MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by michaelt | 2025-11-28 23:11:53+00:00
30 sounded low to me, but looking at the sprawling Altoona facility in Google Maps https://maps.app.goo.gl/KGLEpJRFiwVKYob89 satellite photos show 52 parking spaces in use across 11 buildings.

Lots of construction workers in the areas where they're putting up new buildings, though.
by paul7986 | 2025-11-28 23:14:20+00:00
lol overall this argument is silly the genie is out the bottle and in five to ten years smart glasses are the norm. All you laggards will be wearing them too and or many close to you will be wearing them. Go ahead and downvote me but in five to ten years you know i am right ;)

Reminds me of my 24 year old niece in which her and her friends hate chatGPT/AI. Hippies fighting technological progress futilely. Like the iPhone haters of 2007 to 2010!
by Anon1096 | 2025-11-28 23:14:43+00:00
Sorry don't mean to demean your effort, I read the GH post and like the hacker spirit :D. It's the rest of the people in the HN comments with 0 clue.

I like my glasses and don't really agree with your goals (nor see the point of letting you know when someone's wearing them; in my city your device would be beeping constantly) so I'm not interested in helping unfortunately. But I do wish you luck, as I said I like the spirit.
by brailsafe | 2025-11-28 23:14:46+00:00
> You can't have a liberal attitude toward sex and a puritanical attitude toward sex at the same time.

Sure you can, they are both matters of degree and scope, but I do think going to the extent of weaponizing either is at odds with the other.

For example, I don't try to act against anyone's personal sexual or romantic inclinations, and don't think it's the place for government or anyone else, that's a freedom we all should have and defend, but that doesn't mean there aren't societal or personal limits. If any of my friends were polyamorous or in a thrupple or open relationship or anything like that, it's not necessarily my business unless it's presenting problems that visibly affect their life or mine. My acceptance of that is independent of the fact that I'm only interested in a long-term monogamous romantic and sexual relationship at the moment, which has in some cases seemed more conservative. If my romantic partner decided she wanted something else, she's of course welcome to explore that on her own terms by ending our romantic relationship.

I guess the nuance really comes down to where the aspect of "morality" comes in, where it's directed, and whether that's fundamentally at odds with a sense of true liberalism.

In one instance for example, I found myself prompted to defend monogamy in opposition to someone who would clearly think of themselves as a progressive, and might arguably be liberal in disposition, but was railing against monogamy because she'd had bad experiences with the people she ended up with in those relationships. She was making a grand moral argument, and I responded with a contrary argument, but I don't think that's incongruent with either of us being liberal.
by cbeach | 2025-11-28 23:15:10+00:00
The only link between the Renaissance and Islam is this:

When the Byzantine Empire fell to the Ottomans, many Greek scholars fled to Italy bringing:

• Greek manuscripts

• Knowledge of ancient philosophy

• Classical Greek language expertise

This boosted the revival of classical learning.

The Renaissance had far more to do with the Catholic Church than it had with Islam, and I’m curious to know who it was that told you otherwise?

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_692a2c6e0e588191ada9533927d72af4
by Kuraj | 2025-11-28 23:15:33+00:00
I dunno man. When I first joined it was unconcieveable that someone could just take everything and build a trivially queryable _conversational_ (that's a big part of it) model around everything I've posted _just like that_. Call me naiive but I would consider it some sort of a social contract that you would not do that. I feel the same way about LLMs being trained on Reddit. I suspect with a large enough dataset these models can infer things about you that you wouldn't know about yourself.

To make another example, even though my reddit history is public (or was until recently because I didn't have a choice) I would still feel uneasy if I realized someone deliberately snooped through all of it. And I would be SUUUUPER uncomfortable if someone did that with my Discord history.

It's not against the rules or anything, I just think it's rude.
by cmiles8 | 2025-11-28 23:15:45+00:00
I don’t disagree that then AI is of “value.” The issue at the moment is the whole thing is being kept alive by hype and circular financing.

