MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Poker Puzzles – Train poker skills with scenario-based challenges
by dougSF70 | 2025-12-10 15:09:03+00:00
I went to a poker tournament with a friend recently. He plays in a lot of tournaments but is always getting eliminated because he is a somewhat risk-averse player in tournaments. From my experience with improving my chess rating through chess puzzles I suggested he should do the same. Rather than play more poker, he should practice bet assessment. Anyway I built a poker training platform for him. Each puzzle presents a real game scenario (your hand, board state, pot size) and asks you to make the optimal play.

Features: - 2000+ puzzles covering Tight Aggressive and Loose Aggressive playing styles - All streets: pre-flop, flop, turn, river - Topics: GTO strategies, range construction, bluff frequency, ICM, exploitative adjustments - Filter by difficulty (beginner to advanced)

I am also hosting it on my own-hardware in a Co-Lo facility.

Would love feedback from the HN community – especially anyone who plays poker or has built similar domain-specific training tools.
by torstenvl | 2025-12-10 15:10:04+00:00
I don't understand the argument you're trying to make. You seem to be arguing that C isn't a high-level assembler because some compilers generate different machine code for the same source code. But (a) that doesn't contradict the claim in any way; and (b) this happens in assembly all the time too—some synthetic instructions generate different machine code depending on circumstances.
by lkbm | 2025-12-10 15:10:11+00:00
And then lower down we have TensorFlow 0.6.0 release.

I was considering using this feature the other day to try to get a sense of what AI discourse was like circa 2019. It all blends together after a while. I ended up doing a Twitter search for "GPT-2" ending 2019-12-31, but that's a little more specific than I want.

The HN past feature is an excellent way of seeing snapshots of history, and I wish more sites had things like this. I guess I should Archive.org a little more money.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2025-12-10 15:10:21+00:00
> The process of breaking a complex problem down into the right primitives requires great understanding of the original problem in the first place.

Yes, but with experience that just becomes a matter of recognizing problem and design patterns. When you see a parsing problem, you know that the simplest/best design pattern is just to define a Token class representing the units of the language (keywords, operators, etc), write a NextToken() function to parse characters to tokens, then write a recursive descent parser using that.

Any language may have it's own gotchas and edge cases, but knowing that recursive descent is pretty much always going to be a viable design pattern (for any language you are likely to care about), you can tackle those when you come to them.
by Vinnl | 2025-12-10 15:11:14+00:00
> a better experience (because there is no build step)

I feel like the way to make both of us happy is to just strip type annotations, rather than doing full type checking in the browser. Which, luckily, is already making its way through the standards track: https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations/

> If the browser support TS natively, the compilation target would not be JS (which is what makes the resulting code slow), but either WASM, or naive code.

I was not talking about compiling it to JS; I seem to recall that native support wouldn't necessarily result in big performance improvements. (Consider that JS is also not being compiled to JS.)
by 7777777phil | 2025-12-10 15:11:22+00:00
My bad, I was going to link to a MacRumours [1] article, where this title comes from and then while doing so saw the original WP source that I linked to. No further intention behind it.

[1] https://www.macrumors.com/2025/12/10/apple-app-store-hosting...
by Aurornis | 2025-12-10 15:11:23+00:00
> That would mean that there is never any hallucination.

No it wouldn’t. If the LLM produces an output that does not match the training data or claims things that are not in the training data due to pseudorandom statistical processes then that’s a hallucination. If it accurately represents the training data or context content, it’s not a hallucination.

Similarly, if you request that an LLM tells you something false and the information it provided is false, that’s not a hallucination.

> The point of original comment was distinguishing between fact and fiction,

In the context of LLMs, fact means something represented in the training set. Not factual in an absolute, philosophical sense.

If you put a lot of categorically false information into the training corpus and train an LLM on it, those pieces of information are “factual” in the context of the LLM output.

The key part of the parent comment:

> caused by the use of statistical process (the pseudo random number generator
by thiht | 2025-12-10 15:11:37+00:00
> Those are not benefits. Do not do those things. Anything more complicated than embedding a video is a distraction and will not help your presentation.

