MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by HeinzStuckeIt | 2025-11-25 06:00:35+00:00
Your post above wrote “the location of the proto-Germanic speakers”. Terminology matters; Proto-Germanic is something strictly defined as to what it was, with a longstanding consensus about where and when it was. If you wanted to talk about pre-Proto-Germanic speakers (or “Paleo-Germanic” speakers as this paper does, though I suspect some would quibble with that term used for a very early date), then you could have done so.

Moreover, you posted about a “new theory”, but the paper here only gives new evidence for an old theory.
by __loam | 2025-11-25 06:02:00+00:00
In the first one, he complains that one character is enough to cause an issue, but the user should really have a good understanding of variable scope and the difference between assignment and instsntiation if they're writing concurrent go code. Some ides warn the user when they do this with a different color.

Races with mutexes can indicate the author either doesn't understand or refuses to engage with Go's message based concurrency model. You can use mutexes but I believe a lot of these races can be properly avoided using some of the techniques discussed in the go programming language book.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-11-25 06:02:21+00:00
I suspect this is going in the wrong direction. Telling a sandboxed AI to have a long conversation with a student to ensure they actually know what they're talking about, while giving minimal hints away, seems like the scalable solution. Let students tackle the material however they will, knowing that they will walk into class the next day and be automatically grilled on it, unaided. There's no reason a similar student couldn't have their essay fed into the AI and then asked questions about what they meant on it.

Once this becomes routine the class can become e.g. 10 minutes conversation on yesterday's topic, 40 minutes lecturing and live exercises again. Which is really just reinventing the "daily quiz" approach, but again the thing we are trying to optimize for is compliance.
by CuriousRose | 2025-11-25 06:03:16+00:00
Microsoft's holistic direction is so bad I have moved all of my on-prem Windows Server clients that will listen to Windows 11 Enterprise LTSC 2024, and all desktop clients out of M365 to Office LTSC 2024.

This was after dragging many endpoint users by tooth and nail that just use Xero or web based apps to MacBook Airs (which are going down a similarly terrible direction post Tahoe).

Is there no saviour for modern software? I'm obviously technical but my adolescent quest for customisation and tinkering is behind me. I want software that works and keeps up with hardware, not degrades its margin of improvement.
by IgorPartola | 2025-11-25 06:03:30+00:00
I just grabbed a few from here: https://github.com/VoltAgent/awesome-claude-code-subagents

Had to modify them a bit, mostly taking out the parts I didn’t want them doing instead of me. Sometimes they produced good results but mostly I found that they did just as well as the main agent while being way more verbose. A task to do a big hunt or to add a backend and frontend feature using two agents at once could result in 6-8 sizable Markdown documents.

Typically I find that just adding “act as a Senior Python engineer with experience in asyncio” or some such to be nearly as good.
by ulrikrasmussen | 2025-11-25 06:03:52+00:00
With the move to close down Android further and evil remote attestation, the PC is the last computing platform that leaves the user in somewhat control over the system. This is an indirect attack on our freedom, and I really don't want a future where two American companies somehow got a duopoly with full control over the hardware and software stack of all general purpose computing devices, and on top of that also act as the gatekeepers and distributors of all third-party software. Fuck. That. Shit.

I want full control, and by that I don't mean the ability to customize the color of my UI, but the ability to run whatever software I choose on the device that I supposedly own.

Sure, I may be able to technically be able to run Linux on a PC and retain my free choice for a while, but that is only until Google and Apple has finished selling their remote attestation security snake oil to governments, banks and service providers so that people like me will just be excluded from the digital society altogether.
Show HN: Get an Amazon Giftcard to Test Premium Features on Remotelygood.us
by Theresa_i_a | 2025-11-25 06:04:24+00:00
Hey everyone!

I recently updated my social impact job website RemotelyGood.us again-- I updated the font site-wide, enhanced the UI on mobile, and am prototyping some agentic features for perfecting your job applications. I need your help and feedback!