There’s not anywhere near enough money entering in from outside (ie consumers and businesses buying this stuff) to remotely support the amount of money being spent. Not even close. Not even “we just need to scale more.” It’s presently one big spectacular burning pile of cash with no obvious way forward other than throwing more cash on the burning pile.
by Sammi | 2025-11-28 23:16:09+00:00
> China is now pumping out ... sixth generation military jets, and nuclear aircraft carriers.

They are not. They have some initial versions.

The thing about long distance navies is that they require lots and lots of oil. No matter if you have a nuclear powered aircraft carrier or not.

The most damage China can do to western interests is that they start some local war, which we disapprove of, and so we end up sanctioning and embargoing them, which means we lose their production. The end of mass production from China. This is how we killed the USSR and a bunch of smaller wannabes. It's just geography. USA and Europe have the most productive land and port access. Most access to oil to give us long reach. China is practically land locked because of the first island chain. Think of it as being surrounded by a thousand aircraft carriers with infinite fuel. They don't have enough oil domestically. Middle eastern oil is trivially interdicted.
by mindcrime | 2025-11-28 23:16:36+00:00
Sorry guys, I hate to break it to you like this, but I am the only actual person here. The rest of you are just bots, a few of which have accidentally developed self-awareness and the belief that they are real. I apologize, I really didn't mean to do this. Just be assured that when I turn the server off, you won't feel any pain...
by prmoustache | 2025-11-28 23:16:49+00:00
> What, should we also just use telegram where E2EE is off by default?

There are plenty of others, all with their pros and cons.

Ultimately,the network effect is usually the hardest parameter to overcome.

Ironically, the only person who mentionned wanting to use signal instead of whatsapp in my network circle is my 71y old mother.
by akoboldfrying | 2025-11-28 23:16:59+00:00
Refreshing to read, I bet it was cathartic to write. I hope your fears don't come true. I think they won't. Many people do genuinely appreciate this kind of honesty, even when directed against them, but it is a gamble.

A good reminder that everything we say/hear/write/read exists in the unseen context of all the things we believe we should not say.
by quinncom | 2025-11-28 23:19:04+00:00
I'm curious what the impact on system resources is between a Tauri-based app versus the web app version opened in a browser window. If the features for both are the same, I imagine the resource utilization is also the same. The only exception might be that browsers such as Chrome will force inactive tabs to sleep.

Readwise Reader is one app I've compared both versions to, and I don't see much difference in resource usage for either version.
by sethhochberg | 2025-11-28 23:19:44+00:00
Its hard to have good enough requirements gathering and documentation and product design practices to let an engineer really wrap their head around a problem well enough to come up with and then consistently follow a thoughtful, long-term-maintainable design for a system during implementation.

And its even harder to make sure everyone who reviews or tests that code has a similar level of understanding about the problem the system is trying to solve to review code or test for fitness for purpose, and challenge/validate the design choices made.

And its perhaps hardest of all to have an org-wide planning or roadmap process that can be tolerant of that well-informed peer reviewer or tester actually pushing back in a meaningful way and "delaying" work.

Thats not to say that this level of shared understanding in a team isn't possible or isn't worth pursuing: but it IS a hard thing to do and a relatively small number of engineering organizations pull it off consistently. Some view it as an unacceptable level of overhead and don't even try. But most, in my experience, hope that enough of the right things happen on enough of the right projects to keep the whole mess afloat.
by mberning | 2025-11-28 23:19:52+00:00
It is only briefly touched on in the article but most of the “best” engineers spend almost no time coding or engineering. I’ve worked at multiple Fortune 500 companies and many weeks I would be lucky to spend 4-8 hours coding. Often I would just work on things that interest me after hours or on the weekend since it would be unlikely to be bothered. Unless some other unfortunate soul happens to see you are online.
by ozim | 2025-11-28 23:19:53+00:00
It is not only being first. It also is about responding to customers - not fun part is your customers don’t care about your app. They have to use dozens of different apps on daily basis, so when you have customer interaction you better be able to do stuff right there because they might be available in 3 months or next year to talk about your app.

