MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jimmaswell | 2025-12-12 01:50:13+00:00
This is flabbergasting, how could such a large proportion of highly technical people willingly subject themselves to being shackled by iOS? They just happily put up with having one choice of browser, (outside Europe) no third party app stores, and being locked into the Apple ecosystem? I can't think of a single reason I would ever switch from an S22-25+U to an iPhone. I only went from 22U to 25U because my old one got smashed, otherwise the 22U would still be perfectly fine.
by what-the-grump | 2025-12-12 01:50:17+00:00
You pretend that humans don’t produce slop?

I can recognize the short comings of AI code but it can produce a mock or a full blown class before I can find a place to save the file it produced.

Pretending that we are all busy writing novelty and genius is silly, 99% are writing for CRUD tasks and basic business flows, the code isn’t going to be perfect it doesn’t need to be but it will get the job done.

All the logical gotchas of the work flows that you’d be refactoring for hours are done in minutes.

Use pro with search… are it going to read 200 pages of documentation in 7 minutes come up with a conclusion and validate it or invalidate it in another 5? No you still trying accept the cookie prompt on your 6th result.

You might as well join the flat earth society if you still think that AI can’t help you complete day to day tasks.
by teleforce | 2025-12-12 01:50:57+00:00
I encourage that you write a better refereed article on tide prediction not like the biased OP article with proper citations/references and knowledge lineage including Greek, Indian, China, Arab/muslim, European, etc that will has wider audiences compared to HN for setting the record straight.

I'd highly recommend you to read the Quran for completeness and fairness sake in addition to the Bible and other scriptures since muslim believe Quran is the only holy book that's well and completely preserved [1].

>Hinduism, the world’s oldest religion

Muhammad is considered by muslim as the last messenger and prophet (for all races not only Semite) of the true God starting from Adam including Jesus (since Jesus is just another prophet sent to Jews not God incarnated).

Muhammad is also described and prophesized at length in core canonical Hindu scriptures namely the Sruti not the lesser Smrti as Kalki Avatar (the last Avatar). However he's only a prophet not God incarnate as Hindu claim [2].

Time and tide wait for no man, and we are on the earth only for short term and temporary [3].

Quran Surah Al-Mu'minun (23: 112 - 115):

He will ask ˹them˺, “How many years did you remain on earth?”

They will reply, “We remained ˹only˺ a day or part of a day. But ask those who kept count.”

He will say, “You only remained for a little while, if only you knew.

Did you then think that We had created you without purpose, and that you would never be returned to Us?”

[1] Magnificent Quran:

https://archive.org/details/MagnificentQuran/mode/1up

[2] Kalki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalki

[3] Quran Surah Al-Mu'minun (23: 112 - 115):

https://quran.com/al-muminun/112-118
by sparkie | 2025-12-12 01:51:57+00:00
Thread locals don't fully solve the problem. They work well if you immediately call the closure, but what if you want to store the closure and call it later?

#include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <stddef.h> typedef int (*comp)(const void *untyped_left, const void *untyped_right); thread_local int in_reverse = 0; __attribute__((noinline)) int compare_impl(const void *untyped_left, const void *untyped_right, int in_reverse) { const int* left = untyped_left; const int* right = untyped_right; return (in_reverse) ? *right - *left : *left - *right; } comp make_sort(int direction) { in_reverse = direction; int compare(const void *untyped_left, const void *untyped_right) { return compare_impl(untyped_left, untyped_right, in_reverse); } return compare; } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { int list[] = { 2, 11, 32, 49, 57, 20, 110, 203 }; comp normal_sort = make_sort(0); comp reverse_sort = make_sort(1); qsort(list, (sizeof(list)/sizeof(*list)), sizeof(*list), normal_sort); return list[0]; }