In exchange for signing up for premium and premium plus-- then filling out this feedback survey: https://form.jotform.com/251538756931062 -- I am giving out Amazon gift cards. I'll give $5 for Standard Premium, $10 for Premium Plus. Offer is active until November 30.

Thanks in advance for your help on this!
by gonzobonzo | 2025-11-25 06:04:50+00:00
> But it's still an LLM. It's still being sycophantic: it's only "challenging" because that's what you want.

This seems tautological to the point where it's meaningless. It's like saying that if you try to hire an employee that's going to challenge you, they're going to always be a sycophant by definition. Either they won't challenge you (explicit sycophancy), or they will challenge you, but that's what you wanted them to do so it's just another form of sycophancy.

To state things in a different way - it's possible to prompt an LLM in a way that it will at times strongly and fiercely argue against what you're saying. Even in an emergent manner, where such a disagreement will surprise the user. I don't think "sycophancy" is an accurate description of this, but even if you do, it's clearly different from the behavior that the previous poster was talking about (the overly deferential default responses).
by Dylan16807 | 2025-11-25 06:05:26+00:00
> Maybe we should not want to get prepared for RealPeople™ if all they can do is break us and disappoint us.

Good thing that "if" is clearly untrue.

> AI chatbots as relationship replacements are, in many ways, flight simulators:

If only! It's probably closer to playing star fox than a flight sim.
by thinkloop | 2025-11-25 06:05:33+00:00
Say you do have those sub-agents, they will likely each have tools, and sometimes many, in which case you'll have you route to those tools somehow. The sub-agents themselves are also almost like tools from the main root agent's perspective, and there may be many of those, which you also have to route to, in which case you can use this pattern again. Put simply, sometimes increasing the hierarchy is not the right abstraction vs having many tools in one hierarchy, and thus the need for more efficient routing.
Show HN: uvlink – A CLI to keep .venv in a centralized cache for uv
by corychu | 2025-11-25 06:06:08+00:00
I built this tiny CLI tool that keeps .venv out of cloud-synced project directories by storing the real env in a centralized cache and symlinking it from the project.

Solving this uv issue: https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/1495

Any feedback is welcome :)
by spoaceman7777 | 2025-11-25 06:08:02+00:00
No, I'm talking about parity raid (raidz1/z2/z3, or, more familiarly, raid 5 and 6).

In a raidz1, you save one of the n drives' worth of space to store parity data. As long as you don't lose that same piece of data on more than one drive, you can reconstruct it when it's brought back online.

And, since the odds of losing the same piece of data on more than one drive is much lower than the odds of losing any piece of data at all, it's safer. Upping it to two drives worth of data, and you can even suffer a complete drive failure, in addition to sporadic data loss.
by IgorPartola | 2025-11-25 06:09:00+00:00
I suspect we do. Though you misunderstood my comment about velocity. I was using that purely as a way to demonstrate that something measurable is affected by dropping everything to fix a bug. Sounds like you do wait for an opportune moment to fix a bug and do not make it a top priority after all so I think you see the cost of interruptions.

But yes I am aware of lots of parts of this industry where you do not need to rush a project no matter what. I worked at places that had a breakneck velocity and at places where it is much more chill. I prefer the latter but I can say that I still want to ship software which means goals and deadlines. Bugs should be fixed ASAP but priorities must also be respected.

After 20 years doing this as a career, I agree this industry is a bit of a mess :)
by frayo44 | 2025-11-25 06:09:42+00:00
When I was younger I used to play it with the original Wikipedia website. Now I have created a game based on that that have levels and multiplayer mode.

Available for both Android and iOS, hope you will enjoy playing it!

Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hadadfranc...

iOS: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/the-wiki-game-wikipedia-game/i...
by goku12 | 2025-11-25 06:09:54+00:00
No thanks! It makes sense for them, not for us. Their rent seeking behavior, locking down of the OS and hardware and their hostility towards the FOSS mod community and users have all worsened lately. The only reason why they ever revisit such 'features' is a massive backlash from the community. Then again, history has shown that they try to smuggle them back in some other form.

