MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by blixt | 2025-12-08 13:40:30+00:00
Yeah I’ve found that the only way to let AI build any larger amount of useful code and data for a user that does not review all of it requires a lot of “gutter rails”. Not just adding more prompting, because it is an after-the-fact solution. Not just verifying and erroring a turn, because it adds latency and allows the model to start spinning out of control. But also isolating tasks and autofixing output keep the model on track.

Models definitely need less and less of this for each version that comes out but it’s still what you need to do today if you want to be able to trust the output. And even in a future where models approach perfect, I think this approach will be the way to reduce latency and keep tabs on whether your prompts are producing the output you expected on a larger scale. You will also be building good evaluation data for testing alternative approaches, or even fine tuning.
by Hostingmoz | 2025-12-08 13:40:42+00:00
The World’s First Hosting Plan Search Platform Hostingmoz Is Growing! https://hostingmoz.com

Hostingmoz is the world’s first platform that allows users to search and compare hosting plans and providers, listing 39 countries, 139 hosting providers and 551 active hosting plans, and it continues to expand. Our newest language Turkish is now live. You can now generate detailed reports for hosting plans.

Do you need a hosting plan for your projects? Visit Hostingmoz to find the best hosting plan tailored to your needs with the most comprehensive technical comparison available. Gain insights into the hosting industry and discover the best options using country based and many other advanced filters among hosting companies listed across 39 countries.

So, what do you think about this project?
by twoodfin | 2025-12-08 13:40:53+00:00
They also aimed at what turned out to be the wrong target: When Itanium was conceived, high-performance CPUs were for technical applications like CAD and physics simulation. Raw floating point throughput was what mattered. And Itanium ended up pretty darn good at that.

But between conception and delivery, the web took over the world. Branchy integer code was now the dominant server workload & workstations were getting crowded out of their niche by the commodity economics of x86.
by guttural | 2025-12-08 13:40:59+00:00
No, no you misunderstand, the ports will provide fuel in the form of charged battery containers and there will be runs solely to carry these charged batteries from wherever they can be charged cheap to ports where charging is expensive/unavailable.

Los Angeles port already tries to achieve zero-emissions operations by 2030 I presume more solar could be added. And I guess some/many ports and Los Angeles specifically could use wave energy. But, again, I could very well imagine Northern Australia supply ports in Eastern Asia.
by immibis | 2025-12-08 13:41:04+00:00
Bitcoin is also money printed out of thin air. Bitcoin is also a fiat currency. It may be impossible to change the rate of Bitcoin printing, but it's definitely possible to print more cryptocurrencies (see Ethereum, Monero, Solana, Tron, etc), it's definitely the case that bitcoin's non-deflationary nature is terrible for it as a medium of exchange as it encourages hoarding and destabilises the value, and it's definitely the case that it's impossible for any currency with a fixed issuing rate to maintain a stable value.
by forty | 2025-12-08 13:41:29+00:00
I don't have concrete number to give you but I have a feeling that the trend is to have more soldered ram (at least that was my impression last time I shopped for a laptop). I think things like batteries and disk replacement is something that buyers cares (cared?) a bit more about than repairability and as a result, makers delivered.

My laptop from 2007 with an old core 2 duo cpu can boot a web browser fine. Some websites with "modern" web tech might not work well (ie it's slow), but I don't think the CPU is the issue here :)
by xg15 | 2025-12-08 13:41:40+00:00
I think the author oversimplifies the inference loop a bit, as many opinion pieces like this do.

If you call an LLM with "What is the meaning if life?", it will return the most relevant token, which might be "Great".

If you call it with "What is the meaning if life? Great", you might get back "question".

... and so on until you arrive at "Great question! According to Western philosophy" ... etc etc.

The question is how the LLM determines that "relevancy" information.

The problem I see is that there are a lot of different algorithms which operate that way and only differ in how they calculate the relevancy scores. In particular, there are Markov chains that use a very simple formula. LLMs also use a formula, but it's an inscrutably complex one.

