MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by n1xis10t | 2025-12-04 01:38:42+00:00
Cool! Does ranking use term proximity of any kind, or anything similar to pagerank?

I only get 45 results for cheese. I should get far more results for cheese from an index of 2 million pages. How many pages are indexed? Is it actually 52K pages? Is the demo smaller on purpose?

What is your long term goal, to develop this into a general web search tool, or to have this be an Elasticsearch competitor that a bunch of people use for their own data?

Also since this is about search engines, I need to share this interesting article: https://archive.org/details/search-timeline
by apatheticonion | 2025-12-04 01:39:13+00:00
Same. I started writing one as a weekend project and got as far as having a GH repo with releases that mirror the binaries of the tools that I use, normalizing the archives so they can be installed in the same way. It auto-generates a release whenever the project authors update their projects.

https://github.com/alshdavid/install-scripts/releases?q=node...

https://github.com/alshdavid/install-scripts/releases

All of the binaries here are expected to be standalone/portable installations, so you can download/extract the archive and just run the binary.

curl -L --url https://github.com/alshdavid/install-scripts/releases/download/terraform-1.14.1/terraform-1.14.1-linux-amd64.tar.gz | tar -xvzf - -C $HOME/.local/bin $HOME/.local/bin/terraform --help

I haven't yet written a package manager yet, but I was planning for it to just do the same thing as above but figure out your OS/ARCH, handle extraction and also offer a PATH update system so you can run `eval $(xpkg env)` and PATH is updated automatically.
by itake | 2025-12-04 01:39:16+00:00
Tech (and finance) workers have always had a surplus of wages enabling a comfortable life and plenty left over for investment. Personally, my 'worst' year investing my wages is when I only saved 50%. Currently, I save 70% of my after-tax income. As a result, "double your money" is a very meaningful number.

If your income is closer to average (and stagnating inflation), there isn't much money to double.
by andrei_says_ | 2025-12-04 01:40:29+00:00
My dismissal I think indicates exhaustion from the additional work I’d need to do to make an LLM write my code, annoyance at its inaccuracies, and disgust at the massive scam and grift that is the LLM influencers.

Writing code via a LLM feels like writing with a wet noodle. It’s much faster and write what I mean, myself, with the terse was and precision of my own thought.
by Aerroon | 2025-12-04 01:40:42+00:00
I found it useful for learning to write prose. There's nothing quite like instantaneous feedback when learning. The downside was that I hit the limit of the LLM's capabilities really quickly. They're just not that good at writing prose (overly flowery and often nonsensical).

LLMs were great for getting started though. If you've never tried writing before, then learning a few patterns goes a long way. ("He verbed, verbing a noun.")
by nikkwong | 2025-12-04 01:40:51+00:00
As another Seattle SWE, I'll go against the grain and say that I think AI is going to change the nature of the market for labor for SWE's and my guess would be for the negative. People need to remember that the ability of AI in code generation today is the worst that it ever will be, and it's only going to improve from here. If you were to just judge by the sentiment on HN, you would think no coder worth their weight was using this in the real world—but my experience on a few teams over the last two years has been exactly the opposite—people are often embarrassed to admit it but they are using it all the time. There are many engineers at Meta that "no longer code" by hand and do literally all of their problem solving with AI.

I remember last year or even earlier this year feeling like the models had plateau'd and I was of the mindset that these tools would probably forever just augment SWEs without fully replacing them. But with Opus 4.5, gemini 3, et al., these models are incredibly powerful and more and more SWEs are leaning on them more and more—a trend that may slow down or speed up—but is never going to backslide. I think people that don't generally see this are fooling themselves.

Sure, there are problem areas—it misses stuff, there are subtle bugs, it's not good for every codebase, for every language, for every scenario. There is some sloppiness that is hard to catch. But this is true with humans too. Just remember, the ability of the models today is the worst that it will ever be—it's only going to get better. And it doesn't need to be perfect to rapidly change the job market for SWE's—it's good enough to do enough of the tasks for enough mid-level SWEs at enough companies to reshape the market.