Desktop and laptop are the last standing bastions of user modifiability and general purpose computing. The situation on smartphones is so desparate that I type this message on a half-crippled Android installation, hopelessly wishing that it was Linux in here instead. I don't mind sacrifing some convenience and functionality for a while while the devs figure out how to iron out the shortfalls of Linux on smartphones. I absolutely don't want to concede that same ground on desktops and laptops. We deserve at least some devices that we can experiment and modify to our liking.

I know that if the trillion dollar corporation is out for it, they will force it down the throats of naive people or those who don't know any better. Soon afterwards, the rest of us will have two options - a dwindling supply of heavily modified and refurbished used configurable systems, or locked down, dumbed down machines with arbitrary restrictions like everyone else. At least until then, I believe that it's well worth resisting the invasion of freedoms for as long as we can.
by edwcross | 2025-11-25 06:09:55+00:00
Always stunned by how much teachers can accuse without proof and invert the "innocent until proven guilty".

Honestly, students should have a course in "how the justice system works" (or at least should work). So should the teachers.

Student unions and similar entities should exist and be ready to intervene to help students in such situations.

This is nothing new, AI will just make this happen more often, revealing how stupid so many teachers are. But when someone spent thousands for a tool, which purports to be reliable, and is so quick to use, how can an average person resist it? The teacher is as lazy as the cheaters they intend to catch.
by bradgessler | 2025-11-25 06:11:19+00:00
I wrote a paper about building web applications in 10th grade a long time ago. When class was out the teacher asked me to stay for a minute after everybody left. He asked in disbelief, “did you really write that paper?”

I could see why he didn’t, so I wasn’t offended or defensive and started to tell him the steps required to build web apps and explained it in a manner he could understand using analogies. Towards the end of our conversation he could see I both knew about the topic and was enthusiastic about it. I think he was still a bit shocked that I wrote that paper, but he could tell from the way I talked about it that it was authentic.

It will be interesting to see how these situations evolve as AI gets even better. I suspect assessment will be more manual and in-person.
by karczex | 2025-11-25 06:12:56+00:00
That's how it has to work. To increase capacity you have to make smaller cells where charge may easier diffuse from one cell to another. Also to make drive faster, stored charge has to be smaller, which also decrease endurance. With SLC and QLC comparison is even worse as QLC is basically clever hack to store 4 times more data in the same number physical cells - it's tradeoff.
by jacquesm | 2025-11-25 06:13:37+00:00
CERN is explicit about something they know isn't true. They could just say nothing.

I'm fine with CERN, its scientific mission and whatever they come up with there and have contributed to their cause in a minor way so I can do without the lecturing.

If you do research it is easy to stick your head in the ground and pretend that as an academic you have no responsibility for the outcome. But that's roughly analogous to a gun manufacturer pushing the 'guns don't kill people, people do' angle. CERN has a number of projects on the go whose only possible outcome will be more powerful or more compact weapons.

For instance, anti-matter research. If and when we manage to create anti-matter in larger quantities and to be able to do so more easily it will have potentially massive impact on the kind of threats societies have to deal with. To pretend that this is just abstract research is willfully abdicating responsibility.

Once it can be done it will be done, and once it will be done it is a matter of time before it is used. Knowledge, once gained can not be unlearned. See also: the atomic bomb. Now, CERN isn't the only facility where such research takes place and I'm well aware of the geopolitical impact of being 'late' when it comes to such research. I would just like them to be upfront about it. There is a reason why most particle accelerators and associated goodies are funded by the various departments of defense.

Your typical university research lab is not doing stuff with such impact, though, the biology department of some of these are investigating things that can easily be weaponized, and which should come with similar transparency about possible uses.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-11-25 06:14:36+00:00
> the essence of consciousness / human soul is hiding in the quantum realm and therefore can't be measured or replicated

I agree with you in rejecting this hypothesis. The point isn't that it's unmeasurable. Just that it should be clear, given we can't completely model a brain, that it's not currently measured or replicated.