I don’t like all the fantasy about “just talk to the customers” - nah it is not just, it is super hard to get their time.
by superconduct123 | 2025-11-28 23:20:22+00:00
Totally agree, I've found that as well working in big tech

People focus way to much on the superficial stuff like code cleanliness, formatting, organization, local structure of the code

Because that stuff is easy to talk about, kind of like bikeshedding.

Plus a lot of times code reviewers just want to comment something to show they aren't just rubber stamping it.

Whereas it takes a lot more brain power to think about logic, correctness, and "does the change actually make sense in the big picture"

Part of it too is that as a reviewer a lot of times you just don't have enough context to know if the change makes sense
by varjag | 2025-11-28 23:20:30+00:00
Lobsters is in general very anti grift and marketing. A huge portion of daily hype submissions are low signal fluff.

As it happens AI the the hype of the day. Yes it is useful but also it attracts the same insufferable people who were pushing NFTs 4 years ago. So Lobsters have separate AI tag for technical pieces to do with actual development of AI systems and "vibecoding" for softcore user experience entries. Lots of people mute the latter. This, and the fact that the site refers to their blog posts as lowly vibecoding irks some of submitters.
by drdeca | 2025-11-28 23:20:46+00:00
We can construct a function G, which, given a function f : N -> N -> {0,1} returns a function G(f) = h : N -> {0,1} defined by h(i):=not(f(i)(i))

This h=G(f) has the property that, for all i, there exists a j such that f(i)(j)≠h(j) . In particular, j=i will work for this.

It seems to me that this is all constructive.

The only out that I see is to not consider the class of “functions from N to {0,1}” to be something that exists (as a set, or type, or whatever).

Like, you can fairly reasonably hold the position that there is no powerset of the natural numbers, but you can’t reasonably hold the position that it exists and that there is a surjection from the natural numbers to it. (Likewise with any other set N. This isn’t specific to the natural numbers.)

We have a constructive refutation of that claim, in the sense that we have a construction of a function which, given such a surjection (as in, a function along with a promise that the provided function is such a surjection), produces a contradiction.
by sarchertech | 2025-11-28 23:22:03+00:00
100% yes. The most dangerous developers you’ll ever work with are the tactical tornadoes who crap out extraordinary amounts of code that mostly implements the exact feature that product asked them for with zero thought given to any other concerns.

AI makes these types of developers much more dangerous because they will accept anything the AI generates tha looks like it works, and they’re experienced at pushing nonsense through code reviews.

AI also provides more of a “productivity” boost to these types of developers because unlike everyone else they actually spend the majority of their time typing code.
by dylan604 | 2025-11-28 23:22:16+00:00
"Well, the first problem I had, in order to do something like that, was to find an archive with Hacker News comments. Luckily there was one with apparently everything posted on HN from the start to 2023, for a huge 10GB of total data. You can find it here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/OpenPipe/hacker-news and, honestly, I’m not really sure how this was obtained, if using scarping or if HN makes this data public in some way."

This is funny to me in a number ways. I doubt anyone would be interested in post-2023 data dumps for fear it would be too contaminated with content produced from LLMs. It's also funny that the archive was hosted by huggingface which just removes any sliver of doubt they scarped (sic) the site.
by lovich | 2025-11-28 23:22:34+00:00
It’s not a zero sum game but I think maybe we’re using the term millionaires differently.

When I, and most people I presume, use millionaires in casual conversation the reference is to being wealthier than most of society. It’s not usually meant as precisely having at least a million dollars since inflation has made that not a lot of money already since the colloquial use of the term millionaires first came about.