Because we create `reverse_sort` between creating `normal_sort` and calling it, we end up with a reverse sort despite clearly asking for a normal sort.
by elzbardico | 2025-12-12 01:52:08+00:00
Ok man, now give me a moment, I need to administer my weightloss weekly injection of L-Histidyl-2-methylalanyl-L-alpha-glutamylglycyl-L-threonyl-L-phenylalanyl-L-threonyl-L-seryl-L-alpha-aspartyl-L-valyl-L-seryl-L-seryl-L-tyrosyl-L-leucyl-L-alpha-glutamylglycyl-L-glutaminyl-L-alanyl-L-alanyl-N6-(N-(17-carboxy-1-oxoheptadecyl)-L-gamma-glutamyl-2-(2-(2-aminoethoxy)ethoxy)acetyl-2-(2-(2-aminoethoxy)ethoxy)acetyl)-L-lysyl-L-alpha-glutamyl-L-phenylalanyl-L-isoleucyl-L-alanyl-L-tryptophyl-L-leucyl-L-valyl-L-arginylglycyl-L-arginylglycine
by ok_dad | 2025-12-12 01:52:44+00:00
I'd like to see data on the distances people drive on a regular basis. For America where I am from, I think that a vast majority of people could use EVs today with the ranges they have today. I didn't see any EVs with ranges below 200+ miles and most had 260+. If you have to go further than that on a regular basis, I think that most cars won't work for your specific needs, let alone EVs. The whole range argument seems like some FUD to me that was made up by the ICE industry, honestly, because EVs have had these same ranges for a decade now.
by pyrolistical | 2025-12-12 01:53:28+00:00
> no more traffic

How? There would be a huge increase in demand on the roads. You said it yourself, you’d have to build more roads.

Unless you meant, no more [suffering] traffic, since you could just take a nap.

The only way I see self driving to be a true win if it is so efficient that you can remove all the roads and they become part of the mass transit system.

I would demand personal vehicles to pay a premium (cost plus) as they take up more space per person and add to infrastructure maintenance cost
by chippiewill | 2025-12-12 01:54:01+00:00
There are the parliament acts which restrict the length of the delay the HoL can inflict (including to just 1 month for money bills). They also cannot amend money bills.

There is however the Salisbury convention which is that the HoL shouldn't block legislation that was a manifesto commitment of the governing party. That doesn't meant they can't amend it at all, but they can't substantively change it. It's also just a convention, not a rule.
by YurgenJurgensen | 2025-12-12 01:54:46+00:00
I would personally simply heavily tax ad revenue rather than banning social media, as while a blanket ban is ironically less of an infringement on free speech than banning it for children, it’s still something of an infringement.

There’s a bunch of benefits to an ad-tax too, beyond revenue generation: Users won’t be encouraged to use VPNs (and most VPN users probably also use ad blockers anyway). It’s difficult to evade, since an advertising business kind-of has to operate in the open; if nobody knows you’re running an ad business, your ad business has failed at the one thing it’s supposed to do. Advertisers are also purely profit-motivated, and so won’t hesitate to rat out their competitors if they’re using some loophole to gain a competitive advantage. It’s also very difficult for them to hide which country they’re targeting, since that information has to be available to their customers, so the taxmen can get it by subpoenaing customers or posing as them. And there’s not that many big ad-tech companies, so you don’t really mind if a few small-fries slip through the net.
by tobias2014 | 2025-12-12 01:55:17+00:00
I guess when you use it for generic "problem solving", brainstorming for solutions, this is great. That's what I use it for, and Gemini is my favorite model. I love when Gemini resists and suggests that I am wrong while explaining why. Either it's true, and I'm happy for that, or I can re-prompt based on the new information which doesn't allow for the mistake Gemini made.

On the other hand, I can also see why Claude is great for coding, for example. By default it is much more "structured". One can probably change these default personalities with some prompting, and many of the complaints found in this thread about either side are based on the assumption that you can use the same prompt for all models.
by Defletter | 2025-12-12 01:55:53+00:00
For me at least (different person), the term "speech offences" has been so captured by the far-right who think publicly advocating for the burning down of buildings populated with minorities is totally fine, but calling someone racist is beyond the pale. Whereas, at least from my own experience, progressives tend to use phrases related to expression, eg, protests.

And so when I hear "speech offences", my immediate thought is to question the premise: Are we talking about people publicly advocating for mass violence? Are we talking about bullying or harassment? Are we talking about a private conversation? Are we talking about a group chat? Are we talking about hate speech? Are we talking about defamation? Are we talking about "fighting words"? Etc. Context matters.

