MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by alganet | 2025-11-01 12:55:41+00:00
The super-AI is going to have power. Deployed everywhere, used by millions, etc.

You have two choices:

- It can potentially lash out in an alien-like way.

- It can potentially lash out in a human-like way.

Do you understand why this has no effect on the argument whatsoever? You are just introducing an irrelevant observation. I want the AI to behave like human always, no exceptions.

"What if it's a bad human"

Jesus. If people make an evil AI, then it doesn't matter anyway how it behaves, it's just bad even before we get to the discussion about how it fails. Even when it accomplishes tasks succesfully, it's bad.
by senko | 2025-11-01 12:55:50+00:00
I would not agree, as these sorts of things were frequent before the latest round of ZIRPs:

* Uber IPOed in 2019, had a loss of $8.5b that year; interest rates were around 2%

* YouTube was acquired by Google for $1.65B in 2006, it lost ~$350m in the year before and the entire music industry was suing it; interest rates were around 4%

* Facebook bought Instagram for $1b in 2012, which at that point had no revenue and no plan how to achieve it; this was smack in the middle of the previous ZIRP cycle, however I don't think anyone would say that Instagram wasn't a huge success either for the founders or for Facebook

I would agree ZIRP fuels those things (to unhealthy levels), but not that it's always the root cause.
by andyferris | 2025-11-01 12:56:13+00:00
> I'd like to think that those who don't notice the difference have improved brain GPUs that can compensate for ghosting.

Wow. My perspective was those that did notice the difference were more perceptive. Thank you - now I realize there is a completely different take. (I'm not sure that it's helpful mind you... but it gives me something to chew on).
by Corrado | 2025-11-01 12:56:20+00:00
I'm pretty excited about this because it's one of the cornerstones of why BambuLabs printers are so easy to use. One of the main issues in the past has been tuning your printer to use a certain type of filament; it has more options than a 1999 JVM. With BL printers and filaments you can just slap it on and the printer is automatically configured to optimal print you object.

Now, I can see why BL would not be excited about this. One reason I purchase so much BL filament is because it's so easy to use. Every time I've gone "off-script" and gotten a reel from another maker I have to do the work of configuring it to get the most out of the filament. It's not super hard, it's just really inconvenient. So, of course BL would like me to continue purchasing their filament and would not want to join this movement.

However, BL doesn't produce all types filaments in all necessary colors for everyone. Once (if) everyone else moves to this standard then BL is out in the dark, getting left behind. Orca slicer can be configured to use this new standard and is also compatible with my A1. I'm planning on my next printer being a BL H2? but if that day comes and all the other printers are supporting the new standard my plans will probably change. I think that it would be in BL's best interest to support the new standard, now and in the future.

BTW: one handy way to use up the remnants of an almost empty roll is to make the printer think that it's a different color. Start printing some utility object (where the color doesn't matter) with the almost empty roll and then have the printer automatically switch to the new roll of the correct color. This works pretty well, but it involves you forceably ripping the RFID tags out of the old roll, which is not super fun. It would be great if we could you reprogram the old roll to match the new roll and get on with printing.
by mwcampbell | 2025-11-01 12:56:23+00:00
> They’re trained to be far too user led. They don’t challenge you enough.

An anecdote here: I recently had a conversation with Claude that could be considered therapy or at least therapy-adjacent. To Anthropic's credit, Claude challenged me to take action (in the right direction), not just wallow in my regrets. Still, it may be true that general-purpose LLMs don't do this consistently enough.
by hmry | 2025-11-01 12:56:33+00:00
> Did anyone actually use that?

AFAIK you needed to pay a license fee to write programs using Jazelle instructions (so you needed to weigh whether the speedup of Jazelle was cheaper than just buying a more powerful CPU), and the instruction set itself was also secret, requiring an NDA to get any documentation (so no open source software could use it, and no open toolchains supported it).