I feel the public discussion either treats LLMs as machine gods or as literal Markov chains, and both is misleading. The interesting question, how that giant formula of feedforward neural network inference can deliver those results isn't really touched.

But I think the author's intuition is right in the sense that (a) LLMs are not living beings and they don't "exist" outside of evaluating that formula - and (b) the results are still restricted by the training data and certainly aren't any sorts of "higher truths" that humans would be incapable of understanding.
by Y-bar | 2025-12-08 13:42:04+00:00
He is literally the primary person at the latest Apple event to introduce Liquid Glass, his face and name is on Apple's promotional material. If he wants to live a secluded life where his name is not referenced maybe he should not agree to blast it to millions of people and star in video interviews.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGztGfRujSE (Apple promo) and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z73NELDwyhQ (iJustine interview)
by PythonicNinja | 2025-12-08 13:42:08+00:00
Created css palette based on `cloud-dancer`

```css

:root { /* Core / --cloud-dancer: #F0EEE9; / Pantone 11-4201 approximation /

/* Atmospheric (breezy blues, misted light, aqueous blue-greens) */ --breezy-blue: #CFE5F2; --misted-sunlight: #F5EFD8; --aqueous-blue-green: #C8E9E0; /* Powdered Pastels (subtle, nuanced, understated) */ --pastel-blush: #EADADB; --pastel-peach: #F3E1D8; --pastel-sage: #DDE6DF; --pastel-lilac: #DCD7E9; /* Light & Shadow (veiled hues dissolving into shadow) */ --veil-gray: #D8D4CC; --shadow-1: #8C8F96; --shadow-2: #5C5F66; --shadow-3: #2F3338; /* Utility */ --ink: #1F2328; /* high-contrast text */ --surface: #FAF9F7; /* ultra-light background */

} ```
by immibis | 2025-12-08 13:42:10+00:00
Value can only stabilise if there's either someone in charge adjusting the rate of printing to maintain a stable value. It cannot be done algorithmically as there's no way to determine the value from inside the system.

Non-deflationary currencies encourage hoarding which leads to wild swings in value. Deflationary currencies do much better. Look at the price chart of BTC vs XMR.
by sshine | 2025-12-08 13:42:18+00:00
The way I think about it is:

- Maintaining stateful secrets at rest gives me the heebie-jeebies. - The tools shouldn't let me shoot myself in the foot. - The tools should ideally not have such a high learning curve that I won't actually use them.

You can put your secrets in a separate repository and not think of them as the same kind of repository you'd publish.

Like... I wouldn't put a git-crypt'ed / sops-nix'ed repository online, simply because I don't like the idea that now anyone needs is brute-force; I know quantum computers aren't there yet wrt. brute-forcing stuff made by random people like me, but even hypothetically having this attack vector open, I don't like it.

So there's only two good solutions:

- You put secrets in a (hashicorp-style) vault that only decrypts temporarily in memory. - You put secrets in an encrypted database with only safe tool integration.

The things I don't like about git-based secrets management:

1. You might mix your secrets into projects and then later someone else might release that (against your current interest) 2. The solutions I've seen (sops-nix, agenix, secrix, etc.) are hard to set up and even harder to onboard people on

When something's hard to set up, you might make a mistake or skip some concept.

Well-done secrets management that isn't based on a service like AWS Secrets og GitHub Secrets should be much, much easier.

I like the idea of how easy this is. Now, if it would just be best practice in every possible way at the same time.

The (admittedly well-known) problem with lockenv is that you can't revoke access once a password is known.

It's a big ask.
by kibwen | 2025-12-08 13:42:31+00:00
This is cope dressed up in the stereotypical Gruber sycophancy.

The decision to align iOS and MacOS with the glassy design of VisionOS was a broader corporate strategy that would have required buy-in from more execs than just the "chief design officer". If you accept that this particular bozo wasn't forced out but instead was tempted away by the scent of lucre wafting from Zuck's pockets, then that implies that there are still plenty of clowns left at Apple to fill out the circus.
by ksec | 2025-12-08 13:42:37+00:00
Here is an unpopular opinion, how about Craig Federighi replaced with Scott Forstall.

It isn't just about UI design. But the whole software stack as well. iOS is still 90% the same as it was launched, and yet the apps management is still inconvenient to say the least. Along with copying all Android features, if I wanted an Android I would have brought one.