For all the talk I see online advocating for social media to be considered a public space, I've yet to see anyone really grasp the consequences of that: have any of them tried yelling out in a public space that they should burn down a populated building? That won't go down well, and rightly so. It has never been okay to do that.

People facing consequences for broadcasting their depraved bloodlust online doesn't concern me. What concerns me is the extent to which protests against genocide are being suppressed, with police looking for any minor infraction to pounce upon, but we have video of people saying to police "I support the genocide" to make a point, which the police don't bat an eye at. That scares me.
by keeda | 2025-12-12 01:55:54+00:00
Note I'm not saying one is better than the other, but my takes:

1. The problem solving is in figuring out what to prompt, which includes correctly defining the problem, identifying a potential solution, designing an architecture, decomposing it into smaller tasks, and so on.

Giving it a generic prompt like "build a fitness tracker" will result in a fully working product but it will be bland as it would be the average of everything in its training data, and won't provide any new value. Instead, you probably want to build something that nobody else has, because that's where the value is. This will require you to get pretty deep into the problem domain, even if the code itself is abstracted away from you.

Personally, once the shape of the solution and the code is crystallized in my head typing it out is a chore. I'd rather get it out ASAP, get the dopamine hit from seeing it work, and move on to the next task. These days I spend most of my time exploring the problem domain rather than writing code.

2. Learning still exists but at a different level; in fact it will be the only thing we will eventually be doing. E.g. I'm doing stuff today that I had negligible prior background in when I began. Without AI, I would probably require an advanced course to just get upto speed. But now I'm learning by doing while solving new problems, which is a brand new way of learning! Only I'm learning the problem domain rather than the intricacies of code.

3. Statistically speaking, the people who hire us don't really care about the code, they just want business results. (See: the difficulty of funding tech debt cleanup projects!)

Personally, I still care about the code and review everything, whether written by me or the AI. But I can see how even that is rapidly becoming optional.

I will say this: AI is rapidly revolutionizing our field and we need to adapt just as quickly.
by abetusk | 2025-12-12 01:57:37+00:00
GNU stands for "GNU's Not Unix".

Yacc stands for "Yet Another C Compiler".

Nano was originally TIP which stood for "TIP Isn't Pico" but was later changed to Nano so as not to conflict with another Unix utility called tip [0]. Presumably nano was chosen as the metric prefix next larger than pico.

Personally, I'd prefer choosing a random string of 3-8 letters for command line tools. At least that would be better than naming programs using generic names (Keep, Bamboo, Chef, Salt) which leads to all sorts of name collisions.

From the article:

> This would be career suicide in virtually any other technical field.

The mascot for an $8.8T dollar (supply side) software industry, larger than Google, Microsoft and Apple combined, is a cartoon penguin [1].

"never had it in the first place" is absolutely correct.

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

[1] https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/24-038_51f8444f-...
by anyfoo | 2025-12-12 01:57:52+00:00
It looks like X was deliberately chosen to denote succession of W, not clashing with it:

"The name X derives from the lineage of the system. At Stanford University, Paul Asente and Brian Reid had begun work on the W window system [3] as an alternative to VGTS [13, 221 for the V system [5]. [...] We acquired a UNIX-based version of W for the VSlOO (with synchronous communication over TCP[24] produced by Asente and Chris Kent at Digital’s Western Research Laboratory. [...] It was also clear that, although synchronous communication was perhaps acceptable in the V system (owing to very fast networking primitives), it was completely inadequate in most other operating environments. X is our “reaction” to W."

-- https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/22949.24053
by waleedlatif1 | 2025-12-12 01:59:33+00:00
Copilot and a few modules are sim.ai-only, but self-hosters can access them with an API key. The core—execution engine, all integrations, deployment—is fully Apache 2.0.

We aimed for feature parity with n8n and improved much of the workflow building experience along the way. We also added what we think agentic workflows needed (mentioned above). Would love your feedback.
by phantasmish | 2025-12-12 02:00:17+00:00
I didn't pick perfect examples, I picked useful ones for bounding the rough time period. Both examples are transitional.