I remember being very disappointed when I found out about that
by fishmicrowaver | 2025-11-01 12:56:57+00:00
Guarantee Palantir is 'mitigating' those concerns before anyone has them by having a 'process' and 'guardrails' in place, so everyone can convince themselves this is a great thing to do. The decision makers won't even be around by the time a substantial enough number of people are harmed to incur blowback, and by then, people will have gotten rich/promoted.
by bityard | 2025-11-01 12:57:58+00:00
So, I'm going to challenge you on that.

First, let me describe myself. I'm not always great at explaining my thoughts to others in a meeting. The output peripheral bus has a lower clock speed than the CPU, if you catch my drift. If I'm not the one driving the meeting, I try to wait until I have a decent amount of context before offering my own thoughts. Most critically: I don't speak unless I have something important to say, because time is scarce and talking AT ALL is a very high effort activity for me.

I really don't mind the occasional interruption or clarifying question. But if someone is constantly interrupting me every other sentence, it seems obvious to me that they either think their opinion is more important than mine, or they just like to hear themselves talk. In either case, the constant interruptions mean they don't actually care what I have to say, so there's no value in me trying to say it, and I just stop talking until they are done and let the conversation end naturally.
by specialist | 2025-11-01 12:58:04+00:00
The USA's Fedederal vetocracy gauntlet is composed of Senate, POTUS, and SCOTUS.

I'm very curious about comparisions between governing systems. But am noob, so haven't gotten very far.

I too value -- without evidence pro or con -- some balance between fast, slow, and middling.

Senate was designed to counter balance the House. I'm very skeptical of its benefit; both in principle and in practice.

Our State's patchwork of arrangements is probably informative, in the small. Somehow rank States by legislative output, (their) Supreme Court's actions, lag time in pivoting to adopt norms (marriage equality), or some such.

There's a Harvard researcher (on mobile, can find cites later if needed) who concluded that most all national (democratic) govts eventually adopted norms. On the time span of decades and generations. Regardless of their system. Strongly suggesting that public pressure and need to maintain legitimacy do matter.

I've since wondered if we're just too impatient. I certainly am. Or if that thesis is even true. For example, the USA's Jim Crow era endured for 100+ years. And still remains contested.

Would appreciate any insights any has to share.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-11-01 12:58:34+00:00
What is the point of a database with incorrect biometric data connected to a person?

Accuracy is irrelevant. Even if facial recognition as a technology was adequate, it certainly wouldn't be in whatever random lighting conditions are present in the real world after going through the image processing pipelines of inconsistent phone hardware.

The point is domination, and the app is simply one means to that end. They'd find another if they had to.
by testdelacc1 | 2025-11-01 12:58:48+00:00
> not the same as having a hostile community

Hostile according to who? According to the haters, maybe. I’m sure the Go community was called “hostile” by haters back in the day.

Look at the drama created by Linux maintainers who were being insanely hostile, coming up with spurious objections, being absolute asshats - to the point where even Linus said enough was enough. The Rust for Linux members conducted themselves with dignity throughout. The Linux subsystem maintainers acted like kindergarteners.

But of course, haters will read the same emails and confirmation bias will tell them they’re right and Rust is the problem.

Keep hating.
by zitsarethecure | 2025-11-01 13:00:39+00:00
ESR was pretty clear about their stance on it in this interview:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/article_246jsp/

Personally, I think the argument that "open source is a better way to engineer software" has largely proven to be untrue and FOSS' only advantage has been in protecting the rights of end users (who may also be developers).
by Saline9515 | 2025-11-01 13:01:36+00:00
Giving more votes to the family to align with the amount of children they have isn't far-right. It's a reasonable policy to correct a problem in democracies, where young citizens have no representation and are as a result often the fifth wheel of the cart.

Currently western democracies are dominated by 50+ years old, who tend to vote more conservative policies, which benefit them.

Why would we spend very large amounts of the GDP to support old people through health and retirement programs, but refuse to fund quality daycare, schools and child-oriented infrastructure (playgrounds, sports clubs and so on). Especially given that a healthy and educated youth will create tomorrow's prosperity for the country. Unlike the old who have already lived their lives.

