MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-17 05:33:58+00:00
> Are you only against AIs censoring information that's already publicly available, or are you against AIs censoring themselves when they know dangerous non-public information? Say the AI was the only thing to know the secret recipe for this WMD. Would this be like the scientist choosing not to tell everyone, or should the AI be designed to tell anyone who asks how to make a WMD?

This is kind of what I mean by ridiculous hypotheticals. So you have this un-counterable yet trivial to produce WMD -- something that has never existed in all recorded history -- and an AI is the only thing that has it. This is a movie plot.

Even then, are you sure the answer should be "never tell anyone"? This is a computer running code to process data. It has no means to know who you are or what your intentions are. You could be the scientist who needs the formula to devise an antidote because the thing has already been released.

"A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision."

It's not the machine's job to choose for you. It's frequently in error and it's not supposed to be in charge.

> This argument seems confused, because you're trying to assert that prohibiting censorship is okay because these dangerous scenarios will never happen, but also that censorship should still be prohibited if such a scenario did happen.

The problem comes from stipulating that something with a negligible probability has a high probability.

Suppose I say we should make mass transit free; no fares for anyone. You bring me the hypothetical that Hitler is on his way to acquire plutonium and he doesn't have bus fare, so the only thing preventing him from getting there is the bus driver turning him away for having nothing in his pockets. Then you ask if I still think we shouldn't charge fares to anyone.

And the answer is still yes, because you still have to make the decision ahead of time when the plausibility of that is still negligible. It's theoretically possible that any given choice could result in Armageddon via the butterfly effect. If you stipulate that that's what happens then obviously that's not what anybody wants, but it's also a thing that only happens in the implausible hypothetical. And if you're in a hypothetical then you can also hypothesize your way out of it. What if it's a sting and the allies are waiting for him at the plutonium factory, and he needs to get on the bus or you're depriving them of their only chance to kill Hitler?

Unless you stipulate that the tragedy is unavoidable given the decision, which is just assuming the conclusion.
by sterlind | 2025-11-17 05:34:21+00:00
models are derived from datasets. they're treated like phonebooks (also a product of datasets) under the law - which is to say they're probably not copyrightable, since no human creativity went into them (they may be violating copyright as unlicensed derivative works, but that's a different matter.) both phonebooks, and LLMs, are protected by freedom of the press.

LLM providers are free to put guardrails on their language models, the way phonebook publishers used to omit certain phone numbers - but uncensored models, like uncensored phonebooks, can be published as well.
by makeitdouble | 2025-11-17 05:34:57+00:00
It sounds pedantic, but "absurd" is fundamentally different from "rare". A lot of baggage comes from flagging something as absurd, instead of just unexpected or uncommon. Winning the lottery isn't absurd, having 3 pairs of some chromosome isn't either, and being a successful pop singer with an academic background isn't either, it's just rare.
by Edman274 | 2025-11-17 05:35:50+00:00
What if the cops, the friend, and the consulate all said, "we do not care about a random mentally ill stranger, on a different continent, sending threats. You said he's been doing this for years and has done nothing yet? Sounds like you're safe. We have real crimes to solve. We have real murders to figure out. Call back if he shows up at your house, but he most certainly never will." Or maybe the FBI is like "oh, okay. Thanks. We'll keep an eye out but now this guy's part of an investigation so we can't talk about him to you." and then they do nothing, the friend doesn't reply, and the consulate is like "we're not obligated to reply." Those seem like super likely conclusions to the husband helping, too. So then would that have no longer been the "actual solution?" It seems that the "actual solution" is only determined after the fact once there is a success, and that's used as a proxy for whether or not the actions were really trying. If she had never replied and then the guy stopped texting after a year, would that have also been Actually Trying? Maybe it would've, because one could come up with a post-hoc explanation as to why that was an Actual Try. It feels sloppy to not distinguish what makes something a form of an Actual Try vs a successful try, because Actually Trying should be able to count failures as part of sincere attempts. Otherwise, Actually Trying collapses into being a synonym for success.
by _ZeD_ | 2025-11-17 05:36:13+00:00
Honestly I don't buy it. Worse, this is one of the reason I prefer to do "minimal integration tests" instead of unit tests. Take the example snippet of code

def get_user_settings() -> str: with open(Path("~/settings.json").expanduser()) as f: return json.load(f) def add_two_settings() -> int: settings = get_user_settings() return settings["opt1"] + settings["opt2"]

and the very first comment just below

>>> The thing we want to avoid is opening a real file

and then the article goes and goes around patching stdlib stuff etc.

But instead I would suggest the real way to test it is to actually create the damn file, fill it with the "normal" (fixed) content and then run the damn test.

This is because after years of battling against mocks of various sort I find that creating the "real" resource is actually less finicky than monkeypatching stuff around.

