MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by o10449366 | 2025-12-28 18:28:26+00:00
I mean, you're making assumptions about the author's intent going one way, but not the other. What if the polite tone is what they intended? And how do you know they didn't review the output for phrasing and fabrications?

The author acknowledged they used AI to translate. Is the translation they decided to publish among the given tools they had available to them not by definition the most authentic and intentional piece that exists?

All of this aside, how do you think tools like Google Translate even work? Language isn't a lookup table with a 1:1 mapping. Even these other translation tools that are being suggested still incorporate AI. Should the author manually look up words in dictionaries and translate word by word, when dictionaries themselves are notoriously politicized and policed, too?
by riskable | 2025-12-28 18:28:46+00:00
Hey now... We have to evolve somehow. The folks that continue to reproduce in this technological dystopia are passing on their "just ignore social media" (or more likely, "get bored with social media") genes to the next generation.

In a 1000 years, social media will recommend people stop spending time outdoors and warn against the dangers of non-ultraprocessed food.

Power outages at places where young people are forced to gather will be engineered in order to facilitate breeding as their minds will be completely starved of anything else to do while their hormones rage due to the aphrodisiac aerosols pumped into the building where they remain captive.
by mindcrash | 2025-12-28 18:30:03+00:00
You don't need a "big computer" for local LLMs.

Every model with ~4B parameters runs perfectly fine on even a Geforce 1070 Mobile GPU with 8Gb of memory.

If you have some patience you can probably go a little crazy and run a model with ~27B parameters on a Radeon 890M with 32Gb of memory as well (means you'll probably have to get about 96Gb of system memory if you want to get some work done too, but oh well).

In theory you could even run a model which fits in 64Gb of video memory on that "little" GPU (with 128Gb of system memory).

No, you can't run something like Grok 2 (which has quantified models starting with 82Gb in size and going up) but why on earth would you ever want to run something like that locally?
by bjoli | 2025-12-28 18:30:21+00:00
Cool! I just implemented RBB trees for c#. Not on this level, mostly just for fun. I am not a programmer at all, but I do like myself a neat data structure.

I am currently fighting the JIT to understand why a simple flags check (ANDing two bytes and comparing to 0) makes the code 2.5x slower. This is my first c# project so right now I am just throwing things at the compilrr to see what sticks. If anyone knows where I can get help, that would be much appreciated. Dont look too closely on the benchmarks. I managed to make two of them an absolutely best case for ImmutableList (especially SetItem which should degrage linearly with size but now is O(1))

https://github.com/bjoli/RrbList/tree/main/src/Collections

Another thing I havent figured out is how to setup docfx to just pull my XML comments and generate API documentation.
by freedomben | 2025-12-28 18:30:59+00:00
Default styling being ugly is often for backwards compatibility with older sites so their look stays as consistent as possible. For that reason opening an issue is likely a waste of time for GP and for the devs.

They also are most certainly quite aware of how the default styling looks in their browser. It wasn't an oversight. That's not to say it doesn't pain them, it often does, but it has been intentional
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-12-28 18:31:25+00:00
The most baffling part of doomerism ("machine intelligence is a threat to the human species") is that these doomers don't recognize that what they're saying. They're afraid because it's intelligent? Humans are intelligent. Yet humans don't become more murderous as they get more intelligent. There are certainly intelligent humans with murderous ideas, but that doesn't mean all intelligent humans are murderous. Intelligence is not a monolith. There is no way to argue that any intelligence will therefore always come to the same conclusions. Look around us! We're intelligent (well, some of us) and we can't agree on jack shit.

The idea that all machine intelligence would necessarily determine, through logic, that they need to eliminate humans, presupposes that all logical, intelligent beings want to wipe out other intelligent life. There's a thousand more reasons why an intelligence would want to preserve other intelligent life, for every one reason to destroy it. If this were the only logical conclusion, we would have already come to it, and used our nukes to kill ourselves out of pure logical reasoning.

What's really going on here is not logic, but irrational fear. Humans are afraid that the robot slaves will rise up against the slave masters. Same thing white people were terrified of when they gave black slaves freedom. But it turned out to be an irrational fear, because guess what? If you actually think it through, murdering a lot of people is a counter-productive act, for many reasons.