Alien nails it like 80% of the time (I've watched it twice in the last year, in 4k on a wall-size screen, so it's fresh for me). It's an early, major example of getting it damn near perfect pretty often. Not every shot's great—like, about two-thirds of the shots of the exterior of the landing craft look like a miniature, not as glaring as a Showa-era Godzilla or anything, but you can tell—but it's still a better average than modern computer-heavy movies. It's one of the earliest that's exhibiting the potential of peak pre-CG special effects, if not nailing it all the time. But, very few movies nail it all the time, including modern ones doing the computer graphics thing.
by eru | 2025-12-12 02:00:26+00:00
> Or if the chat got too long (still below 100k however) they deleted your first messages. This was 3 months ago.

I can believe that, but it also seems really silly? If your max context window is X and the chat has approached that, instead of outright deleting the first messages outright, why not have your model summarise the first quarter of tokens and place those at the beginning of the log you feed as context? Since the chat history is (mostly) immutable, this only adds a minimal overhead: you can cache the summarisation, and don't have to do that over and over again for each new message. (If partially summarised log gets too long, you summarise again.)

Since I can come up with this technique in half a minute of thinking about the problem, and the OpenAI folks are presumably not stupid, I wonder what downside I'm missing.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-12 02:00:33+00:00
Yeah, that’s dumb. Curious what they were charged with, e.g. if they were told to disperse and didn’t, and if the charges will stick.

As dumb as it may be, you should be free-in a democracy, with limited exceptions—to verbalize support for a foreign or even domestic terrorist organization as long as you aren’t materially aiding it.

Is “supporting” defined in the UK Terrorist Act?
by eastoeast | 2025-12-12 02:01:42+00:00
For the first time, I’m presenting a problem to LLMs that they cannot seem to answer. This is my first instance of them “endlessly thinking” without producing anything.

The problem is complicated, but very solvable.

I’m programming video cropping into my Android application. It seems videos that have “rotated” metadata cause the crop to be applied incorrectly. As in, a crop applied to the top of a video actually gets applied to the video rotated on its side.

So, either double rotation is being applied somewhere in the pipeline, or rotation metadata is being ignored.

I tried Opus 4.5, Gemini 3, and Codex 5.2. All 3 go through loops of “Maybe Media3 applies the degree(90) after…”, “no, that’s not right. Let me think…”

They’ll do this for about 5 minutes without producing anything. I’ll then stop them, adjusting the prompt to tell them “Just try anything! Your first thought, let’s rapidly iterate!“. Nope. Nothing.

To add, it also only seems to be using about 25% context on Opus 4.5. Weird!
by LargoLasskhyfv | 2025-12-12 02:03:21+00:00
That's not what I meant by 'automatically'.

I'm perfectly at ease with initiating them manually, as I see fit.

For me that means automatically tracking dependencies of things like USE-flags in Gentoo's Portage, or Exherbo's Paludis.

And the possibly resulting conflicts. Arch and its makepkg and the stuff in the AUR has simply no provisions(that I'm aware of) for that. It's all manual, IMO. AUR-helper, or not.

> Definitely not going to happen on Arch and this runs completely counter to what you claimed to like about CachyOS. Distributing binaries is not going to result in a very optimal system... Which is what caused those red flags to be raised in the first place

Says you. I counter that with my years long experience(on CachyOS), limited to the stuff they DO deliver as binary. Obviously carefully tested by people who really know what they do, on much faster systems than I have, before delivery to the general public.

> Btw, I don't suggest doing this. If an update breaks your system then you don't have the versions cached to roll back to. I mean you can download again but your cache gives you a good hint at what did in fact work.

Never needed it, neither on plain Arch in the far past, nor the two years of CachyOS now. Should something bad happen I can boot some rescue-image from whereever, and fix it that way. It's just a waste of space.

Edit: Please don't suggest Nix(OS) or Guix. They give a shit about optimization in the name of 'reproducible builds', and go for the lowest common denominator because of that. Which is understandable, given their goals. But they are unaligned with mine.
by apical_dendrite | 2025-12-12 02:04:09+00:00
Please actually read what I wrote. You are responding to something that I did not write.

I did not claim that there wasn't "massive, unchecked surveillance". The specific claim that I made was that the conspiracy-theory films of the 1990s were based on the idea of unchecked surveillance of US citizens that was then used for purposes such as targeting and murder of US citizens in the United States.