If you think that I'm exagerating, I'd suggest listening to what happens in city councils, in retired-dominated cities: they often refuse improvements for families to fund their own programs. It's not a myth, I saw it with my own eyes, and it's very rational.
by Paradigm2020 | 2025-11-01 13:02:18+00:00
By what metric is he an extremely succesful businessman ?

Why would he have to listen to experts to become president ?

I personally think he's an expert salesman... But take away the wealth and time he was born in and he's neither president nor nearly as rich (he'd be comfortably off <> salesman.

The truth is not always, but definitely very often, in the middle. I think most people don't like that answer.
by evanb | 2025-11-01 13:02:27+00:00
> A small change in the parameter a can lead to vastly different particle trajectories and the overall shape of the attractor. Change this value in the control panel and observe the butterfly effect in action.

I think this is slightly inaccurate. The butterfly effect is about the evolution of two nearby states in phase space into well-separated states. But the parameter a is not a state. To see the butterfly effect by changing a we would need to let the system settle down, give the parameter a small change, and then change it back. The evolution during the changed time acts as a perturbation on states.

Instead, showing that the attractor changes qualitatively as a function of the parameter is more akin to a phase transition.
by NateEag | 2025-11-01 13:03:19+00:00
> Anyone who says or pretends to know it is or isn’t a dead end doesn’t know what they are talking about and are acting on a belief akin to religion.

> It’s clearly not a stochastic parrot now that we know it introspects. That is now for sure.

Your second claim here is kind of falling into that same religion-esque certitude.

From what I gathered, it seems like "introspection" as described in the paper may not be the same thing most humans mean when they describe our ability to introspect. They might be the same, but they might not.

I wouldn't even say the researchers have demonstrated that this "introspection" is definitely happening in the limited sense they've described.

They've given decent evidence, and it's shifted upwards my estimate that LLMs may be capable of something more than comprehensionless token prediction.

I don't think it's been shown "for sure."
by numpad0 | 2025-11-01 13:04:42+00:00
Active installs of LineageOS[1] as reported on official tracker is 4.3m instances right now. An MAU of 5m is like, less than Bluesky, Switch 2 shipped so far, most F2P phones games you've heard of, etc. The leverages it has is that of a game.

1: https://stats.lineageos.org/
by nly | 2025-11-01 13:05:18+00:00
x86 has a Total Store Order (TSO) memory model, which effectively means (in a mental model where only 1 shared memory operation happens at once and completes before the next) stores are queued but loads can be executed immediately even if stores are queued in the store buffer.

On a single core a load can be served from the store buffer (queue), but other cores can't see those stores yet, which is where all the inconsistencies come from.
by rzerowan | 2025-11-01 13:05:19+00:00
UAE backed mercenary army , when you have Colombian ex military , Ukranian(?) , Libyan forces with the active collabaration of neigbouring countries like Kenya,Somalia and Chad - in the movt of weapons/fighters and looting of mineral resources. Calling it a 'civil' war is a misstatement. All conducted under the perview of the UAE which has been heavily lobbying the EU and US to turn a blind eye to its activities as long as it stays the course and fronts more in the 'Abraham Accords'.
by sryanpdx | 2025-11-01 13:05:41+00:00
You're right that existing fingerprinting methods (sensor noise patterns, lens artifacts) work for tying images to specific hardware, and courts do accept those. Where I see gaps:

1. Existing methods require forensic expertise - Sensor fingerprinting needs specialized analysis. Courts accept it, but it's not instantly verifiable by anyone. Expensive and time-consuming for routine authentication and difficult to automate

2. Derivative tagging systems depend on trusted intermediaries - News organizations, stock photo agencies, etc. Works great until you need to verify images outside those systems. Independent journalists, citizen journalists don't have access

3. The deepfake problem is accelerating - Existing forensic methods struggle with AI-generated content. Detection is always playing catch-up with generation. Courts may need higher standards as manipulation gets easier

The blockchain value-add I'm proposing:

- Instant binary verification (hash matches or doesn't - no expertise required)

- No trusted intermediary needed (public ledger anyone can check)

- Established at capture (before manipulation is possible)

Your point about hardware addition is valid though. Secure elements are already in many modern cameras for other purposes (DRM, wireless security), so marginal cost might be lower than it seems. But I agree that retrofitting existing cameras is likely impractical.