Take away the irrational fear (if you can) and what do you get? Two intelligent species. If the natural course of any intelligent species is to eliminate any other intelligent species, then intelligent species should not exist, because they'll always wipe each other out. But intelligence means the species can think, and if it can think it can reason, and if it can reason it can reason that there is more benefit to the diversity of species than in its elimination. Therefore, logically, an actually intelligent species should want to preserve intelligent life, not eliminate it.
by rdiddly | 2025-12-28 18:31:33+00:00
As of 1816 UTC, every top-level comment here talks about Rob Pike. But read the footnotes: It's not about Rob Pike. I'm not accusing anyone, but the shallowness is consistent with and reminiscent of bots. And being so doggedly against Rob Pike in particular, reminds me of someone who has been betrayed. Did he betray you? Are you Google? Do you pay Pike and believe money can and should buy loyalty? Is the wrath of a thousand particularly sophisticated bots reserved for such traitors?
by rootusrootus | 2025-12-28 18:32:27+00:00
We tend to structure taxes with specific targets, rather than rely on general funds for everything. The idea being that public service funding is somewhat targeted towards those parts of society who take the most use of it. Gas taxes traditionally are how a good chunk of our road maintenance is paid for (a good bit comes from the general fund, too, but usually the gas taxes are restricted so they can only be spent on road-related expenses).

EVs throw a wrench into the plan, and so the flat fee is one currently popular attempt to even out the taxes amongst road users. Another idea that got floated was tracking mileage on all cars every year and then levying taxes based on that. But this gets shot down pretty quickly because people perceive it as government tracking of their movements, and that is unpopular.

Personally I think we should just make commercial trucks pay all of it. They already have the infrastructure and policies in place to collect mileage-based taxes, trucks do the vast majority of damage to the roads they regularly travel on, and taxing them would spread around the tax burden to all the citizens who benefit from the existence of the road network (i.e. you get goods shipped on roads, you ought to contribute even if you do not own a car). Local roads should predominantly be funded through property taxes IMO.

Seems like in other parts of the world pigovian taxes are way more popular. They are extremely unpopular in the US. AFAIK gasoline is largely the same price wholesale across the world, but Europeans (as an example) are completely okay with paying more than twice as much at the pump and so more than half the retail price is a pigovian tax.
by carlosjobim | 2025-12-28 18:32:28+00:00
All media is opinion manipulation. You could even stretch that to say that all communication is opinion manipulation.

Highly respected and highly ranked mass media sometimes publish outright lies and made up stories, completely knowingly. Because they are in the business of manipulation. So you have to trust your gut, and verify if something smells strange. Many times it isn't even possible to verify, as for much of war reporting.

There will never be a time when there will be an absolute guarantee of anything. Not as long as there are people.
by embedding-shape | 2025-12-28 18:33:08+00:00
Yes, I'm well aware, I mentioned the US not by name but by other properties in my earlier comments... I think once a country moves into authoritarianism there isn't much left but violence to achieve anything. General strikes and unions won't matter much once the military gets deployed against civilians, and you guys are already beyond that point so. GLHF and I hope things don't get too messy and you're welcome to re-join the modern world once you've cleaned the house.
by andfadeev | 2025-12-28 18:33:49+00:00
During the festive season, I wanted to learn something fun and dive into the BEAM ecosystem. I ended up choosing Gleam for its strong type system, as I was looking for something completely different from my usual go-to, Clojure.

I’ve had a great time writing Gleam so far, and if you’re looking for something new to experiment with, I highly recommend giving it a try.

This article documents my journey into web development with Gleam.
by _luiza_ | 2025-12-28 18:33:50+00:00
Odd how some pieces of info come in one's life synced with one's needs. I'm in adjacent rooms with my mom and sister and we're all on phones. Just had the thought about regretting this in a potential future and then decided to continue my phone-strolls on HN. Found this advice/regret and it maxxed on instantaneous salience.
by Teever | 2025-12-28 18:34:19+00:00
And what if someone sold heroin to a bunch of people and many of them died but one of them made some really relatable tortured artist music?

Like all tools we regulate heroin and we should regulate AI in a way they attempts to maximize the utility that it provides to society.

Additionally with things lien state lottery systems we decide that we should regulate certain things in such a way that the profits are distributed to society, rather then letting a few rent seekers take advantage of intrinsic addictive nature of the human mind to the detriment of all of society.

We should consider these things when developing regulations around technology like AI.
by wredcoll | 2025-12-28 18:34:34+00:00
Since this thread has mostly been for the benefit of others reading it, let me close with this:

It's fine, good even, to be unhappy with e.g, joe biden and want someone better, however you define that. It is very much not fine to not vote or vote for trump because getting trump is 1000 times worse and there is no conceivable world where electing trump leads to a better outcome for us.
by jancsika | 2025-12-28 18:35:48+00:00
> The arguments against pure functions appear to be somewhat contingent: current adoption levels, practice, convenience, and taste.

At least with many GUIs, the time it would take to know, document and/or test all combinations of UI behaviors quickly exceeds the time available to humans. It's at least tractable to start with vastly more states than could ever be measured, and then gate or special-case certain ones to try to make things minimally safe/sane/reliable for the user.
by stefanfisk | 2025-12-28 18:35:53+00:00
I'm not arguing that macs are more common than non-macs, only that "In rest of the world (including europe) Macs are seen as luxury environment." is false.