> Seriously, trust me on this one.

No, that's your opinion. The best presentations I've seen use animations. Just not on every slide, and not huge distracting animations. Animations can be amazing to emphasize what you're explaining.

DO use animations, just make sure they bring something on the table.
by iamnothere | 2025-12-10 15:11:38+00:00
> Again: We disagree in your assertion that pragmatic policies on the oppositional side are all that's required to win against a demagogue.

I never said that this is the only thing you need. You need other things as well, including a modicum of charisma, a good network on the ground, and solid fundraising to support the efforts. And a party that won’t fight its own candidate after the primaries (oh, and you should actually hold a primary).

Demagogues are a problem in every kind of government when the quality of governance declines. You just don’t often hear about it in dictatorships because the demagogues are either killed or they flee to another country. But demagogues are a sort of release valve for public frustration that’s grounded in material reality, and if you suppress their rise long enough then you eventually get a civil war, collapse, or revolution. The only solution is to fix the problems that lead people to seek out radical change.

Anyway, it’s clear we’re talking past each other, I have no desire to continue this thread further.
by SAI_Peregrinus | 2025-12-10 15:11:49+00:00
C's bit-fields ABI isn't great either. In particular, the order of allocation of bit-fields within a unit and alignment of non-bit-field structure members are implementation defined (6.7.2.1). And bit-fields of types other than `_Bool`, `signed int` and `unsigned int` are extensions to the standard, so that somewhat limits what types can have bitfields.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-12-10 15:12:03+00:00
I believe it was a super bowl ad for gemini last year where it had a "hallucination" in the ad itself. One of the screenshots of gemini being used showed this "hallucination", which made the rounds in the news as expected.

I want to say it was some fact about cheese or something that was in fact wrong. However you could also see the source gemini cited in the ad, and when you went to that source, it was some local farm 1998 style HTML homepage, and on that page they had the incorrect factoid about the cheese.
by draegtun | 2025-12-10 15:13:29+00:00
Yes (de)referencing can be a PITA sometimes but you've probably forgotten that your example code could have been better written like this:

$hash1->{key1}{key2}

And if `hash1` was a hash (instead of a hashref) then it's just this:

$hash1{key1}{key2}

The `%{}` de-reference you mention later is only when you have an operation that requires a hash, for eg:

keys %{$hash1{key1}}

And for kstrauser example later in Python...

hash1["hash_name"]["array_name"][3]

the equivalent in Perl would be...

$hash1{hash_name}{array_name}[3]

I find having {} & [] as lookup keys for their types is not only more explicit but also safer/correct.
by bryanlarsen | 2025-12-10 15:14:04+00:00
You can "have your cake and eat it too", as long as you're happy with a smaller portion of the cake.

I own some NVDA. I've sold a good portion of it, so I've "locked in the profit" on it. If it doubles again, I'll sell some more. If it crashes I won't be too disappointed -- I've locked in my profit, and now I own more reasonably priced NVDA shares.

Note that if you have index funds, you probably already own a surprising amount of NVDA.
by doe88 | 2025-12-10 15:14:48+00:00
Exactly! At first this is the precise reason I didn't click through as I thought from the title, a page must have been somehow outputted/hallucinated by error, but luckily I then saw the number of votes, revised my choice and saw a great page.

I'm partial though, loving Haskell myself (as a monad_lover) i'm happy it wasn't forgotten too :)
Tell HN: Proliferation of LLM-Generated Text
by ekjhgkejhgk | 2025-12-10 15:15:04+00:00
I started finding these texts and they're clearly LLM generated.

I was looking how to sign using the ES256 algorithm in Julia, and found links like:

https://ssojet.com/jwt-validation/validate-jwt-using-es256-i...

https://compile7.org/jwt-validation/how-to-validate-jwt-usin...

At first it looks plausible. Except, there isn't a Julia library named `JWT`. It doesn't exist. There's one named `JWTs` and another one `JSONWebTokens`, and neither of them implements ES256.