I'm sure I'll get downvoted to hell for this comment; but I think SWEs (and everyone else for that matter) would best practice some fiscal austerity amongst themselves because I would imagine the chance of many of us being on the losing side of this within the next decade is non-trivial. I mean, they've made all of the progress up to now in essentially the last 5 years and the models are already incredibly capable.
by gjm11 | 2025-12-04 01:40:54+00:00
Right. But (1) no longer needing the skill of thinking seems not obviously a good thing, and (2) in scenarios where in fact there is no need for humans to think any more I would be seriously worried about doomy outcomes.

(Maybe no longer needing the skill of thinking would be fine! Maybe what happens then is that people who like thinking can go on thinking, and people who don't like thinking and were already pretty bad at it outsource their thinking to AI systems that do it better, and everything's OK. But don't you think it sounds like the sort of transformation where if someone described it and said "... what could possibly go wrong?" you would interpret that as sarcasm? It doesn't seem like the sort of future where we could confidently expect that it would all be fine.)
by jliptzin | 2025-12-04 01:40:55+00:00
My friends and I have always wondered as we've gotten older what's going to be the new tech that the younger generation seems to know and understand innately while the older generations remain clueless and always need help navigating (like computers/internet for my parents' generation and above). I am convinced that thing is AI.

Kids growing up today are using AI for everything, whether or not that's sanctioned or if it's ultimately helpful or harmful to their intellectual growth. I think the jury is still out on that. But I do remember growing up in the 90s, spending a lot of time on the computer, older people would remark how I'll have no social skills, I won't be able to write cursive or do arithmetic in my head, won't learn any real skills, etc, turns out I did just fine and now those same people always have to call me for help when they run into the smallest issue with technology.

I think a lot of people here are going to become roadkill if they refuse to learn how to use these new tools. I just built a web app in 3 weeks with only prompts to Claude Code, I didn't write a single line of code, and it works great. It's pretty basic, but probably would have taken me 3+ months instead of 3 weeks doing it the old fashioned way. If you tried it once a year ago and have written it off, a lot has changed since then and the tools continue to improve every month. I really think that eventually no one will be checking code just like hardly anyone checks the assembly output of a compiler anymore.

You have to understand how the context window works, how to establish guardrails so you're not wasting time repeating the same things over and over again, force it to check its own work with lots of tests, etc. It's really a game changer when you can just say in one prompt "write me an admin dashboard that displays users, sessions, and orders with a table and chart going back 30 days" or "wire up my site for google analytics, my tag code is XXXXXXX" and it just works.
by venturecruelty | 2025-12-04 01:41:00+00:00
I mean, I would still hate to be replaced by some chat bot (without being fairly compensated because, societally, it's kind of a dick move for every company to just fire thousands of people and then nobody can find a job elsewhere), but I wouldn't be as mad if the damn tools actually worked. They don't. It's one thing to be laid off, it's another to be laid off, ostensibly, to be replaced by some tool that isn't even actually thinking or reasoning, just crapping out garbage.

And I will not be replying to anyone who trots out their personal AI success story. I'm not interested.
by throw0101a | 2025-12-04 01:41:23+00:00
> They need access to the private key for that, which ACME (and other certificate signing protocols in general) doesn't share with the CA.

Modern TLS doesn't even rely on the privacy of the private key 'as much' as it used: nowadays with (perfect) forward secrecy it's mainly used to establish trust, and after which the two parties generate transient session keys.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy

So even if the private key is compromised sometime in the future, past conversation cannot be decrypted.
by stevenhuang | 2025-12-04 01:41:56+00:00
> But an LLM is that man

And the common rebuttal is that the system -- the room, the rules, the man -- understands chinese.

The system in this case is the LLM. The system understands.

It may be a weak level of understanding compared to human understanding. But it is understanding nonetheless. Difference in degree, not kind.
by bpev | 2025-12-04 01:42:15+00:00
I remember a lecture from a university art class I took around 2010. The professor and class were focused on imagining the future. For context, at this time I was still printing out directions from MapQuest because I was still using a RAZR phone.