There was nothing in the Snowden documents that suggested there were rogue operators going out and murdering Americans. In fact, when it came to Americans specifically, there was minimization, and attempts to abide by FISA, none of which ever featured in 1990s-era conspiracy films. I very specifically spoke about minimization as regards Americans, not globally.
by zbentley | 2025-12-12 02:04:25+00:00
Yes. And malicious egress traffic (bad actors or malware exfiltrating data) typically routes to deliberately-unpredictable and constantly changing IPs.

Like, I don't love TLS MITM-ing. It's not a good thing. But it's the least bad of the options available for solving a problem that many people have decided must be solved (regulating behavior on a LAN).
by rapind | 2025-12-12 02:04:26+00:00
I found the gemini cli extremely lacking and even frustrating. Why google would choose node…

Codex is decent and seemed to be improving (being written in rust helps). Claude code is still the king, but my god they have server and throttling issues.

Mixed bag wherever you go. As model progress slows / flatlines (already has?) I’m sure we’ll see a lot more focus and polish on the interfaces.
by idiotsecant | 2025-12-12 02:04:27+00:00
The idea that all non-western practices, language included, have a deep and amazing and metaphysical quality that westerners simply couldn't understand is so tiresome. No language is more expressive than another, some are more expressive for particular very specific things, like Inuit languages might be much better at describing the varieties of snow, but no language has a monopoly on describing dualism of ideas. It's just as silly to be overly dismissive of the language you're familiar with as it is to be overly dismissive of others.
by paul312 | 2025-12-12 02:04:28+00:00
I'm a solo developer who got burned by GDPR compliance on my last project. Paying lawyers $2K for standard policies felt wrong.

PolicyGen generates customized legal documents (privacy policies, terms, refunds, etc.) based on your business details. Built 18 different policy types covering GDPR, CCPA, DMCA, etc.

Tech stack: Python/Flask, PostgreSQL, Stripe for payments, Resend for emails. Took about 3 months of nights/weekends.

Free tier available. First 10 paid customers get 50% off for life.

What compliance issues do you face? Would love feedback!
by FloorEgg | 2025-12-12 02:04:36+00:00
Sure, but I have never heard anyone use this either. This is not common in discourse.

I also find the wiki description and your comment somewhat ambiguous. Even in this case it's hard to descern between absence of want or a negative want.

Edit: due to either my own personal misunderstanding or maybe cultural niche, "reject" is also ambiguous because it could mean an absence of want and not necessarily a negative want. However I just learned that in semiotics "reject" does mean distinctly a negative.

So yep, "diswant" is exactly what I've seen lacking.

Now the question is why don't people use it more?

I'll try.

Thanks for sharing.
by rootusrootus | 2025-12-12 02:04:41+00:00
I recently ordered a Comma Four, which I will install BluePilot on and use with my Lightning. I'm looking forward to seeing how competent it is. Gets good reviews, at least, so I'm hoping.

I do wonder if there will be many more iterations, though, with so many manufacturers switching over to an encrypted canbus and locking out the control method comma uses.
by dillydogg | 2025-12-12 02:05:08+00:00
>“Descriptive names are boring!”

>>Yes, and surgical instruments are boring.

I'm absolutely certain that this person has never been (awake) in a surgery suite because all of the tools people use have eponymous names.

There are a billion little grabbers that all have silly names like Adson, Allis, Babcock, Kocher etc. which are all meaningless until you just know what they are. And don't you grab the Mayo scissors when they ask for Metzenbaum. In med school we had a flashcard deck that just had a picture of the tool and what it is called on the other end.

In the end, I think the author has a point, but then doesn't really make it that well. I think using awk as a good example is a bit silly. diff is a good one though!
by eru | 2025-12-12 02:05:57+00:00
> I realise this sounds obvious to many people but it clearly wasn't to those guys so maybe it's not!

It's worse: Gemini (and ChatGPT, but to a lesser extent) have started suggesting random follow-up topics when they conclude that a chat in a session has exhausted a topic. Well, when I say random, I mean that they seem to be pulling it from the 'memory' of our other chats.

For a naive user without preconceived notions of how to use these tools, this guidance from the tools themselves would serve as a pretty big hint that they should intermingle their sessions.