MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andai | 2025-11-15 23:47:23+00:00
There's two axes here: Quality-Slop, Human-AI.

Q1: Quality Content (No AI)

Q2: Quality Content (AI)

Q3: Slop (No AI)

Q4: Slop (AI)

More of a spectrum, really, since most posts will in the middle of the quality axis, and most code makes some use of AI now (without being slop).

I think the problem with Q2 is that when you do it right, it passes. You think you're looking at Q1.

It's like the requirement for good AI is to be indistinguishable from human work.

(As soon as I see a ChatGPT-ism, I recoil, even if the article was good!)

Not sure how relevant the Q3/Q4 distinction is, but obviously banning AI completely would eliminate most of the Slop end of the axis too.

I think we'll either see a polaization where some communities become explicitly pro-AI or anti-AI, or perhaps a "hide all AI" toggle and mandatory disclosure (basically unenforceable, except for egregious slop).
by kazinator | 2025-11-15 23:47:30+00:00
The DJ's tracks are just tone producing elements.

If he plucked one of the 13 strings of a koto, we wouldn't say he is just remixing the vibration of the koto. Perhaps we could say that, if we had justification. There is a way of using a musical instrument as just a noise maker to produce its characteristics sounds.

Similarly, a writer doesn't just remix the alphabet, spaces and punctuation symbols. A randomly generated soup of those symbols could the thought of as their remix, in a sense.

The question is, is there a meaning being expressed using those elements as symbols?

Or is just the mixing all there is to the meaning? I.e. the result says "I'm a mix of this stuff and nothing more".

If you mix Alphagetti and Zoodles, you don't have a story about animals.
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-11-15 23:48:31+00:00
The article would have been fine with a theme/title closer to "things that annoy me". I agree with a lot of points raised, but not with gatekeeping. I'll die on the hill that gatekeeping is just wrong, anywhere, in any circumstance, and especially in a field that has open in its name. Open source means open first, source secondary.

So I strongly disagree with the "do. not. publish." point. Let the kids publish. Let them cringe 10-20 years from now when they see their first projects. We did with ours. My first geocities site had all the "slop" markers (triangle warning gifs, page under construction, etc), but I still laughed when I found some print-screens I had saved from that era, years later.

Writing slop and publishing slop is a rite of passage. When I see it, I don't have to like it, and I can avoid it. But I would never tell anyone "don't publish". Go ahead, there's plenty of bits on them github servers. Go nuts.
by skydhash | 2025-11-15 23:52:21+00:00
My account on Twitter is still there (I like the handle). But I've not connected in months (close to be a year). And before that I spend years connecting only in private windows (so that I disconnect as soon as I'm done and all the cookies vanish). Instead I spend time in here, or lurk in some reddit forums (I deleted my account there). But mostly I hack in some code to learn about stuff (lately it's been the subsonic protocol and Open Publication Distribution System, trying to create some good clients)

Here gives me enough news about what notable and I know where to find info for niche communities. But these days, it seems that I'm learning old tech most rather than the newish thing.
by famouswaffles | 2025-11-15 23:52:31+00:00
>Yeah - you might want to check what you actually typed there.

That's what you typed in your comment. Go check. I just figured it was intentional since surprise is the first thing you expect humans to show in response to it.

>Not sure what you're trying to prove by doing it yourself though. Have you heard of random sampling? Never mind ...

I guess you fancy yourself a genius who knows all about LLMs now, but sampling wouldn't matter here. Your whole point was that it happens because of a fundamental limitation on the part of LLMs that causes them unable to do it. Even one contrary response, never mind multiple would be enough. After all, some humans would simply say 'mat'.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. Completing 'mat' doesn't have anything to do with a lack of understanding. It's just the default 'assumption' that it's a completion that is being sought.
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-11-15 23:52:42+00:00
If the archive.today contact is telling the truth, then this implies that WAAD had collected links containing CSAM and chose not to contact the person who could best get rid of the material. I think it implies either:

1. WAAD has developed a good way of detecting CSAM, but is ok with the CSAM staying available longer than it needs to, and remaining accessible to a wider audience than needed, in order to pursue their ulterior motive. In this case, they could be improving the world in some significant way, but are just choosing to do something else.

