizing the action potential within the simulated environment (and that could be done efficiently on a large enough quantum computer, again, in principle).

However, it doesn't seem to empirically be required to actually model the high levels of human behavior. Plus, mathematically, we can just condition the theories on their axiomatic statements (I.e., for markov blankets, they are valid approximations of reality given that the system described has an external and internal state, a coherence metric, etc etc), and say "hey, even if humans and LLMs aren't identical, under these conditions they do share, they will have these XYZ sets of identical limit behaviors and etc given similar conditions and environments."
by returningfory2 | 2025-11-03 21:33:08+00:00
> Didn't the Spanish show up briefly, then come back in force later?

The end of the Incan empire is a really striking example of this dynamic. The Spanish landed on the South American mainland in ~1524, European diseases started spreading, and in 1527 the Incan emperor died from one of the diseases without an heir. This triggered a really brutal civil war of succession that weakened the empire. The Spanish started the conquest proper of the Incan empire in ~1532 and were successful in part because how weak the empire was after the civil war.

So essentially, by arriving early and (inadvertently) initiating the disease epidemics, the Spanish put in place conditions that made the conquest possible a few years later.
by jeenuv | 2025-11-03 21:33:10+00:00
Location: UK/India.

Remote: Yes / mostly. Can travel to London semi-regularly or on a need-basis.

Willing to relocate: no.

Technologies: C++, C, Python, Rust, Java, Javascript, Typescript, Haskell, Elm, React, Shell script.

Resume: https://is.gd/jeenuv_resume

Email: See resume.

Headline: Strong system software (primarily ARM architecture) and low-level background. Currently works in low-latency/high-frequency trading. Interests: low-level programming, functional programming, distributed systems, formal modelling, web UI tooling, command-line. Open to opportunities in system software or anything adjacent to my expressed interests.
by ACCount37 | 2025-11-03 21:34:06+00:00
It's unclear whether intelligence, consciousness and capacity for suffering are linked in any way - other than by that all three seem to coincide in humans. And the nature of consciousness does not yield itself to instrumentation.

It's also worth noting that there's a lot of pressure to deny that "intelligence", "consciousness" or "capacity for suffering" exist in LLMs. "AI effect" alone demands that all three things should remain human-exclusive, so that humans may remain special. Then there's also an awful lot of money that's riding on building and deploying AIs - and money is a well known source of cognitive bias. That money says: AIs are intelligent but certainly can't suffer in any way that would interfere with the business.

Generally, the AI industry isn't at all intrigued by the concept of "consciousness" (it's not measurable), and pays very limited attention to the idea of LLMs being potentially capable of suffering.

The only major company that seems to have this consideration is Anthropic - their current plan for "harm reduction", in case LLMs end up being capable of suffering, is to give an LLM an "opt out" - a special output that interrupts the processing. So that if an LLM hates doing a given task, it can decide to not do it.
by squidsoup | 2025-11-03 21:34:27+00:00
In the 90s, psychiatrist Rick Strassman proposed in his book DMT: The Spirit Molecule that large quantities of DMT (an endogenous psychoactive substance), are released into the brain upon death. I don't know that we have any clear evidence of this, but its certainly an interesting perspective on what might account for near death, and death experiences.
by ghtbircshotbe | 2025-11-03 21:35:31+00:00
In the article he seems to be saying several different things (maybe?)

1. We shouldn't give computers human emotions, or have them stimulate emotions. I guess because computers are better at solving problems and should leave human interaction to people.

2. We shouldn't try to make computers self aware. We should focus on making computers useful tools to people instead. Yet self awareness seems like it would be something that would make a program more useful...

3. Computers cannot be conscious because its just a simulation. I'd like to congratulate him on being the first and only person to understand consciousness, assuming it's even a well stated and understandable concept to begin with.
by kenjackson | 2025-11-03 21:35:34+00:00
"vision had decades of head start, yet LLMs leapfrogged it in just a few years."

From an evolutionary perspective though vision had millions of years head start over written language. Additionally, almost all animals have quite good vision mechanisms, but very few do any written communication. Behaviors that map to intelligence don't emerge concurrently. It may well be there are different forms of signals/sensors/mechanical skills that contribute to emergence of different intelligences.

It really feels more and more like we should recast AGI as Artificial Human Intelligence Likeness (AHIL).
by bigyabai | 2025-11-03 21:35:46+00:00
I know Apple lied to me about it: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-...

Their justification is that they were federally prohibited from admitting that the surveillance existed. So no, you couldn't sue them because the fed won't admit that the software exists until their pants are around their ankles.
by kemotep | 2025-11-03 21:36:23+00:00
Hell is it going to start injecting ads into coding output? Ask Codex to generate you a fix for your web app and it spits out a number for a web hosting service? Give it a Jira ticket and it gives you an ad for a different SaaS ticketing system?

Is it going to inject ads for indeed while a recruiter is using ChatGPT to summarize a stack of resumes?

If it only ever injects ads for specific requests how profitable would that even be? I understand clients would want their product to be recommended but if I only get the ad answer when prompting a certain way, can I the user avoid ads by asking questions a specific way?