Real question: Is the gap between "forensically provable with expertise" and "instantly verifiable by anyone" worth the additional complexity? Maybe the answer is no. Existing systems work well enough for professional contexts where authentication matters. Would be curious if you've seen situations where current methods failed or were inadequate?
by vbezhenar | 2025-11-01 13:06:03+00:00
I've made a test for myself. Screen split into two parts, two small squares moving and bouncing. First square moves every frame, second square skips every second frame, but moves 2x. So basically one half of the screen is full FPS, another half of the screen is half FPS. And I implemented it as a "blind test", so I could make a guess and then check it.

For screen with 60 FPS, the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS was pretty obvious and I could guess it 100% of the time.

For screen with 144FPS, the difference between 72FPS and 144FPS was not obvious at all and I couldn't reliably guess it at all. I also checked it with a few other persons, and they all failed this simple test.

So now I'm holding firm opinion, that these high-FPS displays are marketing gimmick.

https://pastebin.com/raw/hwR62Yhi here's HTML, save it and open. left click reveals which half is "fast" (full FPS) or "slow" (half FPS), scroll changes speed, F5 generates new test.
by fer | 2025-11-01 13:06:16+00:00
Literally the volatile keyword in Java is to make the Java compiler aware in order to insert memory barriers. That only guarantees consistent reads or writes, but it doesn't make it thread safe (i.e. write after read), that's what atomics are for.

Also not only compilers reorder things, most processors nowadays do OoOE; even if the order from the compiler is perfect in theory, different latencies for different instruction operands may lead to execute later things earlier not to stall the CPU.
by aurintex | 2025-11-01 13:06:26+00:00
I imagine it helping me remember things or stick to my habits. For example, if I want to lose weight and have a weak moment, it could remind me—like when I order a burger.

It could also help me use my time better. If it knows what I’ve been doing lately, it might give me useful tips.

So overall, more like a coach or assistant for everyday life.
by wkat4242 | 2025-11-01 13:07:01+00:00
I don't remember how much I had, but I think the "contemporary" is the issue. It really needed up to date hardware and most people didn't spend a lot on computers in those days so it would usually have been a year or some old.

And yeah I'm sure I didn't have a ton of ram, I don't remember how much though. I was only a poor student (but as a computer science student I already had a lot more than most people I knew).

But if someone just went home with a CDROM and installed it, it usually would not end well, this was part of the problem. I knew some enthusiasts that loved it but they did invest specifically to run it. That's just not great for an OS that still has to prove itself.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-01 13:09:38+00:00
How about displaying data in rows and columns in a accessible and easily styled way, without having to rely on JS and your own CSS to replicate a table? How exactly would you do that with HTML and CSS without using tables? Using flex and grid for those purposes don't make much sense unless you care about design above all else.

<table> just gives you so many good defaults (semantic structure, accessibility, column styling, column alignment, keyboard navigation) for free compared to using CSS to create your own table, that I'm not sure why you wouldn't use <table> for tabular data.

Of course, if you need masonry, card grids and so on it makes sense, do actual layouting with layouting tools. But thankfully <table> hasn't died just yet, it's still better than CSS for many use cases.
by MSFT_Edging | 2025-11-01 13:10:22+00:00
The thing about assembly is, in a limited context it's not that hard to understand at all.

Value goes into register, do some math on register, compare register to immediate, etc.

The difficulty comes the more code you add. The same thing happens in nearly any language. A single file python script is easy, the complexity in a mature async python app is hard. It's easy to add some numbers and val >> stout in c++, but managing all the dependencies and build chain is hard in a million line program.