We had a week focused on locative media, and one thing that stuck with me was when the professor said "My question is not whether self-driving cars will become reality, but how long it will take before it's illegal for people to drive". That class felt pretty wild at the time, but now it's always humorous to me when stuff like this comes out. I remember when Black Mirror got popular, and I had already had lectures on all their shocking plot points.
Show HN: EchoCopi Local-first, model-agnostic alternative to Google Antigravity
by sparksupernova | 2025-12-04 01:44:12+00:00
I've been building an AI agent framework for myself for the last year because I got tired of re-explaining context to my LLM every morning.

Google just announced "Antigravity" to solve this, which looks amazing, but it locks you into their cloud and their models (Gemini). I wanted something that:

1. Runs 100% locally on my machine. 2. Works with any model (I switch between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4o). 3. Persists memory in simple JSON files I can edit/version control.

I call it *EchoCopi*. It's a Python-based "memory organ" + a background worker script that executes tasks while I sleep.

I'm releasing the core memory module as open source (MIT) today. I'm also finalizing a "Full Autonomy" suite (background worker + VS Code integration) that I'll release later this month.

*Core Repo:* https://github.com/SparkSupernova/EchoCopi *Full Suite:* (Coming late Dec 2025)

Happy to answer questions about the architecture or how I use it to maintain a "sentient" coding partner.
by alwillis | 2025-12-04 01:44:12+00:00
> I don't think there are any. It is likely just a social media hype.

It's not hype. Here's a comprehensive review of a lot of terminals and Ghostty did very well--"State of Terminal Emulators in 2025: The Errant Champions" [1]

[1]: https://www.jeffquast.com/post/state-of-terminal-emulation-2...
by kragen | 2025-12-04 01:46:30+00:00
Thanks! It does better than I expected on tricky input like [0, 1/2). It seems like there are a lot of special cases, though. It does indeed remove parentheses from the output in some cases but not others.

Probably figuring out how to write things in AsciiMath is more trouble than copying and pasting them from Wikipedia though. (The alt text on equation images is the LaTeX source preceded with \displaystyle.)

How do you do \bigg(\big((4x + 2)x + 1\big)x - 3\bigg)x + 5 in AsciiMath? (((4x + 2)x + 1)x - 3)x + 5 makes all the parens the same size.
by leoc | 2025-12-04 01:46:48+00:00
Steve Wozniak was supposedly invoved in the design of ADB, but it's so hard to confirm that that I'm starting to wonder if it's a myth. The closest to confirmation I can find is a reference to "the ADB, created by Steve Wozniak" on Bill Buxton's input-device timeline https://www.billbuxton.com/inputTimeline.html (which at least dates back to 2011 https://web.archive.org/web/20110410220530/http://billbuxton... ) but there's no citation to support it. Any ideas, anyone?
by harrall | 2025-12-04 01:47:16+00:00
I strongly disagree with this approach in life.

I am “morally lucky” because every decision I make is to ensure I can always be morally lucky, 10 years later. I take certain kinds of jobs in certain kinds of industries.

It’s my same approach to reducing stress or getting things done. I never get a parking ticket not because I’m amazing — it’s because I know if I have to go out later and move my car, I’ll forget, so I’ll just park right the first time. 10 years later and no parking tickets and no stress — if someone tells me “oh you’re just lucky,” I can only chuckle.
by shawneechase | 2025-12-04 01:47:31+00:00
Anthropic recently introduced Tool Search, which lets Claude look up tools dynamically instead of loading everything into the context window. It’s a promising idea, especially if you’re working with large tool catalogs.

We maintain ~4,000 agent-optimized tools at Arcade.dev (Gmail, Slack, GitHub, Drive, Zendesk, Salesforce, etc.), so we ran a simple evaluation: 25 straightforward tasks that normally achieve ~100% retrieval accuracy when the toolset is small (<50 tools).