I think what's happening is it knows how to answer this question in Python, and it's hallucinating a transalation. E.g. PyJWT -> JWT, etc.

This is garbage.
by 9rx | 2025-12-10 15:15:07+00:00
As valuable as that diversion no doubt was for you, we still haven't established from your data sources how many people are involved in R&D in a hobby/pleasure/necessity capacity and how that compares to those who have chosen to dedicate their lives towards it.

If it is not in the data, you can say so, but it becomes impossible to know how the average person performs in R&D without it. Which then returns us to the original question: "Based on what?"
by rpdillon | 2025-12-10 15:15:27+00:00
I mean, we're watching the world try to figure out how to use a new set of tools. As with so many disruptive technologies, the initial stages of development appear to be drop in quality and inferior to the status quo. That usually reverses within five to ten years.

That said, I agree with you that AI is not going to lead to people doing less work, in the same way that computers didn't lead to people doing less work.
by Dilettante_ | 2025-12-10 15:15:35+00:00
This is the real question. Not to rehash the self-driving cars arguments that have been had to death, but with potential LLM mental healthcare the question "but what if it causes harm in some interactions" is asked much, much more than with human mental healthcare professionals.

(And I'm not being theoretical here, I have quite a bit of experience getting incredibly inadequate mental health care.)
by raw_anon_1111 | 2025-12-10 15:15:41+00:00
You’re forgetting about all of the Evangelical Christians who think that if Isreal is not protected, Jesus won’t have a place to come back to when he returns (yes they think this)

And the Young Republicans are real live anti semite Nazi sympathizers and JD Vance made all sorts of excuses for them.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/14/private-chat-among-...
by bachmeier | 2025-12-10 15:15:48+00:00
You have to use caution when interpreting those numbers. The bottom 50% doesn't have much wealth, so a big chunk of their wealth will decrease. It also tends to be unevenly distributed, so for those trying to improve their situation (think someone 60 years old with $50K in retirement savings), it would hit really hard. Plus a lot of those people would lose their jobs when the highest 10% cut back on spending.
by delaminator | 2025-12-10 15:15:56+00:00
Only people with a paid subscription can do that.

The top story on here for 2 days has been “Show HN: Gemini Pro 3 hallucinates the HN front page 10 years from now”

I could have typed that into an LLM myself too.

Before that it was “llm tries to recreate Space Jam website”
by lII1lIlI11ll | 2025-12-10 15:16:40+00:00
> But today we do have Java which has all of the rust safety guarantees and then some, is insanely performant for network code and has a massive amount of mindshare and available programmers.

I'm not entirely convinced that Java has much mindshare among system programmers. During my 15 years career in the field I haven't heard "Boy I wish we wrote this <network driver | user-space offload networking application | NIC firmware> in Java" once.
by mfisc_019 | 2025-12-10 15:16:54+00:00
Hello, my name is Mateo and am one of the cofounders of Countify. We recently launched and wanted to share our software with the YC community as there are a couple of biotech startups that might find our software incredibly useful, we are looking to further develop the tool so feedback is always welcome too.

We are currently partnering with institutions such as Harvard and Stanford were we make their research workflows 120x faster and can save them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars yearly in disposables alone, as well as 4-6 hours daily in tedious and labor intensive counting and visual microscopy through our proprietary Ai.

I'd be happy to talk more if this is something that could be of use to your research or you'd simply like to talk.

Feel free to shoot me an email @ countify.mateofischer@gmail.com
by miyoji | 2025-12-10 15:17:07+00:00
> (This may be out-of-date at this point, but I haven't heard of Amazon or Google doing on-device processing for Alexa or Assistant.)

It was out of date 6 years ago.

"This breakthrough enabled us to create a next generation Assistant that processes speech on-device at nearly zero latency, with transcription that happens in real-time, even when you have no network connection." - Google, 2019

https://blog.google/products/assistant/next-generation-googl...
by codeptualize | 2025-12-10 15:17:25+00:00
Advertising, search partnerships, premium subscriptions afaik.