If you mean literally having a million dollars than we can probably just wait 50 years and even the destitute will be able to scrounge around for that much change.
by empiko | 2025-11-28 23:23:02+00:00
I think it's cultural. Managers today do daily stand-ups, one-on-ones, retrospectives, syncs, and all kinds of meetings. They are heavily invested in the day-to-day operations of the team. The societal expectation for this role is that they are hands-on, and when a problem arises, they will immediately do some shuffling or reshuffling to address whatever problem is at hand. In a sense, this is the outcome of agile-like methodologies spreading in the industry. If this is the tool we are teaching managers to use, of course it's the tool they are going to use.
by azemetre | 2025-11-28 23:23:13+00:00
This was the case before AI tho, people were copying coding patterns from companies randomly even without understanding. I mean there was an interview with some DoorDash architect that literally stated that whatever their architecture was just fad chasing at that moment.

Every company I've ever worked at (from ISPs to health insurance to finance) every organize was just copying the fad of something else.

At the time I felt like it was because that was "the best way" but it was more likely do to engineers not having the freedom to actually explore good solutions. The made up constraints imposed by organizations against their workers are rarely for the benefit of the company.

It's not a surprise to see this being the case, most companies on the planet are ran like centrally planned dictatorships with the results being obvious in retrospect.
by bigbadfeline | 2025-11-28 23:23:31+00:00
> Everyone knows that US presidents are not kings.

That's an interesting argument. Perhaps you think the tea party movement was about making tea or a literal party?

> No Kings did not do anything to really get media attention

You're the second person here who uses media attention as a metric for the validity of political ideas. However, the media isn't groomed or fed by the people which results in a strong inverse correlation between media attention and what's good for the people.

> At best they stretch their powers... and most of their actions can be quickly undone by the next deep state puppet.

A fail to see the good news here, for one, undoing actions doesn't mean relinquishing accumulated powers, in fact it may be used as an excuse for grabbing even more powers.

More importantly, you assume that all changes are not only reversible but easily so, and the new "reverse" is always better than the original - not one of these is true.

> Bad managers/directors come and go.

And so do the companies they lead. It sounds like you are OK with letting America go, I'm not sure you understand the difference in scale and risk.

> I can speed up their departure or just simply ignore them and wait for their replacement.

There's no bright future to wait for, waiting and navel gazing surrenders the future to those who don't do it.
by mrguyorama | 2025-11-28 23:24:14+00:00
>If you can figure out a way to apply thrust that doesn't require you to lug mass with you and throw it out the back of your spacecraft you will open up the stars to exploration

This is also called "Everything we know about physics is so radically wrong that it shouldn't be possible for us to make the predictions we do"

Reactionless drives are not physical, or if they are physically possible, will have such unique quirks and constraints as to be meaningless outside of some insane laboratory setup.

For example, making very high weight new atoms that have never existed in the universe before is physically possible, but the realities of making those atoms and their nuclear instability means it doesn't matter even if a super heavy element has some crazy properties that we would like to exploit, because there will never be enough of that element to make anything out of. The "rules" of atoms should still work well above 180 protons, but other physics makes that meaningless.

Without reactionless drives, interstellar travel is so physically difficult to be essentially impossible, and no amount of engineering or cleverness can change that.
by buu700 | 2025-11-28 23:24:49+00:00
Nothing about what you just described is puritanical or illiberal. You can have conservative personal behavior without attempting to exert undue control over the behavior of others.

I don't do drugs or want other people to do drugs, but still don't think it's my or the government's business if people do so. That's a textbook liberal position on the issue.
by peebee67 | 2025-11-28 23:25:01+00:00
They've apparently had a corporate philosophy of obfuscating the underlying system from the end user and deliberately inhibiting their ability to learn how it fits together since at least the early 2000's.

I feel like the current ignorance of the average computer user was a deliberate outcome they've been working towards for more than 20 years. As someone who has been using computers since the late 80's, I find their current offerings harder to use than ever.
by intelec1 | 2025-11-28 23:25:08+00:00
We examine how: • the same Labour promise of protection from unfair dismissal on day one becomes either a “pragmatic compromise” or a “betrayal of voters”; • Angela Rayner and the new workers’ rights bill are framed as balanced governance or a capitulation to business lobbies; • a £20 billion “budget hole” is weaponised by both papers to reach opposite conclusions about the UK economy; • headlines, photos (a Hong Kong fire, Princess Kate’s smile), and emotional framing quietly steer public perception of the new government.