Examples:

“Send an email to my colleague…” → expect Gmail_SendEmail

“Post a message to #general…” → expect Slack_SendMessage

“Schedule a meeting…” → expect GoogleCalendar_CreateEvent

We tested both built-in search modes (regex + BM25) and counted a task as correct only if the expected tool appeared in the top-K returned references (K=5). We did not test whether Claude then chose the tool correctly or generated good parameters — just the retrieval.

Results:

- Regex search: 56% (14/25)

- BM25 search: 64% (16/25)

Some tools were consistently found (Calendar, GitHub, Docs, Spotify, Salesforce). Others — including the most common ones — were not retrieved reliably (Gmail_SendEmail, Slack_SendMessage, Zendesk_CreateTicket, ClickUp_CreateTask, HubSpot_CreateContact, etc.).

Our read: Tool Search is architecturally the right direction (defer tool loading, avoid context bloat, JIT retrieval). But at ~60% retrieval accuracy across a large catalog, it’s not production-ready for agents that must reliably choose the right tool and parameters.

Results + full data + source code are here: https://blog.arcade.dev/anthropic-tool-search-4000-tools-tes...

Curious whether others have tried Tool Search at scale or have observed similar behavior?
by aetherspawn | 2025-12-04 01:49:01+00:00
I buy and use the stupid keyboard just for this inconvenience.

Although to be honest not the worst keyboard I own, but not the best, I probably rate it like a 7/10.

It would be a 5/10 if the Bluetooth wasn’t so magically seamless.

The low profile means I can get by without a wrist pillow.
by eru | 2025-12-04 01:49:16+00:00
Oh, I should have been more careful in my formulation:

There are organisations that are generally competent, and there are places that are less competent. It's not all that uncommon for the whole organisation to be generally incompetent.

The saddest places (for me) are those where almost every individual you talk to seems generally competent, but judging by their output the company might as well be stuffed by idiots. Something in the way they are organised suppresses the competence. (I worked at one such company.)

> Maybe I have just been lucky, but I have not had the displeasure of working with people either tha incompetent or willfully ignorant yet.

It's very important before you start any new job to suss out how competent people and the organisation are. Ideally, you probably want to work for a competent company. But at least you want to know what you are getting into.

There's a bit of luck involved, if you go in blindly, but you can also use skill and elbow-grease to investigate.
by gus_massa | 2025-12-04 01:50:13+00:00
Probably you need to add a few confirmed slots, like for your mother in law.

If most guest are known by both, it's probably not too much problem. But there are a few that only you know and a few only your S.O. know, and a joint list may be a problem.

Protip: Move the slider in the leaderboard to the right :)
by ajkjk | 2025-12-04 01:51:38+00:00
disagree completely. You're doing the thing I described: assuming it's all ultimately about personal benefit when they're telling you directly that it's not. The same people could trivially capitalize on the shifting climate and have a good career in the new world. But they'd still be pissed about it.

I'm one of these people. So is everyone I know. The grievance is moral, not utilitarian. I don't care about executives getting rid of people. I care that they're causing obviously stupid things to happen, based on their stupid delusions, making everyone's lives worse, and they're unaccountable for it. And in doing so they devalue all of the things I consider to be good about tech, like good software that works and solves real problems. Of course they always did that but it's especially bad now.
by queenkjuul | 2025-12-04 01:53:12+00:00
The thing is, Claude Code is great for unimportant casual projects, and genuinely very bad at working in big, complex, established projects. The latter of course being the ones most people actually work on.

Well either it's bad at it, or everyone on my team is bad at prompting. Given how dedicated my boss has been to using Claude for everything for the past year and the output continuing to be garbage, though, i don't think it's a lack of effort on the team's part, i have to believe Claude just isn't good at my job.
by Joker_vD | 2025-12-04 01:54:52+00:00
But the resulting algorithm is just... weird. It operates under the assumption that the elements f.i can be arbitrary e.g. negative or greater than 9 — which they can't. And adopting that assumption allows you to dispense with keeping track of the variations of the total sum and merely track the separate digits themselves, which would allow a non-mechanical programmer to see easily that the algorithm is correct.
by progmetaldev | 2025-12-04 01:55:12+00:00
I truly respect this statement, and position. I always hope that the benefit I've provided through my software is felt, even if I don't directly benefit from it. It's about taking pride in your work, and what it has brought others. I think of it as a craft, like woodworking, brewing, art, music, etc. While there are far more rules, the love of it is what makes it viable.

