MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hammock | 2025-12-05 01:56:28+00:00
Thanks boss, they were the same company for a while and then got spun off. There is so much confusion that AI even has a hard time keeping them straight if you aren’t careful.

Anyway it doesn’t matter the name for the purpose of my argument. And lol at “unfounded conspiracy theory” it’s only a “conspiracy” that Blackrock is buying homes (crucially, no one is actually suggesting that, except the people who are confused between Blackrock and Blackstone), because Blackstone definitely is buying homes.
by mrguyorama | 2025-12-05 01:57:50+00:00
There is a distinction between "What the universe is made of or how it works just happens to be really compatible with how math describes things" and "The universe is just "running" math and we discovered that math and use it for other things"

But like, words stop working at these levels of rigor.

What the hell does "The universe is made of math" mean? How can something be made of a field of study? Where is the "Addition" particle? How does 1+1=2 give rise to what we see as an electron?

Like it's bad enough dealing with "quantum fields" that might be "real" or maybe are just really nice mathematical objects that happen to be useful for calculating the future.

Does math take up space? Does space take up math? Does blue afraid of seven? Can I eat integrals or will they go straight to my thighs?

If the universe is "made of" math, what is the consequence? For example, the consequence of being made of "quantum fields" in my lay mind is that we get observations like entanglement and the hilarity of whatever is going on in the higgs field.

>Then again, I am a Pythagorean.

Ah, let me just move this sqrt(2) out of the way real quick :P

I want simple rules because I am a simple man, and if those simple rules happen to actually be math, that sucks for me because the "simple rules" are really hard math.
by al_borland | 2025-12-05 01:58:52+00:00
The Stanford admission process could lead to a higher percentage of people with conditions that are classified as disabilities, but give them an edge.

Albert Einstein was a smart guy and very accomplished… yet his wife had to paint is house door red so he knew where he lived. He very likely had what we would now call ASD. While he was brilliant and a top university would love people like that, he needed some accommodations, such as a red front door.
by Libidinalecon | 2025-12-05 01:59:12+00:00
This is exactly the kind of thing you would expect to happen and to feel in an insane unsustainable bubble.

I am much more worried looking at these ridiculous prices on newegg that memory will be dirt cheap 3 years from now because the economy has imploded from this mass stupidity.

I was blown away by Gemini 3 at first but now from using it I have ran into all the dumb things it does because it is a large language model.

What I notice getting shorter is the time between the frontier model making me feel I will have no job prospects in the future to the model reminding me that LLMs are fundamentally flawed.

It is because I want to believe in AGI. I love the holy shit moment of a new model, it is so exciting. I don't want to face the reality that we have made an enormous mistake. I want to believe OpenAI will take over computing because the alternative of some kind of Great AI winter bubble burst would be such a horrible experience to go through.
by refactor_master | 2025-12-05 01:59:13+00:00
If you've ever read a blog on trading when LSTMs came out, you'd have seen all sorts of weird stuff with predicting the price at t+1 on a very bad train/test split, where the author would usually say "it predicts t+1 with 99% accuracy compared to t", and the graph would be an exact copy with a t+1 offset.

So eye-balling the graph looks great, almost perfect even, until you realize that in real-time the model would've predicted yesterday's high on today's market crash and you'd have lost everything.
by IgorPartola | 2025-12-05 02:00:10+00:00
You can call them planning if you want or pre-planning. But I would encourage you to play with the API version of your model of choice to see exactly what this looks like. It’s kind of like a human’s internal monologue: “got an email from my boss asking to write unit tests for the analytics API. First I have to look at the implementation to know how exactly it actually functions, then write out what kinds of tests make sense, then implement the tests. I should write a TODO list of these steps.”

It is essentially a way to expand the prompt further. You can achieve the same exact thing by turning off the “thinking” feature and just being more detailed and step by step in your prompt but this is faster.