These things can be found public:

- Opera https://investor.opera.com/news-releases/news-release-detail...

- Mozilla (largely funded by google) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

- Brave https://brave.com/blog/100m-mau/ (ads, search api, premium subscription, and their crypto thing)

- Browser company: not sure, I think they have a subscription, but I assume they still mostly run on VC money.

Chrome, Safari, and Edge are funded by their parent companies. I believe Google does also pay Apple $20B to be the default search engine on Safari and ios.

So you could make an argument that Google pays for browsers. A lot of browsers run on Chromium, owned and funded by Google (although technically open source). Except Apple and Mozilla who get search money from Google.
by kkylin | 2025-12-10 15:17:35+00:00
I have been using mu4e for years, and am generally happy with it, and yet... I've never recommended it to anyone else. Unlike, say, org-mode or magit, which I'd happily evangelize.

The pain points are what other commenters have said:

- I don't find the default config a good fit for me, and run it heavily customized. As someone said everything in Emacs turns into a project...

- Performance can be an issue, especially indexing new mail (and especially if you like to lug around a copy of most of your emails locally as I do). On a laptop while traveling this used to be more of a problem, but newer versions are notieably quicker and newer laptops have better battery life.

- HTML rendering isn't great. Thankfully I don't get too many important messages that isn't just plain text. This might be a reasonable use case for xwidget-webkit though I'd imagine there are security/privacy issues to work out. (Another Emacs project -- yay!)

When I started I thought it would be an efficient way to get through lots of emails, and it has been for the most part. I'm just not sure I've saved time overall unless one counts the hours configuring it as "entertainment / hobby" rather than "work".
by bartread | 2025-12-10 15:17:56+00:00
It is cool.

I am irked that on desktop it does not work in Firefox, but only in Chrome (and presumably other Chromium based browsers).

I'm not a big fan of Chrome, for a variety of reasons, but principally because I don't trust it and can no longer use a good ad blocker, so I never really enjoy having to fire it up.
by leecarraher | 2025-12-10 15:18:06+00:00
i agree, not just the multinomial sampling that causes hallucinations. If that were the case, setting temp to 0 and just argmax over the logits would "solve" hallucinations. while round-off error causes some stochasticity it's unlikely to be the the primary cause, rather it's lossy compression over the layers that causes it.

first compression: You create embeddings that need to differentiate N tokens, JL lemma gives us a bound that modern architectures are well above that. At face value, the embeddings could encode the tokens and provide deterministic discrepancy. But words aren't monolithic , they mean many things and get contextualized by other words. So despite being above jl bound, the model still forces a lossy compression.

next compression: each layer of the transformer blows up the input to KVQ, then compresses it back to the inter-layer dimension.

finally there is the output layer which at 0 temp is deterministic, but it is heavily path dependent on getting to that token. The space of possible paths is combinatorial, so any non-deterministic behavior elsewhere will inflate the likelihood of non-deterministic output, including things like roundoff. heck most models are quantized down to 4 even2 bits these days, which is wild!
by lateforwork | 2025-12-10 15:18:11+00:00
Counter argument: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/business/wall-street-valu...

Excerpts:

In the 1990s and early 2000s, many of the companies leading the stock rally were not making much money, if any. This led to very high P/E ratios for some companies because share prices kept going higher, even when earnings were lagging well behind.

While Nvidia’s stock price has risen roughly 1,000 percent over the past three years, from $17 to $180, its earnings — the actual money it is making — have increased even faster. This means the stock is arguably cheaper today than it was three years ago, said Stacy Rasgon, a stock analyst at AB Bernstein.
by perihelions | 2025-12-10 15:18:23+00:00
For what it's worth, HN is on ICE's list of surveilled sites (which it pays a tech contractor to crawl),

https://www.404media.co/the-200-sites-an-ice-surveillance-co... ("The 200+ Sites an ICE Surveillance Contractor is Monitoring")

https://archive.is/Lldzh
by gus_massa | 2025-12-10 15:18:30+00:00
> the one-year survival rate reached 100%

What is the survival rate of the control group [1]?