The software stack, how many years has Swift been announced? how many years have they announced Swift UI? Xcode? HN discussed macOS problems not long ago [1]. It would have been far better they just stick to Objective-C for the past 10 years and actually get things done.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46114599
by jombojam2 | 2025-12-08 13:42:52+00:00
It will be an equally good news if Zuck poaches the person or team that manages Apple's feedback assistant tool, the one that's used to report bugs. Asking customers to file issues there and then not at all responding to those for months and years even after repeated pings should definitely generate some interest from Meta. Zuck, some more poaching please?
by dns_snek | 2025-12-08 13:43:05+00:00
That is just an observation, not an argument against building, improving, and using crypto.

Cryptocurrency doesn't need to do everything for everyone at all times to be a useful thing to have in the world. It only needs to be helpful to a subset of people, in a subset of situations, some of the time.

I'm happy paying by card for ~100% of my daily transactions, but I want cryptocurrency to exist should the need arise. The rise of authoritarian governments and policies across the world should've made that obvious by now. What's legal and perfectly moral today can become a crime tomorrow.
by wpietri | 2025-12-08 13:43:47+00:00
It is not a schedule, it's a standard. One I normally try to exceed. We ship when things are ready, which for my current team is ~2-3x/week, but in the past I've had teams that were faster.

We know that there will be things to ship because we try to break the work down into small units of deliverable value by focusing on seeking the highest-value things to do. Large requests are typically composed of a bunch of things of varying value, so we split them until we find things that advance the needs of the user, the customer, or the business. One that's often not intuitive to people is the business need for getting information about what's truly valuable to some part of the audience. So we'll often ship a small thing for a particular audience and see how they react and what actually gets used. (You can save an amazing amount of time by not building the things nobody would end up using.)

Sometimes we can't figure out how to break down something smaller enough that we have something to release right away. Or sometimes a chunk of work surprises us and it drags out. We avoid that, because compared to working on smaller things, it's much less comfortable for both developers and business stakeholders. But if it happens, it happens. We try to learn from it for the next time.

Regarding deadlines, we sometimes have them. Broadly, efforts break down into two categories: driven by date or driven by need. For the former, releasing early and often means we adjust scope to hit the date. For the latter, scope is primary and they get stuff when they get it. Either way because the business side sees steady improvement and has fine-grained control over what gets shipped, they feel in control.

This can be a learning experience for business stakeholders used to waterfall-ish, plan-driven approaches. But I have never once had somebody successfully work this way and want to go back. I have, however, had some product managers get thrown back into document-driven development and tell me how much they missed working like we did.
by Hetzner_OL | 2025-12-08 13:44:14+00:00
Hi there, First, we are currently in the process of unifying our user interfaces, so it is helpful to get feedback like this. We do have an AI chatbot on our website because that tends to work well for most basic sales questions. Depending on the questions it gets, it will also steer users to other ways of reaching out to us. We have a contact form for Custom Solutions, and real humans answer those. https://www.hetzner.com/custom-solutions/ The same is true for general sales tickets that go here: https://www.hetzner.com/support-form/ You do not need to already be a customer, or give us your credit card info, to use those two forms. The reasons we steer our people who are already customers to use their account: 1) We can protect their data better there. 2) We can send the question to the right queue/team more easily. 3) We can quickly ask follow-up questions. The credit card information on new accounts is a step to prevent abuse and fraud. Depending on a user's location, once they create an account, they will likely have other billing options and they may change depending on their location. There are certain aspects of other platforms that make it a bit easier for companies to respond to customers/readers. We actually try really hard not to fish here on HN, and therefore only really respond if someone mentions us directly or if I see incorrect/misleading information. I imagine it is the same with other providers. --Katie
by antonymoose | 2025-12-08 13:44:23+00:00