My guess is that the next evolution of this will be models that do an edit or review step after to catch if any of the constraints were broken. But best I can tell a reasoning model can be approximated by doing two passes of a non-reasoning model: first pass you give it the user prompt with instructions that boil down to “make sense of this prompt and formulate a plan” and the second pass you give it the original prompt, the plan, and an explanation that the plan is to implement the original prompt using the plan.
by psviderski | 2025-12-05 02:00:59+00:00
Uncloud is a bit lower-level, CLI-only (for now), with no central server. If some nodes go offline, the rest keep working and stay manageable.

It also has the WireGuard overlay networking built in so containers across machines get direct connectivity without having to map ports to the host. For example, securely access a database running on another machine. This also allows you to horizontally scale your services to multiple replicas on different machines and distribute traffic between them with minimal configuration.

The current state of Uncloud is the primitives and foundation that could be used to build a more higher-level PaaS-like solution such as Coolify.
by 0manrho | 2025-12-05 02:01:15+00:00
> you will have trained your model on market patterns that might not be in place anymore

How is that relevant to what was proposed? If it's trading and training on 2010 data, what relevance does todays market dynamics and regulations have?

Which further begs the question, what's the point of this exercise?

Is it to develop a model than compete effectively in today's market? If so then yeah, the 2010 trading/training idea probably isn't the best idea for the reasons you've outlined.

Or is it to determine the capacity of an AI to learn and compete effectively within any given arbitrary market/era? If so, then today's dynamics/constraints are irrelevant unless you're explicitly trying to train/trade on todays markets (which isn't what the person you're replying to proposed, but is obviously a valid desire and test case to evaluate in it's own right)

Or is it evaluating its ability to identify what those constraints/limitations are and then build strategies based on it? In which case it doesn't matter when you're training/trading so much as your ability to feed it accurate and complete data for that time period be it today, or 15 years ago or whenever, which is no small ask.
by zzyzxd | 2025-12-05 02:01:16+00:00
Exactly. Once I was connecting to my VPN in AWS and was totally prepared for 90% of the websites to throw human verification at me. Then a faked cloudflare one almost got me. It was 3AM and my brain was barely functioning. (it didn't work, only because it instructed me to run a PowerShell command and I was on macOS).
by filleduchaos | 2025-12-05 02:01:49+00:00
> What's the "?" doing? Why doesn't it compile without it?

I don't understand this line of thought at all. "You have to learn the language's syntax to understand it!"...and so what? All programming language syntax needs to be learned to be understood. I for one was certainly not born with C-style syntax rattling around in my brain.

To me, a lot of the discussion about learning/using Rust has always sounded like the consternation of some monolingual English speakers when trying to learn other languages, right down to the "what is this hideous sorcery mark that I have to use to express myself correctly" complaints about things like diacritics.
by timschmidt | 2025-12-05 02:02:58+00:00
> Rust makes it easy to write correct software quickly, but it’s slower for writing incorrect software that still works for an MVP.

I don't find that to be the case. It may be slower for a month or two while you learn how to work with the borrow checker, but after the adjustment period, the ideas flow just as quickly as any other language.

Additionally, being able to tell at a glance what sort of data functions require and return saves a ton of reading and thinking about libraries and even code I wrote myself last week. And the benefits of Cargo in quickly building complex projects cannot be overstated.

All that considered, I find Rust to be quite a bit faster to write software in than C++, which is probably it's closest competitor in terms of capabilities. This can be seen at a macro scale in how quickly the Rust library ecosystem has grown.
by T-A | 2025-12-05 02:03:19+00:00
If all goes "well", starting work on a new DDR5 fab now would result in having it ready to go when DDR6 hits the market:

https://www.techpowerup.com/339178/ddr6-memory-arrives-in-20...

So the supply side won't get better until about 2028.

I suppose you could hope for an AI crash bad enough to wipe out OpenAI, but unless it happens within the next few months, it may still be too late to profitably restore the DDR5 production lines now being converted to HBM, even if the broader economy doesn't tank:

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/if-ai-is-bubble-econo...