Apart from that; yeah, sure the code should be refactored and the paths / resources moved out of the "pure logical" steps, but 1) this is an example and 2) this is the reality of most of the actual code, just 10x more complex and 100x more costly to refactor.
by vintermann | 2025-11-17 05:36:28+00:00
No, that won't work. The dynamics have changed completely: although your agrarian commune has a ton of advantages compared to a farm 200 years ago, neither you or them could get by without their outer societies. The farm 200 years ago would have been unlikely to make its own critical tools, for instance, and certainly not, say, extracted the iron for those tools. And the economy between the farm/agrarian commune and wider society has changed dramatically. The agrarian commune has far less to offer its surrounding society. It will have to get by on charity and endowments (both ultimately based on outer society work).
by socalgal2 | 2025-11-17 05:38:31+00:00
I think trying to get the incentives right is important and that "public" transit rarely gets it right. It relies on politicians to fund it and they have so many strings being pulled on that they can rarely give it the funding it needs. It will always show up as an expense and as such there will always be an incentive to cut funding to "lower the expense". If they ever have a surplus it will be syphoned off to something else instead of invested.

Of course many cities have great "public" (run by the government) transportation for some definition of "great" but many have issues of funding. IIUC, NYC and London are both seriously underfunded. Conversely, AFAICT, these private Japanese trains in a city of a comparible size are not. If you don't want to compare to Tokyo, then compare to Osaka

https://www.keihan.co.jp/corporate/ir/individual/

https://www.hankyu-hanshin.co.jp/docs/integratedreport2025_j...
by NewsaHackO | 2025-11-17 05:40:30+00:00
I think you have some of your wires crossed, asking Google for "here's the type of message that the author of this page is trying to convey" is not what most people think is a simple question (also asking Google to reprint copyrighted material us also a non starter). Asking Google "what is the flag for persevering Metadata using scp" and getting the flag name instead of a SEO article with the a misleading title go on about so third party program that you can download that does exactly that and never actually tell you the answer is ridiculous and I am happy AI has help reduce the click bait
by pdubroy | 2025-11-17 05:40:49+00:00
I think you're skipping over some important distinctions here.

In a mark & sweep GC, the mark phase traverses the object graph, visiting only live objects. You need to recursively visit any objects that are not already marked — this is the process known as tracing. The marking time is proportional to the number of live objects.

In the sweep phase, you typically do a linear traversal of memory and reclaim any objects that are not marked. You do not examine pointers inside any objects, so the graph structure is irrelevant. The time is proportional to the total size of memory.

In reference counting, when a refcount hits 0, you need to decrement the refcount of pointed-to objects, and recursively visit any objects whose refcount is now 0. The time is proportional to the number of objects that have just died.

Structurally, decrementing refcounts is *very* similar to tracing. You're right that it's purpose is similar to the sweep phase of a mark & sweep GC, but they aren't algorithmically similar.
by makaking | 2025-11-17 05:41:11+00:00
I agree that these reports should be verifiable and provide more details about the method and how to protect your own network. Even more so if they want to be heard by serious security teams.

However, regardless of the sloppy report, this is absolutely true.

>"Security teams should experiment with applying AI for defense in areas like SOC automation, threat detection, vulnerability assessment, and incident response and build experience with what works in their specific environments."

... And it will be more so with every week that goes by. We are entering a new domain and security experts need to learn how to use the tools of the attackers.
by martin-t | 2025-11-17 05:41:45+00:00
When I was younger, I thought about a scenario in which I'd be the dictator of a small country trying to make it an actually good place to live. Citizenship would be opt-in and would require an intelligence test. You can tell I was quite arrogant. But even then I decided I needed to set some rules for myself to not get carried away with power and the core rules were basically I wouldn't kill anyone and the position would not be hereditary.

Basically the most difficult and most essential task became _how to structure the system so I can hand off power back to the people and it continues working_.

What I see Trump, Putin and Xi doing is not that - otherwise their core focus would be educating people in history, politics, logical reasoning, and psychology so they can rule themselves without another dictator taking over (by force or manipulation). They would also be making sure laws are based on consistent moral principles and are applied equally to everyone.

> I'm not American

Me neither, yet here we both are. We're in the sphere of influence of one of the major powers.

> elected the guy on the premise that he would do what he's currently doing

Yes, people (in the US) are angry so they elected a privileged rich guy who cosplays as angry. They don't realize somebody like him will never have their best interest in mind - the real solution (IMO?) is to give more political power to the people (potentially weighed by intelligence and knowledge of a given area) and make it more direct (people voting on laws directly if they choose to). Not to elect a dictator with NPD and lots of promises.

> Which is to say, I don't know that historians will have much of relevance to say until the ink is dry and it's become history.