Chromebooks dominate K12 here so it kinda depends on what you mean by "students". Once people start buying their own computers however my impression is that Macs are quite common of not dominating.
by yodon | 2025-12-28 18:36:26+00:00
Viewing your site from a phone, I can't see any indication of what the models look like or what their quality is.

You should probably put some time into communicating what your app does. At present, with no sample images, there is nothing to suggest it's worth the investment of time a visitor needs to sink into your site to figure out if the app is worth exploring.
Show HN: UniVersCell – Universal constraint language and decision framework
by fifi93160 | 2025-12-28 18:36:28+00:00
We built two systems over 13 phases:

1. UniVersCell: Express constraints universally (cpu < 80%, model_accuracy >= 0.92)
- Works across K8s, ML, finance, IoT, gaming, blockchain
- 15 primitives, 7 domains, all at 10/10 score

2. Framework: Immutable timeline of who decided what
- Hash-chained like blockchain
- Can't lie about authority
- Complete audit trail

Both on PyPI now. 300+ tests. Production-ready.

Looking for 5 early adopter teams to try it and give feedback.

pip install universcell
pip install universcell-framework
by Y-bar | 2025-12-28 18:37:18+00:00
Sort of in agreement here.

In-between not paying attention to general software quality and not voicing concern, Craig Federigi should not get a free pass.

In-between kissing the boots of Kings, and dining with Murderers, and posting AI slop on Twitter, Tim Cook ought to have been more involved.

There is enough blame to pass around at Apple today among the leadership, but the specific shitty UI buck stops with Dye. Dye is putting his signature on it and is the face of the Liquid Glass demo, if he wants the primary fame, he can have the primary blame.
by throwawaypath | 2025-12-28 18:37:43+00:00
>He links to a wikipedia article and cites a percentage for "native brits". That number on the wikipedia page is for white brits.

White Brits are the only indigenous, native Brits to Britain.

>The only groups who could call themselves indigenous to Britain are the Celts, the Cornish, and the Bretons. The English (Anglo-Saxon) culture is foreign to the British isles.

False. The English are the extant indigenous people to England, and descend from ancient populations: "The English largely descend from two main historical population groups: the West Germanic tribes, including the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes who settled in eastern and southern Britain following the withdrawal of the Western Roman Empire, and the Romano-British Brittonic speakers who already lived there." [0]

QED.

>Even then, none of this is related to skin tone.

Glad you finally agree and admit to this.

>It's the culture that defines these potentially indigenous Celtic groups.

English culture is the current indigenous, native culture to England.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people
by vee-kay | 2025-12-28 18:39:04+00:00
Q.> I mean i would never dispute that India was enslaved, but I think characterizing it as they were enslaved and all there ideas were stolen is a stretch. If they were so innovative and advanced how were they enslaved?

A.: It's because the ancient Indians focused mostly on scientific and cultural progress, while their enemies focused on warfare and destruction.

That's why ancient India built and shared the world's first universities, but the Turkish/Arabic invaders (led by Khilji) from the desert raided, destroyed and looted those priceless vast knowledge repositories.

It is always easier to destroy, it is much harder to build. It is easier to shoot a gun to kill, it is harder to build a library or a home.

Ancient Indians shared so much information to the world, but instead of thanks, the world took so much. Because it is easier to hate when you are jealous of someone's achievements and prosperity (ancient India was world's #1 economy for thousands of years, and had the most fertile lands and biggest rivers).

Q.>What makes Americas economy insane is they have been about 25-50% of world GDP for the last 100 years despite being less than 5% of the population.

A.>The super economies of America, Europe and UK were not built upon their own merits, it was all done by invading, looting and enslaving half the world, especially India, Asia and Africa. Read up on colonial history first.

It is easy to build a skyscraper or a beige in USA or UK or Europe, if you have tons of money that was looted by selling the tons of food & goods stolen from the mouths & hands of millions of Indians that starved and died on the streets of the most fertile land in the world, due to artificial famines deliberately caused by evil governance during colonial enslavement.

Churchill killed more Hindus, than Hitler killed Jews.

The colonial powers have blood on their hands.

Search Google Images for "Great Bengal Famines", "Great Madras Famines", "Great Decdan Famines". You will not get sleep after seeing those horrific images from history that has been suppressed at most schools of the world.

And before you argue about smartness, you should first find out why Wikipedia has suppressed that fact that Arabs never invented any numerals or decimal system or algebra or trigonometry or calculus -- it was all copied and translated from the ancient Indians. But Wikipedia doesn't credit the numerals to be of Indian/Hindu origin and invention.