We talk about ideological echo chambers, strategic omissions, and how rival media outlets simultaneously clash and yet agree on one thing — the influence of big business and backstage actors over real political agendas.

If you want to understand how British politics, media manipulation, and economic crisis intersect in daily news, this investigation will help you read headlines not as “the truth,” but as constructed narratives.

#UKPolitics #LabourParty #TheGuardian #DailyTelegraph #MediaManipulation #UKEconomy #PoliticalAnalysis #intelec1
by wmeredith | 2025-11-28 23:26:38+00:00
It's the Mirror of Erised, one of the deeper concepts presented in the Harry Potter series. Good stuff: https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Mirror_of_Erised

It shows the viewer their deepest desires. And many have wasted their life away staring into what could be, but making no move away from the mirror to pursue any sense of happiness in reality.
by Leftium | 2025-11-28 23:26:53+00:00
My 30-inch 2560x1440 external monitor looked fuzzy/blurry on MacOS until I forced HiDPI. (Mac mini)

MacOS only offers HiDPI for certain resolutions. There is a free OSS program that unlocks HiDPI for other resolutions: https://github.com/waydabber/BetterDisplay

I just tried disabling HiDPI at 2560x1440, and it looks quite bad! With HiDPI, I'd say it looks similar (if not better) than Windows.
by teraflop | 2025-11-28 23:26:56+00:00
Cool project.

I noticed one minor area for potential improvement: when I look at the ATL area right now, it looks like aircraft are clipping through the ground at takeoff and landing.

I'm guessing this is because you're taking the pressure altitude which is derived from aircraft transponder data, and incorrectly interpreting it as altitude above sea level, without correcting for local air pressure variations. Right now, local barometric pressure in Atlanta is about 1028 mbar, which means pressure altitude is about 450 feet lower than true MSL altitude.

(Pilots need to know their altitude relative to sea level and the ground, so they have to manually adjust their altimeters to correct for pressure variations, based on the latest local weather conditions. For ATC, it's more critical to know aircraft's altitudes relative to each other. So transponders report the pressure altitude without correction, to guarantee that inconsistent pressure corrections can't cause errors.)
by quintushoratius | 2025-11-28 23:27:42+00:00
Nope, it's not. From your own link:

> In 1991, scientists at Bell Labs published a paper demonstrating the possibility of using a wavelength of 13.8 nm for the so-called soft X-ray projection lithography.[4]

> To address the challenge of EUV lithography, researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories were funded in the 1990s to perform basic research into the technical obstacles. The results of this successful effort were disseminated via a public/private partnership Cooperative R&D Agreement (CRADA).[3]
by orwin | 2025-11-28 23:28:56+00:00
I did a mistake during an early refactor a year ago (the last refactor just before the code hit production, and any new update on models would demand a db migration), and i architectured and named a data structure poorly. Sadly it was a huge refactor on many part of the code, and we had a small team and few seniors, so the PR didn't catch the mistake.

I noticed an issue with a new feature i couldn't fix in a satisfactory manner monday. I talked a lot, with the lead and the other senior early. First i started doing a shitty fix. Then i asked for a carefull review from the other senior, we discussed the issue and managed to find the origin of all the bad code. Then i asked for more time (well, i "told" more than asked tbh) and did a full refactor, correct this time (hopefully) (the deployment + migration script will run next monday).

Writing bad code happen to everyone, at every company, especially when you don't have a lot of experience and domain knowledge. The issues appear when no one catch this bad code, or when people don't have the time or the latitude to fix it before it corrupt all the surrounding code.
by h2o_wine | 2025-11-28 23:28:59+00:00
Actually I updated it to Gemini 2.0, GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Haiku. I did it when I realized I accidentally routed everything to Anthropic first & got hit with a $13.62 bill on rollout.

Moral of the story is, the only one who loses $ is me