2. WAAD has intentionally had archive.today index CSAM material in order to pursue their ulterior motive.

Of course, option 2 is _much_ more damning than option 1, but I feel both are really bad, and naively I'd still expect option 1 to be illegal. If you know of a crime and intentionally hide it, that seem illegal.
by codedokode | 2025-11-15 23:53:10+00:00
> The candidate declared ZERO money spent in campaign

I thought to win you need to get more votes than competitors, not to spend more money.

Also, I think you are not seeing the obvious "backdoors" in law. Think for a second, why the punishment for errors in documentation or misreporting is barring a candidate from elections, and not a fine (or imprisonment for cases with serious fraud)? It is obviously intentional. It is relatively easy to make a mistake in documentation (given the large volume of documentation one has to deal with even in mayoral elections), and even more so if you manage to plant your man into candidate's staff or bribe/pressure someone dealing with documentation to "accidentally" make some mistakes.

Whenever you see some bureaucratic, complex procedures in election regulations (or any other law), be sure, they are intentional. The more documentation one needs to fill out correct, the more the chance to find mistakes there. And every mistake would be in the favor of whoever is in power.

Example: France, a popular, but unwanted, candidate barred from elections. Counter example: USA, where a convicted felon, who faked documentation multiple times, still won because of popular support.

In a democratic country the bar for removing a candidate should be exceptionally high. Definitely not decision of several unelected people friendly with the current government.

> TikTok bot farms including one linked to Kremlin boosting Kremlinescus posts

So what you are implying? The voters are dumb and will vote for whoever they saw in TikTok?

> you will find it weird that 25k asians are hitting like on a Romanian politician posts.

So if TikTok promoted Biden, he would win against Trump? Maybe they should replace Electoral College with like counting then and save money. Also, TikTok is mostly used by teenagers listening to dumb robotic music who have no right to vote anyway.

Also, talking about ads, TV also often provides unfair free ads to some candidates under the guise of "news". By the way Youtube - what a coincidence - also nowadays has "news" section on the main screen. Maybe the candidate skirted some rules regarding advertisement, but it's not like he stuffed fake ballots into the box.

And now think why would the voters want to vote for a random shady candidate rather than people who have been on TV screens for 20 years? Only because some evil puppeteer spent several grands on buying TikTok likes, dumb, ungrateful voters forgot about all the good things those candidates have been doing for them, and exorbitant growth of economy and their income?
by forgetfulness | 2025-11-15 23:54:16+00:00
Becoming someone who can do the thing is how you get to do a lot of things

Not what your boss and your bosses’ boss wants you to do, instead of doing other things you can do to maximize value for shareholders in some arbitrarily chosen amount of time

But thinking of how you wouldn’t have permission to get ready to do the thing in a business context, also, isn’t doing the thing
by n1xis10t | 2025-11-15 23:54:30+00:00
Huh. Yeah also in the FAQ they say that the reason why they return so few results is just because their ranking is so fantastic: https://help.kagi.com/kagi/faq/faq.html#why-does-kagi-return...

I feel like that is either hubris (they are overconfident in their ranking) or they have some other reason. Now you bring this up, and it seems to fit with the same kind of thing.

It reminds me of this article which brings up a bunch of suspicious things about search engines, and talks about how weird it is that so many engines limit how far you can go into the results: https://archive.org/details/search-timeline
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-15 23:56:43+00:00
> Well all those things got better but what about this other thing?

This is peak "let them eat cake". A person needs to live out of their car because they can't afford rent, but hey. They can buy a flat screen TV for $200 now!

Things are inverted, and not for the better. You can make all electronics 10x more expensive if it measn we can reasonably expect rent to be 30% of average income again. That means you can actualyl save up for luxuries. Or invest and live frugally. As it is now, it's the worst of both worlds.

>Boomers aren't immortal. Eventually they will die and whatever housing constraint there is will turn to surplus.

Sadly, no. The "great wealth transfer" is not going down to the next generation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/josephcoughlin/2025/06/02/the-g...