There is a group proceeding on the assumption that the limiting factor is computation. I'm sceptical, given how badly we're failing at modelling simpler neural clusters. (Counterpoint: we're still shit at modelling a proton. That, too, may be computationally restricted.)

Two years ago we discovered astrocytes release glutamate, a neurotransmitter [1]. The same year we discovered creatine is also a neurotransmitter. We don't yet know what are the parts to critically include in a brain model, and which can be simplified. Do the number of neurotransmitters matter to the unit? Do the spins on their electrons? When? To what degree?

That is what I think GP is getting at by suggesting quantum effects. Less voodoo. More that we don't know what we don't know, and that which we don't know is vaster than popular science suggests.

[1] https://www.newsweek.com/breakthrough-brain-cell-discovery-s...
by zsoltkacsandi | 2025-11-25 06:15:44+00:00
I never claimed this was a scientific study. It was an observation repeated over time. That is empirical in the plain meaning of the word.

Criticizing it for “not being scientific” is irrelevant, I didn’t present it as science. Are people only allowed to share experiences here if they come wrapped in a peer-reviewed paper?

If you want to debate the substance of the observation, happy to. But don’t rewrite what I said into a claim I never made.
by khafra | 2025-11-25 06:15:52+00:00
All of the leading labs are on track to kill everyone, even Anthropic. Unlike the other labs, Anthropic takes reasonable precautions, and strives for reasonable transparency when it doesn't conflict with their precautions; which is wholly inadequate for the danger and will get everyone killed. But if reality graded on a curve, Anthropic would be a solid B+ to A-.
by adityaathalye | 2025-11-25 06:16:38+00:00
Every great culture, over the millennia has imagined great weapons and unlimited godlike destructive power. You could, as you are doing now, retrofit our narrative on any of those if you wish. Make your own sci-fi fantasy. Those texts are not.

Example:

Gotham Chopra did that with what is now Virgin Comics: https://liquidcomics.com/

See the gorgeous Ramayan 3392 A.D. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramayan_3392_A.D.

Also see the film Cargo, which turns mythological narrative into a rather watchable space opera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_(2019_film)
by kstonekuan | 2025-11-25 06:17:30+00:00
I was curious how people were choosing between voice AI agent providers and was interested in comparing them by baseline network performance, but could not find any existing solution that benchmarks performance before STT/LLM/TTS processing. So I started building a benchmarking tool to compare Pipecat (Daily) vs LiveKit.

Unlike your average LLM benchmark, this benchmark focuses on location and time as variables since these are the biggest factors for networking systems (I was a developer for networking tools in a past life). The idea is to run benchmarks from multiple geographic locations over time to see how each platform performs under different conditions.

Basic setup: echo agent servers can create and connect to temporary rooms to echo back after receiving messages. Since Pipecat (Daily) and LiveKit Python SDKs can't coexist in the same process, I have to run separate agent processes on different ports. Benchmark runner clients send pings over WebRTC data channels and measure RTT for each message. Raw measurements get stored in InfluxDB, then the dashboard calculates aggregate stats (P50/P95/P99, jitter, packet loss) and visualizes everything with filters and side-by-side comparisons.

I struggled with creating a fair comparison since each platform has different APIs. Ended up using data channels (not audio) for consistency, though this only measures data message transport, not the full audio pipeline (codecs, jitter buffers, etc).

Latency is hard to measure precisely, so I'm estimating based on server processing time - admittedly not perfect. Only testing data channels, not full audio path. And it's just Pipecat (Daily) and LiveKit for now, would like to add Agora, etc.

The README screenshot shows synthetic data resembling early results. Not posting raw results yet since I'm still working out some measurement inaccuracies and need more data points across locations over time to draw solid conclusions.

This is functional but rough around the edges. Happy to keep building it out if people find it useful. Any ideas on better methodology for fair comparisons or improving measurements? What platforms would you want to see added?