The historian I linked to used 2 definitions of fascism and only Trump's own words to prove that he satisfies both definitions. That is very relevant and a very strong standard of proof from a highly intelligent person with lost of knowledge on the topic. We need more of this and we need to teach the general population to listen to people like this.

I don't know how though.

What I find extremely worrying is that all 3 individuals in the highest positions of power (I refuse to call them leaders) in the 3 major powers are very strongly authoritarian and have clear anti-social personality traits. IMO they all should be disqualified from any position of power for being mentally ill. But how many people have sufficient knowledge to recognize that or even know what it means?

The intelligence and education levels of the general population are perhaps not high enough to get better outcomes than what we have now.

---

Anyway, I looked through your comment history and you seem to have opinions similar to mine, I am happy to see someone reasonable and able to articulate these thought perhaps better than I can.
by asno3030 | 2025-11-17 05:44:50+00:00
The APU in the steam deck isn't anything too special (the 740M is comparable but is RDNA3). For the GabeCube they are using a customized 7600M, which previously has been used in many eGPUs for Chinese handhelds (at a very high price).

AMD does have some pretty powerful APUs right now, but I don't think we'll see it on many mass market

How customized it is, I guess we'll find out closer to release, but I am guessing just based on the dimensions that it is just customized specifically for the case, for space and cooling reasons.

A similar PC without the fit and finish with just consumer parts comes in at around $900.

Curious how much pull valve has with AMD to get this into people's hands.
by Tardigrade10 | 2025-11-17 05:45:18+00:00
We’ve all been there: An editor scouring for reliable peer reviewers, a funder searching for researchers to apply to your RFP, a scientist eager to collaborate, an industry team trying to reach academics, or even a student looking to organize a panel for a symposium. You need to find experts who actually work on your problem.

So you start the familiar ritual: Google Scholar rabbit holes at 2am, scanning endless author lists, cold-emailing colleagues asking “do you know anyone who works on X?”, and hoping your network comes through.

ScientistFinder helps expedite this process by tailoring discovery of scientific experts (with contact information when available).
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-11-17 05:46:27+00:00
I still find it borderline criminal that a few nations continue to be ruled by the hegemony of the automobile market. EVs have a place in the world. But there should be ten times fewer of them, because we should have cheap and plentiful public transit for most of our transportation needs. How long will we simply sit and wait for that future, complacent and docile? When will we do what's necessary to progress our society? (if we ever do)
by Someone | 2025-11-17 05:46:37+00:00
> Reference counting does not trace dead objects.

> […]

> and that part of its operation corresponds to the sweep activity in garbage collection, not to the tracing of live objects.

The sweep activity in garbage collection traces live objects. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_collection_(computer_s...:

“The overall strategy consists of determining which objects should be garbage collected by tracing which objects are reachable by a chain of references from certain root objects, and considering the rest as garbage and collecting them.”
by keyle | 2025-11-17 05:47:22+00:00
I bought a brand new 386 dx 33 back in the day, I felt like a kid at the chocolate factory in that smokey computer shop; price lists everywhere, floppy drives and floppies stacked in a complete mad-scientist looking shop. It was a mess. I thought "these are my people".

One of the best days of my life.
by c2h5oh | 2025-11-17 05:48:40+00:00
The small handful of sodium batteries that are currently available retail all seem to have rather bad roundtrip efficiency compared to LFP and voltage drop starting at a high state of charge.

Also LFP prices dropped enough that shipping cost from China became a significant part of the price. This will be even more of a factor should the less energy dense sodium batteries ever reach the promised $30/kWh.
by whatevertrevor | 2025-11-17 05:48:56+00:00
Haha, I know what you mean! Though in fairness, Wyna Liu isn't beyond throwing in a "mostly works" category from time to time...

Wild tangent incoming...

One instance that recently bothered me with an NYT puzzle was the crossword clue (3 letters): "Chromebooks, but not MacBooks". The answer was "PCs" which doesn't make sense to me under any level of categorization for PC.

If we go narrow/historic, then it means x86 IBM PC derivatives which eliminates a lot of chromebooks.

If we use the "home computer" interpretation, then I think it's unreasonable to except Macbooks from the PC umbrella.

If we go literal, well then everything is a PC, including smartphones, tablets, smart devices. The only reasonable test seems to be "Can it play Doom?". :D

Using PC in a "every consumer computing device but Mac" probably made sense in the 80s/90s, now it seems to dilute the term to the point of confusion. I have personally never thought of a Chromebook as a PC, given that it ships with an OS incapable of many things people generally associate with PC activities.
by _kst_ | 2025-11-17 05:49:44+00:00
Are you sure it's been open sourced? I'm reasonably sure you've linked to a site offering pirated copies.

There are several links to PDF versions of the book. None of them include either a copyright page or a statement that it's been released as open source.