It's no different, but assembly is neat because you can isolate the complexity via inlining and just step back and tell the computer exactly what to do.
by sotix | 2025-11-01 13:11:42+00:00
> Linux sucks at running games, and there is no good Linux/x86 hardware out there.

This isn't true in the slightest. You must be dealing with some seriously outdated information.

I've been running games on Linux full time for 3 years. I made the switch the week Elden Ring launched when it immediately ran better on Linux than on Windows. That was the top selling game at the time. I've had extremely minimal performance issues since my switch. Other major games I've run include Baldur's Gate 3, multiple Resident Evil games, and the Oblivion remaster.

I'm running a 7600X with a 9070XT as of last month and am finding my hardware is perfectly fine.
by cogman10 | 2025-11-01 13:11:55+00:00
I've always had a deep interest for it, but the more I learn about what and how compilers can do stuff, the more I'm like "Ok, better just let the compiler handle it".

It's truly wild how much a modern compiler can transform code. There are circumstances where a human can do better (mostly around SIMD optimizations) but those require you to be in situations where you doing operations on large arrays of numbers. Not extremely common in most programming (beyond maybe making totals. Which is a SIMD operation that compilers do well).
by boriskourt | 2025-11-01 13:12:25+00:00
The UN has been in the region for a long time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Mission_in_Suda...

And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Mission_in_Sout...

But the scale of the conflict is beyond all comprehension. And capacity to make a difference outside of proxy funding by state actors is minimal.
by Herring | 2025-11-01 13:12:38+00:00
Read the article. The world moves on & paths around damage. At the end of the day Trump won the popular vote. This country has been headed that way for a long time - http://web.archive.org/web/20210723035356/https://www.theatl... Americans won't listen to sense, so it's a lot easier to move to Europe than to start another Civil War.

And for the record I'm advocating something like a worldwide federal system. You think that's a dictatorship because that's how your mind works. There are hundreds of good examples, but you tunnel vision on two exceptions. Nothing I can do about that bit of damage except to move on from this conversation.
by hexbin010 | 2025-11-01 13:13:28+00:00
> In fact it doesn't bother you with any updates

Patently false on modern MacOS. I get a reminder about Tahoe every week or two. Plus a persistent red "1" dot in the Settings app that you can't dismiss. And a huge info/advert panel in the 'Software Update' section of Settings about Tahoe, that you can't dismiss.
by conartist6 | 2025-11-01 13:13:50+00:00
Right so now you're giving it your brain and body to run and giving it the kind of trust and faith you had previously reserved for humans and it's already managed to sever many of the ties to reality that were your layers of protection against having a psychotic break. It is not, emphatically not a person and if you allow yourself to start to treat it like one and build a relationship with it then you already have one foot over the edge of the precipice
by imtringued | 2025-11-01 13:14:45+00:00
You must guarantee forward progress inside your critical sections and that means your critical sections are guaranteed to finish. How hard is that to understand? From my perspective this situation was basically guaranteed to happen.

There is no real difference between a deadlock caused by a single thread acquiring the same non reentrant lock twice and a single thread with two virtual threads where the the first thread calls the code of the second thread inside the critical section. They are the same type of deadlock caused by the same fundamental problem.

>Remember too that the Mutex could be buried beneath several layers of function calls in different modules or packages. It could require looking across many layers of the stack at once to be able to see the problem.

That is a fundamental property of mutexes. Whenever you have a critical section, you must be 100% aware of every single line of code inside that critical section.

>There’s no one abstraction, construct, or programming pattern we can point to here and say "never do this". Still, we can provide some guidelines.

The programming pattern you're looking for is guaranteeing forward progress inside critical sections. Only synchronous code is allowed to be executed inside a critical section. The critical section must be as small as possible. It must never be interrupted, ever.

Sounds like a pain in the ass, right? That's right, locks are a pain in the ass.