This page [2] claims the 5 year survival rate with the usual treatment is 84-93% depending on the advance. I can't find numbers for 1 year.

[1] Note: In these cases, the control group recived the usual treatment, not just suggar pills.

[2] https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/hodgkin-lymphoma/detecti...
by jghn | 2025-12-10 15:18:37+00:00
> The strange loop maybe was the last bastion of tech conference where I could check in those kinds if speakers.

Strange Loop was amazing. The vibes were perfect. And I've never been to another tech conference that I found to be so mind expanding. Most of the talks I'd attend had no practical utility in my daily life, but got me thinking about all sorts of what ifs and if/how I could apply some nugget of what they were saying to more practical applications.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-12-10 15:19:00+00:00
Indeed, the vast majority of Americans have no exposure to equities, or limited exposure through a 401k or a pension. "Be a shame if something happened to these meager rows in a database we've been conning you is the path to financial independence and security. Won't you think of your crumbs?" But I digress. TLDR If the equities market implodes, it'll be mostly fine. The stock market is not the economy [1] [2]. The economy is demand for goods and services.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=the+stock+market+is+not+the+...

[2] https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2019/08/the-stock-market-is-...

(and I say this as someone with more exposure to the capital markets than most Americans, while hedging against irrationality, voting vs weighing machine and all that)
by masom | 2025-12-10 15:19:02+00:00
What you are looking at is corporate environments; the studios of the past (Ex: Westwood and Blizzard) had a small headcounts, and people were direct decision makers.

The story of Starcraft 1 is quite interesting as the devs copied the Warcraft 2 code and began changing it quickly[1](https://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/tough-times-on-the-road-to-...).

> StarCraft was originally envisioned as a game with modest goals that could fit into a one-year development cycle so that it could be released for Christmas, 1996 > Warcraft II had only six core programmers and two support programmers; that was too few for the larger scope of StarCraft,

No boardrooms of PMs, and Directors, and VPs, and execs, chiming in every decision, leading to fast turnarounds.
by myko | 2025-12-10 15:19:14+00:00
I'm positive Google's voice commands worked better when Google Home initially released. No idea why it has gotten so bad. Recognition seemed better when it was internal and called "Majel" though on that one I'm sure that's just rose tinted glasses.

It's weird because Gemini is so impressive multimodally but even the Gemini powered assistant can't figure out which lights to turn out, telling the TV to "play" doesn't mean turning it on (it means unpausing it!), just an incredibly frustrating experience.
by cafard | 2025-12-10 15:19:22+00:00
For about ten years I worked for composition shops, and eventually for a maker of typesetting systems. Through blurred eyes I could tell TNR from Baskerville from Garamond from Janson from ... Some of these fonts I can still identify.

But I have no idea what font was used in the book I just finished reading or the book that I'm returning to later today. My main question about a font is whether I can read it with old eyes.

I do agree that designers should care about these matters. I'll add that for some portion of the reading public TNR more likely means The New Republic than Times New Roman.

[Five minutes later: the book just finished, What We Can Know by Ian McEwan, appears to be set in Palatino, never a favorite of mine. The one I'm returning to, I'm not sure.]
by paulddraper | 2025-12-10 15:19:50+00:00
Yeah. You don't own more or less of anything. Five sticks of gum, a car, 10 shares of $MSFT, a Mewtwo Ultra Rare.

You have exactly same assets as before. The businesses of which you are a fractional owner have the same fundamentals.

But other people won't trade other assets for yours at the same rate.
by willvarfar | 2025-12-10 15:19:55+00:00
Does it materially impact people's pensions?

Globally, pension funds hold approximately $5–7 trillion directly in the top US tech stocks (the "Magnificent Seven" and adjacent AI infrastructure).

Also in the last couple of years many pension funds have moved money into Private Equity and Private Credit to chase higher returns and they're the backstop for all the off-books AI datacenter buildout debt?