Keep in mind this happens in all industries to varying degrees and causes.

I once worked as a cashier at “The Fresh Market” chain, a higher end, higher income store. We had this issue all day every day. I couldn’t go a shift without having to call over the manager for two or three price corrections. The root-cause was our incompetent stoner stock-boy would leave up discounted sale signs up for days and even weeks after the time had passed. Despite his bad work ethic he worked there for years because help was just that hard to come by. Nothing ultimately malicious by corporate but the end result looks suspicious as can be.
by phil21 | 2025-12-08 13:44:38+00:00
Because social security tax is simply a tax like any other, and social security is a pay as you go means tested entitlement program like any other.

Current workers pay for current retirees. There is no account anywhere with your name on it earmarked for your retirement.

It was enacted with lawmakers well knowing this - it was simply marketed in such a way to make it politically possible to enact and keep around long-term. If it were pitched as an additional tax and spend welfare program it’d have never gotten off the ground to begin with.

Without your dollars going in today, current retirees would not be receiving meaningful benefits - as their contributions largely went towards those retired while they were working. The whole idea is more of a social contract between generations than anything else.
by wisty | 2025-12-08 13:44:47+00:00
I think they are much smarter than that. Or will be soon.

But they are like a smart student trying to get a good grade (that's how they are trained!). They'll agree with us even if they think we're stupid, because that gets them better grades, and grades are all they care about.

Even if they are (or become) smart enough to know better, they don't care about you. They do what they were trained to do. They are becoming like a literal genie that has been told to tell us what we want to hear. And sometimes, we don't need to hear what we want to hear.

"What an insightful price of code! Using that API is the perfect way to efficiently process data. You have really highlighted the key point."

The problem is that chatbots are trained to do what we want, and most of us would rather have a syncophant who tells us we're right.

The real danger with AI isn't that it doesn't get smart, it's that it gets smart enough to find the ultimate weakness in its training function - humanity.
by jcalvinowens | 2025-12-08 13:44:48+00:00
You can do it on x86 too, just use jmp instead of call and invent your own arbitrary register scheme for it. This x86 program has no stack: https://github.com/jcalvinowens/asmhttpd

I don't think it's too hard to imagine a compiler that does that, although it would obviously be very limited in functionality (nesting would be disallowed as you note, or I guess limited to the number of registers you're willing to waste on it...).
by kachapopopow | 2025-12-08 13:45:42+00:00
criminals are not always bad people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrFs2_uhz-o

and to break it down lawfully or/and morally bad:

lawfully bad, morally bad = bad and crypto is one of the major tools in your arsenal lawfully bad, morally good = neutral, but you are a prosecuted criminal, crypto is helpful for you but there are alternatives lawfully good, morally bad = bad, but not a prosecuted criminal, crypto is not that useful for you lawfully good, morally good = you are not a criminal, crypto is not that useful for you
by soco | 2025-12-08 13:45:43+00:00
Maybe for the UK it would be an authoritarian move, but I can definitely say that the other European states which don't use juries seem to me less authoritarian than the UK is - even as of today. Maybe the problem at the root is the mistrust people already have in the UK system? Because if we're only afraid of stereotypes, they wouldn't be worse for a judge than for a jury.
by woodruffw | 2025-12-08 13:45:55+00:00
I’d say that GitHub has done an admirable job making attestations more accessible, but that “easy” is still a stretch of a characterization: it’s still not the default, and the error/configuration states are somewhat opaque (e.g. around OIDC permissions, unprivileged triggers, what constitutes a signing identity in a reusable workflow context, etc.). Some of these are latent complexities that GitHub can’t be blamed for, but some are certainly made worse by architectural decisions in GitHub Actions.
by torginus | 2025-12-08 13:45:56+00:00
I wouldn't go so far - I would just raise the minimum wage to a level where a person can actually make ends meet.

Sure some folks would be fired, and their jobs automated, but they could be redirected towards better paying opportunities.