They are either selling it off and living it up, or Healtchare is going to eat into it. Either way, don't expect the boomers dying off to magically reset the economy.
by anigbrowl | 2025-11-15 23:58:19+00:00
(Side note: While running Python itself on a microcontroller is growing in popularity for educational and hobby applications, there’s no real future for pure Python in real-time mission-critical deployments.)

Bridging the two could be a real win for people using hardware like the M5Stack ecosystem, which has a wealth of peripherals and a robust Python stack.
Show HN: SelenAI – Terminal AI pair-programmer with sandboxed Lua tools
by moridin | 2025-11-15 23:58:31+00:00
I’ve been building a terminal-first AI pair-programmer that tries to make every tool call transparent and auditable. It’s a Rust app with a Ratatui UI split into three panes (chat, tool activity, input). The agent loop streams LLM output, queues write-capable Lua scripts for manual approval, and records every run as JSONL logs under .selenai/logs.

Key bits:

Single tool, real guardrails – the LLM only gets a sandboxed Lua VM with explicit helpers (rust.read_file, rust.list_dir, rust.http_request, gated rust.write_file, etc.). Writes stay disabled unless you opt in and then approve each script via /tool run.

Transparent workflow – the chat pane shows the conversation, tool pane shows every invocation + result, and streaming keeps everything responsive. CTRL shortcuts for scrolling, clearing logs, copy mode, etc., so it feels like a normal TUI app.

Pluggable LLMs – there’s a stub client for offline hacking and an OpenAI streaming client behind a trait. Adding more providers should just be another module under src/llm/.

Session history – every exit writes a timestamped log directory with full transcript, tool log, and metadata about whether Lua writes were allowed. Makes demoing, debugging, and sharing repros way easier.

Lua ergonomics – plain io.* APIs and a tiny require("rust") module, so the model can write idiomatic scripts without shelling out. There’s even a /lua command if you want to run a snippet manually.

Repo (MIT): https://github.com/Almclean/selenai

Would love feedback on:

Other providers or local models you’d like to see behind the LLM trait. Additional sandbox helpers that feel safe but unlock useful workflows. Ideas for replaying those saved sessions (web viewer? CLI diff?). If you try it, cargo run, type, and you’ll see the ASCII banner + chat panes. Hit me with issues or PRs—there’s a CONTRIBUTING.md in the works and plenty of roadmap items (log viewer, theming, Lua helper packs) if you’re interested.
by bell-cot | 2025-11-15 23:58:41+00:00
If you'd passed their Intro CS class when it was C++, and they'd later switch to Java, would you have had to re-take the Intro class? I'd bet "no". Even though there'd be no difference - except that they'd collected your tuition $$$ for the class, and the bad optics.

My general experience with colleges is that "rules" are mostly for the little people. And pretty much all of them become negotiable the moment that serious money, prestige, or scandal avoidance are on the table.

(BTW - University of Michigan? I know several people who got similar crap from their CS Dept.)
by bigyabai | 2025-11-15 23:59:39+00:00
Shit, I'd take it. Sideloading, custom OSes, less-wimpy legal chops against hackers... Valve could turn Apple around.

A 5 year release cadence would incentivize the iPhone to change something more significant than just the price tag. And Proton would give me my first justification for a owning a powerful phone.
by RossBencina | 2025-11-15 23:59:49+00:00
Nice.

> int ret = libwifi_get_wifi_frame(&frame, data, data_len, got_radiotap);

> ...

> int ret = libwifi_parse_beacon(&bss, &frame);

I haven't looked into the implementation, but if I understand correctly, the above code (extracted from the example on the home page) implies that the unparsed segment of `data` is either (1) copied into `frame` or (2) a pointer-span in `frame` references the unparsed segment of `data`. I wonder why either of these approaches have been taken. I imagine that the pointer-span could be computed (possibly even statically) inside `libwifi_parse_beacon` and `data` could also be passed:

> libwifi_parse_beacon(&bss, &frame, data);

This would shrink the size of `frame` and achieve zero-copy. Or perhaps I'm missing something.
by colechristensen | 2025-11-15 23:59:57+00:00
> $400 is an arbitrary price ceiling and you’re not looking at dollars per performance unit, you’re just cutting off with a maximum price. So if there’s a $430 AMD CPU that’s 20% faster you’re going to forego that better price per performance value just because it’s slightly above your price target.