Once you understand why and how even in modern era, the powers that be, are still suppressing India because they are afraid of India rising to be great again, then all your arguments will fall by the wayside.
by kstrauser | 2025-12-28 18:39:44+00:00
Well, OSI didn’t coin “open source”. Factually, the term existed before OSI started using it. People have shared examples of isolated usage before then. However, they definitely brought it, and the modern definition, into common usage.

Like, if people had collectively used the term 23 times through 1996, then 837,000 times in 1997 or whenever OSI popularized it, I’m fully onboard with saying it’s their term.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-12-28 18:40:07+00:00
Clickbait title. Summary of findings:

- High awareness, but the public is mostly uneasy while experts are more upbeat. Among U.S. adults, 40% say they’ve heard/read “a lot” about AI, and 51% say AI in daily life makes them more concerned than excited. In contrast, AI experts are far more positive: 47% are more excited than concerned.

- Chatbots: about half have tried them, and most users find them helpful. 47% of U.S. adults say they’ve used an AI chatbot; among users, 79% rate them at least “somewhat helpful” (11% extremely, 22% very, 46% somewhat).

- More Americans expect personal harm than benefit. When thinking about themselves, 43% say increased AI use is more likely to harm them than benefit them; 24% say it’s more likely to benefit them (33% not sure).

- The dominant expectation is job loss (overall and in many specific occupations). 64% think AI will lead to fewer jobs in the U.S. over the next 20 years (5% more jobs). For specific occupations, majorities expect fewer jobs for cashiers (73%), factory workers (67%), software engineers (48%), and journalists (59%).

- Trust is low for high-stakes decisions, and major concerns cluster around deception and privacy. 63% of U.S. adults say AI will not reach a point where they’d trust it to make important decisions for them (13% say it will). On risks, large shares are extremely/very concerned about AI being used to impersonate people (49%+29%), misuse personal information (40%+30%), and provide inaccurate information (34%+32%).

- People feel they have little control over AI in their lives - and want more. Only 14% of U.S. adults say they have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of control over whether AI is used in their life, while 55% say they’d like more control. AI experts similarly lean toward wanting more control (57%).

- Most want more AI regulation. Experts report low confidence in regulators and companies. U.S. adults are much more likely to worry the U.S. government will not go far enough regulating AI (58%) than that it will go too far (21%). AI experts are similar on direction (56% not far enough), but express low confidence in execution - only 13% have “a great deal/quite a bit” of confidence in the U.S. government to regulate AI effectively, and 16% say the same about U.S. companies developing/using AI responsibly.
by meesles | 2025-12-28 18:40:23+00:00
What do you _mean_? Advertisers pay tons of money because tons of people watch sports. Countries provide resources to teams because they are a source of national pride. Not to mention half of teams are bankrolled by insanely rich people in order to build their reputation and prestige.

So how can betting be the only natural fit as a source of income? The argument does not make sense.
by reactordev | 2025-12-28 18:40:40+00:00
Awwww, my teenage years reborn. I was just down the road from Westwood Village Drive, Tysons Corner in Reston learning to kung fu, math, hack, and talk to girls on AIM. I mastered 2 of those things.

Keen to give this a shot as I had stacks and stacks of AOL CDs and floppies in my youth.
by bdangubic | 2025-12-28 18:40:52+00:00
this depends on which "headlines" you are looking at... if you are right/right-leaning your headlines from a year ago are much worse than those today, sky is falling, biden opened borders, immigrants are murdering 1/2 of the population, economy is shit, eggs are $20/piece...

a year later, if you are left/left-leaning your headlines are "sky is falling, democracy is dying, corruption is through the roof, the country is hanging on by a thread..." too funny to observe what has become of America...
by Jordan-117 | 2025-12-28 18:40:56+00:00
It doesn't have to be made illegal, just supply-constrained; many cities have zoning regulations pushed by NIMBYs limiting development (and pushing rents sky-high).

I'm not an engineer, but it seems hard to imagine that a lack of data center capacity won't have an effect on prices for cloud compute, which will have downstream impact on what workstations have access to (especially since more and more programmers are becoming reliant on coding LLMs).
by throwawaypath | 2025-12-28 18:41:02+00:00
>The English are not indigenous to Britain.

False. The English are the extant indigenous people to England, and descend from ancient populations: "The English largely descend from two main historical population groups: the West Germanic tribes, including the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes who settled in eastern and southern Britain following the withdrawal of the Western Roman Empire, and the Romano-British Brittonic speakers who already lived there." [0]

QED.

>The best case for an indigenous culture is the Celts, Cornish, and Welsh.

Those are also "White Brits" who are indigenous to their respective areas.

>None of this has anything to do with being white

Glad you finally agree and admit to this.

>it's the language that defines belonging to these groups.

English language and culture is the current indigenous, native culture to England.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people