If all else fails, then the money saved by such approaches could be used for welfare. It's just putting things from one pocket into the other for the government.

As things stand, these corporate subsidies are just for enshrining inefficiencies in the system.
by keiferski | 2025-12-08 13:46:02+00:00
The thing that bothers me the most about LLMs is how they never seem to understand "the flow" of an actual conversation between humans. When I ask a person something, I expect them to give me a short reply which includes another question/asks for details/clarification. A conversation is thus an ongoing "dance" where the questioner and answerer gradually arrive to the same shared meaning.

LLMs don't do this. Instead, every question is immediately responded to with extreme confidence with a paragraph or more of text. I know you can minimize this by configuring the settings on your account, but to me it just highlights how it's not operating in a way remotely similar to the human-human one I mentioned above. I constantly find myself saying, "No, I meant [concept] in this way, not that way," and then getting annoyed at the robot because it's masquerading as a human.
by PedroBatista | 2025-12-08 13:46:38+00:00
While I’m not a fan of mobbing on someone as it easily escalates to bullying an gratuitous attacks, parodying his name is the least of my concerns. And he is a public figure. Being the head designer at Apple grants you that status and don’t even doubt for a second anyone who wants that type of job doesn’t play the fame/status game.
by turnsout | 2025-12-08 13:46:56+00:00
As a color company, I'm surprised they didn't lean into some of the current trends that involve shocks of bright color. I'm seeing a lot of Y2K-inspired design, holographic/dichroic color, and super expressive packaging. There are some GenZ/GenA pastel trends, but I do think these pastels have a Millennial stigma.
by darjan_dev | 2025-12-08 13:46:58+00:00
Hi I'm Darjan!

Senior Frontend Engineer with 5+ years of experience building and scaling modern web applications. Strong in React/Next.js, TypeScript, clean architecture, and UI/UX implementation. Comfortable working across the stack when needed. Looking for remote roles on product-focused engineering teams.

Location: Europe ( Bosnia and Herzegovina ) Remote: Yes — only looking for globally remote positions Willing to relocate: No Technologies: React, Next.js, Vue.js, TypeScript, JavaScript, UI/UX, Tailwind, Node.js, SQL Résumé/CV: https://darjan.dev/ Email: darjan.developer@gmail.com

Let’s build something great together!
by kure256 | 2025-12-08 13:47:14+00:00
- https://github.com/ai-first-guides/first.ai?tab=readme-ov-fi...

AI-first web design is based on a simple observation: more and more queries go directly to AI assistants instead of traditional search engines. If you want AI systems to understand, trust, and cite your content, the web must be written for them — not only for the visual browser. Just like SEO once made websites visible to Google, AI-first structure increases the chance that your website becomes the source AI systems quote.
by carschno | 2025-12-08 13:47:25+00:00
It is concerning that GitHub hosts the majority of open-source software, while actively locking its users into a platform that is based on closed source for eerything except Git itself. This issue with Actions shows how maintaining proprietary software inevitably ends up rather low on the priority list. Adding new features is much more marketable, just like for any other software product. Enshittification ensues.

For those who can still escape the lock-in, this is probably a good occasion to point to Forgejo, an open-source alternative that also has CI actions: https://forgejo.org/2023-02-27-forgejo-actions/ It is used by Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/
by simonsarris | 2025-12-08 13:47:32+00:00
There's no steering anything. You are not paying for yourself, you are paying for current retirees on the hopes that there will be enough people to pay for your. Current retirees are not getting enough from that, so they are accumulating debt to pay themselves even more, hence the article.

Since the population pyramid has not worked that way, you will simply have a worse time, and younger people even worse, unless you can convince the people after to take on even more debt.

"Children are the retirement plan" has been true all along, only obfuscated. It would have been more sensible if social security payouts were contingent on how much tax revenue your children made, rather than the current model.
by trex099 | 2025-12-08 13:48:16+00:00
I use an iPhone but daily drive Fedora. Apple's Universal Clipboard only works with Macs, so I built my own.

Copy text/images on iPhone → lands in Linux clipboard via iOS Shortcuts + local FastAPI server. No cloud, no account.

Available via Fedora Copr, AUR, Nix flake, AppImage, or curl installer.

Feedback welcome!