Perhaps not coincidentally, that Reuters article was published the same day OpenAI announced that it had cornered an estimated 40% of the world's DRAM production:

https://openai.com/index/samsung-and-sk-join-stargate/

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/dram/openais-star...
by rahimnathwani | 2025-12-05 02:03:21+00:00
"If you would find wearing noise blocking ear muffs, or sitting on a bouncy chair, or using a typing instrument instead of writing, improves your performance on a test, then yes that should be permitted."

The thing these examples have in common is that they don't give you any inherent advantage that invalidates the purpose of the test. (Assuming it's not a handwriting test, or an 'ignoring distractions' test.)

I would group all of these along with the examples I gave: corrective glasses, and wheelchairs. They should be available to all students, without diagnosis or discrimination.

If you think limited time on tests doesn't serve a useful purpose, then why give 'extra' time to only some students, and not to all students?
by IgorPartola | 2025-12-05 02:03:35+00:00
They have SOTA models from OpenAI and Anthropic and Google and you can access them at a 5.5% premium. What you get is the ability to seamlessly switch between them. And also when one is down you can instantly switch to another. Whether that is valuable to you or not is use case dependent. But it isn’t without value.

What it does have I think is a problem that TaskRabbit had: you can hire a house cleaner through TR but once you find a good one you can just work directly with them and save the middleman fee. So OR is great for experimenting with a ton of models to see what is the cheapest one that still performs the tasks you need but then you no longer need OR unless it is for reliability.
by ericdykstra | 2025-12-05 02:03:47+00:00
There is a bit too much emphasis on the relationship between the manager and individual subordinates as the only thing a manager does. It's certainly the relationship that programmers have with their manager, but it ignores the reason why managers exist at all. In the end, managers are part of the translation layer between the company's top-level goal of acquiring customers and improving profitability and code that gets written and deployed.

The day-to-day responsibilities of a manager vary by company, but in essence can be boiled down to: Take priorities that are handed down from above -> apply those priorities as efficiently as possible to the team -> assist in execution.

The manager might be part of the discussion of priorities and clarify them before relaying them to their team, they may actually have quite a bit of freedom of interpreting the priorities, or they may literally just be a task-assigner-and-enforcer. The manager might also have technical leadership authority, architecture responsibility, or anything else, but these are still all in service of coordinating a team to produce the best output possible.

How a manager relates to their subordinates is important, of course, and the best managers treat their subordinates as individuals that have different needs. There's a responsibility to give them room to grow, keep them happy, and keep them productive as part of the job, but that alone isn't the job.
by kmeisthax | 2025-12-05 02:04:32+00:00
I would love to know who the hell thought adding "brighter than white" range to HDR was a good idea. Or, even worse, who the hell at Apple thought implementing that should happen by way of locking UI to the standard range. Even if you have a properly mastered HDR video (or image), and you've got your brightness set to where it doesn't hurt to look at, it still makes all the UI surrounding that image look grey. If I'm only supposed to watch HDR in fullscreen, where there's no surrounding UI, then maybe you should tone-map to SDR until I fullscreen the damn video?
by kibwen | 2025-12-05 02:04:56+00:00
Erlang is great for distributed systems. But my bugbear is when people look at how distributed systems are inherently parallel, and then look at a would-be concurrent program and go, "I know, I'll make my program concurrent by making it into a distributed system".

But distributed systems are hard. If your system isn't inherently distributed, then don't rush towards a model of concurrency that emulates a distributed system. For anything on a single machine, prefer structured concurrency.
by RVuRnvbM2e | 2025-12-05 02:05:07+00:00
> There's also no way to shrink the memory underlying a slice.

Sorry, that is incorrect: https://pkg.go.dev/slices#Clip

> It's a common newbie mistake to think they do work like that, and write "append(s, ...)" instead of "s = append(s, ...)". It might even randomly work a lot of the time.