My choice of CPU currently has the best value / performance on this benchmark aside from two very old AMD processors which are very slow and just happen to be extremely cheap. No new AMD processors are even remotely close.

It's also currently $285 no top tier performers are even close except SKUs which are slight variations of the same CPU.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html

> benchmarks don’t pick up unique CPU features nor they pick up real world application performance. For example, Intel has no answer to the X3D V-cache architecture that makes AMD chips better for gaming.

Happy to be convinced that there's a better benchmark out there, but if you're trying to tell me it's better but in a way that can't be measured, I don't believe you because that's just "bro science".

> If you’re looking for integrated graphics, you’re pretty much always better off with AMD over Intel

I never have been looking for integrated graphics, sometimes I have bought the CPU with it just because it was a little cheaper.

> You can’t really ignore motherboard cost and the frequency of platform socket changes. AMD has cheaper boards that last longer (as in, they update their sockets less often so you can upgrade chips more and keep your same board)

I've always bought a new motherboard with a CPU and either repurposed, sold, or given away the old CPU/motherboard combination which seems like a much better use of money. The last one went to somebody's little brother. The one before that is my NAS. There's not a meaningful difference to comparable motherboards to me, particularly when the competing AMD CPUs are nearly double the cost or more.
by akoboldfrying | 2025-11-16 00:00:25+00:00
> "1 cup of caffeinated coffee" basically says nothing at all

Frankly, no. 1 cup of caffeinated coffee is on average significantly more caffeine than 0 cups, which is all you need for sufficient n. The only confounding variable to worry about here is whether caffeine is entering the diets of the two experimental groups at different rates via other channels (e.g., are the people who are forbidden to drink coffee drinking more tea to compensate?), though even this effect, if present, would likely tend to decrease the separation of the outcome distributions and is thus a low threat to validity.

People obsess over precision when it is often one of the least important aspects of an experiment. The outcomes of studies like this are in practice absolutely dependent on quality and rates of compliance. Choosing an uncomplicated treatment that is easy and natural for subjects to comply with is not merely acceptable but in fact a massively better design than complex protocols involving precisely measured quantities of lab-grown coffee in vials that can be misplaced, forgotten, deliberately shunned, etc. Also in this case the treatment corresponds closely to the real-world situation that the research is attempting to learn about.
by alisonatwork | 2025-11-16 00:01:20+00:00
I let this thread go for a while, but just saw your reply and wanted to say thanks for your insight! I am a hobbyist DJ for whom "playing out" just means "on a friend's equipment from time to time" so I probably don't need to fuss as much as I do, but your experience has kinda reaffirmed for me that keeping stuff MP3 is going to be the least hassle.

It really used to annoy me that bringing along just a USB left me with a useless "filenames only" view on old CDJs, and then even when they did read the file they only cached the metadata of a fraction of the tags, which is how I ended up same as you - custom genres with modifiers in the comment. It's not the ideal data structure for organizing your collection at home, but it seems to work the best for bringing music to go.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-16 00:02:18+00:00
It's something I note a lot about detractors on HN. They don't think in people, they think in "things". And the "important things" are ones they take for granted. If they secured a house from the tech boom of the 10's before everything went to shit, then they are completely insulated from the idea that "things are harder to get".

Then there's the job aspect. I guess Hacker News is more older millenial/Gen X, so they are on the sticky side of this "sticky job market". If they are done job hopping, they won't feel how bad it is out there.
by Normal_gaussian | 2025-11-16 00:02:48+00:00
Generally if you encounter CSAM you should report to your countries appropriate organisation. Skip the police and go straight there to save everyone some time and avoid confusion. This agency will handle notifications etc to the site.

USA - https://report.cybertip.org/reporting

UK - https://report.iwf.org.uk/org/ (technically the NCA, but they are a catch all reporting target. As a private individual IWF will handle the onward report for you).