Stack: Python, TypeScript (React), InfluxDB
by paxcoder | 2025-11-25 06:17:31+00:00
From the article:

>Another important note - some binary blobs and other non-free software components are used today in PebbleOS and the Pebble mobile app (ex: the heart rate sensor on PT2 , Memfault library, and others). Optional non-free web services, like Wispr-flow API speech recognizer, are also used. These non-free software components are not required - you can compile and run Pebble watch software without them. This will always be the case. More non-free software components may appear in our software in the future. The core Pebble watch software stack (everything you need to use your Pebble watch) will always be open source.

100% should mean 100%
by jacquesm | 2025-11-25 06:17:34+00:00
I know what the standard requires. I also know what happens in practice and typically the auditors are understaffed, overworked and their technical expertise is lower than it should be. As a result a lot of stuff slips through the cracks.

What does get flagged though is not getting employee permission for putting photos on the 'team' page. It's good they flag that. I'd rather they also went in much deeper on tech issues.

I've reviewed 270 companies to date. I have yet to find a single one that had audited the source code they imported. It's not untypical to find an installation that automatically updates a whole raft of dependencies during the build phase. And absolutely nobody looks at that code until something breaks.
by arjie | 2025-11-25 06:19:07+00:00
Custom GPTs are pretty old, but I recently found a use for them. My wife wanted some meeting note-taking and task recording assistance and I found that making a Custom GPT with a trivial Notion API that was scoped to one page[0] with structure that was encoded in the API was a quick couple-hour thing that unlocked a lot of utility for her (the default Notion MCP is "too broad"). It helped that this Custom GPT sits in her ChatGPT UI and she doesn't have to have another app or whatever to make it work.

We liked it quite a bit, but it led to some funny things. We use Reminders to keep our home to-do lists, hers and mine in one list with two sections. I wanted to take this existing flow we had and make it work with a Custom GPT. It's practically impossible because Reminders:

* doesn't have a good API through EventKit

* requires a pop-up permission grant in the UI

So in the end, I did end up making somewhat of an MCP server for it, running it on an old Macbook Pro I had and then sticking Amphetamine on in closed-lid display-sleep mode hooked up to my Tailnet and exposed via a Cloudflare tunnel so that we could use ChatGPT to interact with the thing. Yes, you can see how insane that whole thing is. But there's quite a lot of value to have your AI agent just be the one thing.

0: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2025-10-17/Custom_GPTs
by MobiusHorizons | 2025-11-25 06:22:06+00:00
I made my usb install media with Rufus and I it had some option to remove a bunch of frustrating behavior (this option was on by default). For instance it allowed me to create a local account. That seems to have completely removed advertising you mentioned. I had a lot of it in windows 10. Maybe the person you are replying to used Rufus (which is recommended if you want to make the install media from Linux or Mac) and didn’t realize it made changes.
Show HN: Lenscraft – Shoot Photos from Google Street
by bosschow | 2025-11-25 06:22:07+00:00
Made a silly little project(https://d01.dailyaiship.com/) over the weekend - a virtual camera that uses Google Street View as the viewfinder.

You can adjust all the camera settings (focal length, aperture, ISO, shutter speed) and apply film simulations. It's basically a DSLR simulator but you're shooting street view panoramas instead of real photos.

Built with Next.js, uses Google Street View API for the viewfinder and Static API to capture the actual image. Added some film simulation filters and optional AI enhancement.
by landr0id | 2025-11-25 06:22:17+00:00
First sentence:

>I have been writing production applications in Go for a few years now. I like some aspects of Go. One aspect I do not like is how easy it is to create data races in Go.

Their examples don't seem terribly convoluted to me. In fact, Uber's blog post is quite similar: https://www.uber.com/blog/data-race-patterns-in-go/
by karlgkk | 2025-11-25 06:22:25+00:00
I kinda gotta push back on that

Most threat models don’t include state level or equally well funded/motivated actors.

Some of those, in theory, are fine for most corporate usage - when used or implemented by knowledgeable people. Shipping it as a consumer product is a bit rougher of a story, although most companies seem to cope by not giving a shit (lol, oof)