"append(s, ...)" without the assignment doesn't even compile. So your entire post seems like a strawman?

https://go.dev/play/p/icdOMl8A9ja

> So (generalizing) Go won't implement a feature that makes mistakes harder, if it makes the language more complicated

No, I think it is more that the compromise of complicating the language that is always made when adding features is carefully weighed in Go. Less so in other languages.
by danvc | 2025-12-05 02:05:20+00:00
Long story short:

After going through two layoffs, I realized I had the same painful problem both times: I lost all my: - contacts, - personal messages, - and important information that were tied to my company email.

None of these were business-related — they were personal, and yet I had no way to recover them once my access was removed.

Because of that, I decided to build a solution (for free) that lets people safely sync their accounts to a platform where messages, attachments, and contacts are backed up.

If they ever lose access to their original account, they can quickly and easily recover everything.

The most interesting feature is that, if you already lost something (by deleting in your end) but some friend of yours sync its account.. you'll recover it back

I’m currently looking for 5 users to test this POC (for freeeeeeee).

Would you be willing to test the platform for me and share your feedback? Specifically:

What you think overall What worked well (and what didn’t) What could be improved Any issues or bugs you find Your feedback would be incredibly valuable and would directly help me make the product better.

Thank you so much in advance! https://app.trevally.io
by benmmurphy | 2025-12-05 02:05:21+00:00
agreement on raising the minimum wage is suspect because its a controversial econ position and presumably some form of UBI or 'negative income tax' is a much better alternative which would have the redistributive effects of a higher minimum wage without the 'tariff' downsides. like we have recently heard why its a very bad idea to artificially raise prices but apparently we are unable to extend this analysis to the minimum wage.
by josephg | 2025-12-05 02:05:38+00:00
Lately rust is my primary language, and I couldn't agree more with this.

I've taken to using typescript for prototyping - since its fast (enough), and its trivial to run both on the server (via bun) or in a browser. The type system is similar enough to rust that swapping back and forth is pretty easy. And there's a great package ecosystem.

I'll get something working, iterate on the design, maybe go through a few rewrites and when I'm happy enough with the network protocol / UI / data layout, pull out rust, port everything across and optimize.

Its easier than you think to port code like this. Our intuition is all messed up when it comes to moving code between languages because we look at a big project and think of how long it took to write that in the first place. But rewriting code from imperative language A to B is a relatively mechanical process. Its much faster than you think. I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often.
by nu11ptr | 2025-12-05 02:06:15+00:00
> you sort of come to understand "this goo at the end of the expression is just coercing the return value into whatever alternate goo the function signature dictates it needs", which is not at all the same thing as careful error handling.

I think the problem is Rust does a great job at providing the basic mechanics of errors, but then stops a bit short.

First, I didn't realize until relatively recently that any `String` can be coerced easily into a `Box<dyn Error + Send + Sync>` (which should have a type alias in stdlib lol) using `?`, so if all you need is strings for your users, it is pretty simple to adorn or replace any error with a string before returning.

Second, Rust's incomplete error handling is why I made my crate, `uni_error`, so you can essentially take any Result/Error/Option and just add string context and be done with it. I believe `anyhow` can mostly do the same.

I do sorta like Go's error wrapping, but I think with either anyhow or my crate you are quickly back in a better situation as you gain compile time parameter checking in your error messages.

I agree Rust has over complicated error handling and I don't think `thiserror` and `anyhow` with their libraries vs applications distinction makes a lot of sense. I find my programs (typically API servers) need the the equivalent of `anyhow` + `thiserror` (hence why I wrote `uni_error` - still new and experimental, and evolving).

An example of error handling with `uni_error`:

use uni_error::*; fn do_something() -> SimpleResult<Vec<u8>> { std::fs::read("/tmp/nonexist") .context("Oops... I wanted this to work!") } fn main() { println!("{}", do_something().unwrap_err()); }

Ref: https://crates.io/crates/uni_error
by dghlsakjg | 2025-12-05 02:06:22+00:00
> That should be so obvious that I wonder if it was DIY by the pilot.