If you are in a country without such an agency, the above agencies are good to inform, as they will both handle international reports.

These organisations will ensure the material is taken down, and will capture and analyse it. CSAM can be compared against hash databases (https://www.thorn.org/) to determine whether there it is as yet unknown material or reshared known material. This can help lead to the identification, arrest, and conviction of material creators as well as the identification and support of victims.

If you tell the site administrator directly there is a good chance they will remove the material and not report it; this is a huge problem in this space at the moment.

In the UK and the USA (and many other places) operators are obligated to report the material; in fact the controversial Online Safety Act puts actual teeth around this very obligation in the UK.
by technofiend | 2025-11-16 00:03:10+00:00
Completely shared experiences with regards to both Forrest's books and Estes' rockets, except after enough losses of the latter I got pretty fatalistic about new rockets. They were assembled and flown same day as soon as the glue dried, with maybe a slapdash decal; there wasn't much point investing too much time or energy when the wind or a tree was going to take them anyway.
by Muromec | 2025-11-16 00:03:33+00:00
>I don't think Russians actually live in fear of the big brother, I wouldn't be friends with so many Russian femboys if that really was the case.

I'm not sure what it has to do with anything, other than you own ideas about what oppressive governments are up to.

>makes the world a better, more peaceful place.

the chain has to be yanked from time to time, otherwise the thing at the end of it tends to forget you are holding it.
by bell-cot | 2025-11-16 00:03:36+00:00
> Yes polygraphs are bollocks, but, rules are rules.

> The issue is, if exceptions are made, ...

Except that "exceptions are made" can also be a stage of phasing out useless or counter-productive rules - as social acceptance grows that Astrology, Polygraphs, and Tarot have no place in security screening.
by Veserv | 2025-11-16 00:04:25+00:00
Those are non-issues.

It only takes a few thousand lines (easily less than 10k even with zero dependencies and no standard library) to implement QUIC.

Kernel management of transport protocols has zero actual benefit for latency or throughput given proper network stack design. Neither does hardware offload except for crypto offload. Claimed differences are just due to poor network stack design and poor protocol implementation.
by benjiro | 2025-11-16 00:04:26+00:00
Funny thing is that also makes it easier on LLM / AI... Tried a project a while ago both creating the same thing in Rust and Go. Go's worked from the start, while Rust's version needed a lot of LLM interventions and fixes to get it to compile.

We shall not talk about compile time / resource usage differences ;)

I mean, Rust is nice, but compared to when i learned it like 10 years ago, it really looks a lot more these days, like it took too much of a que from C++.

While Go syntax is still the same as it was 10 years ago with barely anything new. What may anger people but even so...

The only thing i love to see is reduce executable sizes because pushing large executables on a dinky upload line, to remove testing is not fun.
by ineedasername | 2025-11-16 00:05:40+00:00
It’s really not difficult to work with the LLM to tweak behavior in eg speckit for higher or lower levels of this behavior. It is setting a baseline of how the LLM should engage with a project which is pretty critical to getting the highest quality output with lower token overhead and API costs. It mirrors the way LLMs are used productively in countless tasks in other industries to structure their output according to needs, be it something like content analysis and summary or tasks that require more structure inherently like data analysis.
by skissane | 2025-11-16 00:05:44+00:00
I wonder how that works? Speculation: there is some kind of genetic/epigenetic signalling which modulates DNA repair mechanisms, such that certain DNA regions can be marked as more mutation-prone than others. And there may be selective pressure to make genes associated with disease-resistance more mutation-prone, because that’s a gene whose mutation is more likely to be beneficial (compensating mutations for evolution in existing diseases or to respond to new diseases), less likely to be harmful (most of the time, most likely outcome of the “wrong” mutation would be less resistance to diseases, but it probably wouldn’t otherwise be lethal or cause serious disability). But if that is what is actually going on here, is there any actual challenge to Darwin’s views? He didn’t know about DNA; I don’t think he ever claimed all mutations were equally likely (why would he when he had no idea what the actual mechanisms behind them were)