I suspect that those who express concern over your work being ripped off are just showing that they are extremely happy with how you run things. Rather than being under the control of another entity, the actual value is in your personal involvement. That's just my two cents, I hope I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth.

EDIT: I realize that you aren't the creator of Ghostty, but my original statement seemed like I was stating this.
by chrislusf | 2025-12-04 01:55:49+00:00
This is Chris and I am the creator of SeaweedFS. I am starting to work full time on SeaweedFS now. Just create issues on SeaweedFS if any.

Recently SeaweedFS is moving fast and added a lot more features, such as: * Server Side Encryption: SSE-S3, SSE-KMS, SSE-C * Object Versioning * Object Lock & Retention * IAM integration * a lot of integration tests

Also, SeaweedFS performance is the best in almost all categories in a user's test https://www.repoflow.io/blog/benchmarking-self-hosted-s3-com... And after that, there is a recent architectural change that increases performance even more, with write latency reduced by 30%.
by linguae | 2025-12-04 01:57:02+00:00
Exactly! Apple wouldn't have existed without access to the MOS 6502 and other electronics, which allowed Woz to carry out his dream of building a personal computer. Microsoft might not have existed without the Altair 8800. Many 1990s and 2000s web startups got off the ground with affordable, available hardware, whether it's hand-me-down RISC workstations or commodity x86 PCs.

Granted, to be fair, many of today's startups and small businesses are made possible by AWS, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and other cloud services. It is sometimes cheaper to rent a server than to own one, and there are fewer system administration chores. However, there's something to be said about owning your own infrastructure rather than renting it out, and I think a major risk of compute power being concentrated by just a few major players is the terms of computation being increasingly dictated by those players.
by TulliusCicero | 2025-12-04 01:57:33+00:00
> Aren't people upset about both?

I'm sure a few people are, but typically no. People are aware that trading card games can be a monetary black hole, but Magic and similar games usually don't take the same heat for the business model that Valve does for loot boxes, even though they're actually worse on paper.

> They've long dismissed the mobile scene as lost.

I'm not talking about the mobile market. Are you not aware that Magic the Gathering is a physical card game? (though it does have some digital implementations too)
by kragen | 2025-12-04 01:57:49+00:00
I think it was Snowden who made TLS the default. Let's Encrypt did great work, but basically having the NSA's spying made common knowledge (including revealing some things that were worse than we expected, like stealing the traffic between Google's data centers) created a consensus that unencrypted HTTP had to go, despite the objections of people like Roy Fielding.
by mxfh | 2025-12-04 01:58:24+00:00
To put this in long term relation.

Even current DDR4 3200 DIMM prices are at an all time high.

These are 6+ year old chip specs now!

I even thought stuff was overpriced four years ago in mid-2021 already, but this is a whole new level.

Some sample long term data for those:

https://geizhals.eu/?phist=2151624&age=9999
by esperent | 2025-12-04 01:58:27+00:00
> much better than Gemini 3 Pro for writing a lot of code

I know that people here are myopically focussed on code, but that's not what the majority of people use AI for.

If Opus 4.5 is better than Gemini 3 for code, but the same or worse for most other uses (which seems to be the case according to benchmarks), that's great for us but terrible for Anthropic.

Claude still can't even draw basic pictures, for example.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-12-04 01:58:29+00:00
You pay, but you get actual support from console makers. They kind of need to given how closed off it is otherwise. The competition also means larger profile studios (indie and AAA) will usually get some good deals to work with.

The one time model from Apple/Android really is just a tax that gets you nothing but access in comparison. It's a full advert model where the biggest players throw millions at Apple/Android for visibility.

Valve's somewhere in the middle of the two. No "p2w" adverts but it's not doing too much to draw devs (except reducing the tax for AAA devs). It doesn't need to. A lot of its community models are "we're having a party, you bring the food and drinks".