I don't know how the regulatory environment is in the UK for experimental craft (this is considered to be "experimental" category in the US and Canada), but yes, the idea behind an experimental is that everything is DIY.

I have an experimental, and I can do close to anything I want. What I can't do is complain when my plane crashes because I installed a part that isn't fit for duty. I, as the owner and operator, am the one that signs off on the airworthiness of the plane.

E.G. If I install a Cessna part on my plane, and that is the cause of a crash, that is my fault from the point of view of the FAA.

There may be legal considerations outside of airworthiness and flight rules, but as far as the FAA is concerned (or would be if this had happened in the US), the manufacturer of a part is off the hook once the thing is installed on an experimental.
by xpe | 2025-12-05 02:07:07+00:00
> Most of these students are claiming mental health conditions and learning disabilities, like anxiety, depression, and ADHD. ... Obviously, something is off here. The idea that some of the most elite, selective universities in America—schools that require 99th percentile SATs and sterling essays—would be educating large numbers of genuinely learning disabled students is clearly bogus.

"Obviously"? "is clearly bogus?"

Not to me. I see too much rhetoric and assumptions. In an article in Reason magazine, I expect more -- to demonstrate careful thinking that cuts through lazy common-sense thinking.

To make sense of a situation, one of my favorite tools is simple: a causal diagram(s). See [1]. This requires effort, and it should. Making a useful, communicable model that forms the foundation for your argument takes practice. Here's a disability-related example: [2]

I want to live in a world where causal models are demanded by readers.

[1]: https://thesystemsthinker.com/wp-content/uploads/images/volu...

[2]: https://ibb.co/5XcGyLK0
by bigbuppo | 2025-12-05 02:07:45+00:00
When the AI bubble pops, it's going to take the good parts of AI out with it.

Capitalism has never been about the survival of the fittest. That's just weird Nietzschean-Libertarian fantasy where someone ends up blaming the lack of truly free markets for their inability to get a date.

Any large building in a rural area will be used as a barn if it has no other useful purpose. It's kind of hilarious when I pass by the old AT&T long lines facility being used as a hay barn.
by adrianwaj | 2025-12-05 02:08:42+00:00
Well, if there was a way to monetize bot traffic, wouldn't that be useful? And bots may be willing to pay, given they are training on your data. So getting on the receiving end of the trillion dollar paywall... not useless at all.

I think the idea was for stablecoins to be used to sell government bonds and treasuries. Interesting use cases for digital nomads.. assessing possible geographic locations according to the strength of their stablecoins and government integration.

So it's about micropayments and making them viable and useful. That's still the 'cold fusion' of today's internet. I personally think they should be opt-in and scalable to one's generosity/means. If people are willing/able to pay for something, they should.

Blockchain just needs to be implemented better, that's all.

"Ping the AI and then charge it when it comes" is the future, quite possibly.
by rendx | 2025-12-05 02:08:57+00:00
I think the author, an American, is confusing common law and civil law. The ruling's language may be overly broad but in civil law countries like all of Europe, while it may be cited in other legal cases _as a supporting argument by one side or the other_, it will not fundamentally change law and it's not the catastrophy the post author makes it sound like.

> There’s nothing inherently in the law or the ruling that limits its conclusions to “advertisements.” The same underlying factors would apply to any third party content on any website that is subject to the GDPR.

False. A European court's conclusions are specifically around the case it is ruling about, so it is inherently limited to the exact circumstances of that case, without the need for it to specify that. They do not set precedent.
by kmeisthax | 2025-12-05 02:09:02+00:00
Funnily enough HDR already has to detect this problem, because most HDR monitors literally do not have the power circuitry or cooling to deliver a complete white screen at maximum brightness.

My idea is: for each frame, grayscale the image, then count what percentage of the screen is above the standard white level. If more than 20% of the image is >SDR white level, then tone-map the whole video to the SDR white point.