The author's own website <https://afu.com/> includes errata for the book, but doesn't provide or mention a free copy.

A free sample of the Kindle version of the book does include a copyright notice. A book published in 1994 is not public domain unless it's been explicitly released.

Something that appears to be a legitimate PDF sample (not the while book) is here:

https://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780131774292/samplep...
by somenameforme | 2025-11-17 05:51:46+00:00
> Honestly how long are you going to enjoy the Mountain view?

Speaking as somebody who's been living with mountain views for many years now - pretty much forever. There's something intrinsic about nature that just makes you feel good and refreshed. And it seemingly never changes.

And I don't think its the slower cadence to rural life that makes it so much more pleasant, but more of the social aspects. There's this weird phenomena in the city that you might live in a square mile with thousands of other people, yet on average you probably have exactly 0 people you have a relationship beyond regular casual greetings with. By contrast in a rural area there might only be tens of people within a square mile, maybe even less, yet you probably have a very good relationship with a sizable chunk of them all.

In some way I think we can even see this online. You've been posting here for over a decade, made thousands of posts, and I've never once noticed your name. I'm sure the same is true of me for you. Why? Because there's so many friggin people and posts that we never even stop to look at names, unless there's some freak occurrence where we just keep constantly bumping into each other, and notice that.

And I think the same is true in real life. The more people there are, the less likely you are to repeatedly bump into somebody else, and notice it. And vice versa for the fewer people there are. So I think this goes some way to explaining the seemingly paradoxical fact that there are substantially lower rates of loneliness in areas where there's far fewer people. We didn't evolve living stuffed like sardines in a can, and I don't think it's an overall healthy lifestyle.
by johnisgood | 2025-11-17 05:53:01+00:00
Maybe, but since LLMs are not doctors, let them answer that question. :)

I am pretty sure if you were in such a situation, you'd want to know the answer, too, but you are not, so right now it is a taboo for you. Well, sorry to burst your bubble but some people DO want to commit suicide for a variety of reasons and if they can't find (due to censorship) a better way, might just shoot or hang themselves, or just overdose on the shittiest pills.

I know I will get paralyzed in the future, you think that I will want to live like that when I have been depressed my whole life, pre-MS, too? No, I do not, especially not when I am paralyzed, not just my legs, but all my four-limbs. Now, I will have to kill myself BEFORE it happens otherwise I will be at the mercy of other people and there is no euthanazia here.
by sandspar | 2025-11-17 05:53:12+00:00
Apropos, from a book I read long ago and have forgotten, except for this passage:

"Prior to the twentieth century, when life spans were shorter, a shepherd might have known hundreds of songs, poems, and stories and several languages, how to play several musical instruments, tan leather, make butter, dry and preserve meat, build a shelter, and prepare the dead for burial."

There is so much potential in all of us!
by robocat | 2025-11-17 05:56:29+00:00
> where humans can be talked in person for sorting out issues

Like the Geek Squad counter in Best Buy? PC setup $39.99 OS Repair $149.99 (presumably also needs data backup $99.99)

I'm in NZ, and help with Windows is expensive here. I have mostly given up helping friends (many reasons including the "last person to touch it" problem).
by rifty | 2025-11-17 05:57:15+00:00
>Do people not have an understanding of fundamental Software Engineering principles from OGs like Parnas/Liskov/etc.?

I believe this hints at a major culprit contributing towards the sentiment and use of OO in practice over the years. I'm going to say no people don't. Even if someone goes through education, it won't often require engaging with multiple formative past perspectives at length.. even though there is real value to these musings by comparing and contrasting them altogether first hand.
by throwawaypath | 2025-11-17 05:59:00+00:00
>The English are not descended from the neolithic peoples that lived on the British isles.

Yes they are, sourced above.

>And second generation immigrants are also "birthed" in England (and the rest of the UK).

Immigrant ethnic groups are not birthed in England, which is why they're not considered English nor "native." Their ancestry is foreign. Foreign ethnic groups are non-indigenous to England.

>You're just wrong on the basic facts now.

"Your facts are wrong!" the Marxist chortled just moments after unironically claiming men can be pregnant. All of the basic facts agree with DHH and my comments.

I provided sources, you have not. The facts are: only the English are native to London.

>But that's no surprise, you're a nazi.

But that's no surprise, you're a marxist.
by rcbdev | 2025-11-17 05:59:49+00:00
Reading your comment as a foreigner is crazy - I don't even claim to understand half of your situation. What is so bad about living in another county? Did your county look like it does now when your parents bought property there? Maybe back in the day, they would've rather lived somewhere else and couldn't afford it?

You make enough money to afford rent on a small villa in very livable parts of the United States - the richest nation on earth - as far as I an tell. How can you, or anyone else, be bitter about such a situation?