MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by godelski | 2025-12-08 01:04:25+00:00
In case people missed it there's some additional important context:

- Major AI conference flooded with peer reviews written by AI https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46088236 - "All OpenReview Data Leaks" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46073488 - "The Day Anonymity Died: Inside the OpenReview / ICLR 2026 Leak" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46082370 - More about the leak https://forum.cspaper.org/topic/191/iclr-i-can-locate-reviewer-how-an-api-bug-turned-blind-review-into-a-data-apocalypse

The second one went under the radar, but basically OpenReview left the API open so you didn't need credentials. This meant all reviewers and authors were deanonymized across multiple conferences.

All these links are for ICLR too, which is the #2 ML conference for those that don't know.

And for some important context of the link for this post, note that they only sampled 300 papers and found 50. It looks to be almost exclusively citations but those are probably the easiest things to verify.

And this week CVPR sent out notifications that OpenReview will be down between Dec 6th and Dec 9th. No explanation for why.

So we have reviewers using LLMs, authors using LLMs, and idk the conference systems writing their software with LLMs? Things seem pretty fragile right now...

I think at least this article should highlight one of the problems we have in academia right now (beyond just ML, though it is more egregious there): citation mining. It is pretty standard to have over 50 citations in your 10 page paper these days. You can bet that most of these are not going to be for the critical claims but instead heavily placed in the background section. I looked at a few of the papers and everyone I looked at had their hallucinated citations in background (or background in appendix) sections. So these are "filler" citations, which I think illustrates a problem: citations are being abused. I mean the metric hacking should be pretty obvious if you just look at how many citations ML people have. It's grown exponentially! Do we really need so many citations? I'm all for giving people credit but a hyper-fixation on citation count as our measure of credit just doesn't work. It's far too simple of a metric. Like we might as well measure how good of a coder you are by the number of lines of code you produce[0].

It really seems that academia doesn't scale very well...

[0] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rDk_LsON3CM
by lmm | 2025-12-08 01:04:35+00:00
> The problem with Scala 2 is that the type inference part of the compiler is still broken. Nobody worked on that. Instead they changed the language in ways that don't address complaints.

Huh? Type inference is much more consistent and well-specified in 3. In 2 it was ad-hoc so and impossible to fix anything for one codebase without breaking another. There are plenty of legitimate complaints to be had about Scala 3, but this is absolutely not one of them.
by phil21 | 2025-12-08 01:04:53+00:00
Spices might be the most universal ripoff anywhere in the US. You can get it so much cheaper either at ethnic stores, generic plastic bags at certain grocery stores in the ethnic aisles, or restaurant supply stores for spices that don’t have a short shelf life.

It’s so bizarre to me. At some point someone needs to do an in-depth expose on how this spice monopoly happened.
by mindslight | 2025-12-08 01:05:03+00:00
> or omitting to update a sign by mistake

No, in this case the shop is legitimately offering an item for sale, and then forgetting to change the price they are offering it at. It's quite disingenuous for a shop to put up signs, and then act like those numbers aren't legally binding, while the real prices are hidden away in a database somewhere. If they want to have their database be the authoritative copy pricing information, then they can just not put up price signs to begin with.
by erelong | 2025-12-08 01:05:38+00:00
This reminds me of something slightly different but of "not reinventing the wheel"

It feels like there should be emerging "optimized solutions" to certain problems that are widely accepted, but rather instead it seems like people just keep re-doing things that I thought we would have already "solved" and moved on past

For example, if you simply want to consume the cheapest caffeine source, I thought someone figured out it was powdered caffeine... versus paying maybe like 100x more for a coffee from a "coffee chain store". Now, granted the experience and maybe the same antioxidants or chemical makeup may not be the same in caffeine powder versus coffee, but the point is I feel like a lot of problems aren't "solved for optimization" which would enable us to make progress on some other unoptimized problem in society

I guess this "reinvention of the wheel" feels like a "vanity activity" to me?
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-12-08 01:06:50+00:00
I am. I think that organic farming is based around the same kind of fake nostalgia discussed upthread, and there's really no coherent reason to avoid chemical fertilizer. Manure contributes nothing better other than a pile of contaminants and pathogens. (I'm more sympathetic to people who want to avoid herbicides, even if the best evidence is that they're safe.)

Even if you like modern organic farming, it's carefully regulated to control the risks and environmental costs of using crap. The US National Organic Program (https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/5006.pdf), for example, requires 90-120 days between the application of raw manure and harvest; only properly pasteurized manure can be used in the months before harvest.
by crest | 2025-12-08 01:09:06+00:00
* Includes a microphone? Look at the datasheet of the devboard they used, dummy. * Running everything as root? Valid point. That's a inexcusable mistake and has been for ever a sign of laziness and ignorance. * Not including systemd? Yes please. * Not including a package manager the author nows? Shows the authors ignorance to assume apt would be found on a small embedded system.
by alickz | 2025-12-08 01:10:18+00:00
>what if the LLM gets something wrong that the operator (a junior dev perhaps) doesn't even know it's wrong?

the same thing that always happens if a dev gets something wrong without even knowing it's wrong - either code review/QA catches it, or the user does, and a ticket is created

>if it fails here, it will fail with other things, in not such obvious ways.

is infallibility a realistic expectation of a software tool or its operator?
by phil21 | 2025-12-08 01:10:26+00:00
Sounds like the grocery stores were not serving their customer base well if they couldn’t compete with “overpriced” dollar stores.

Carrying cost of produce does not add up. If produce is going bad at that spoilage rate the store management fucked up and didn’t order the correct amount of product for the location. You can’t wish your way into a product mix.

Nothing was stopping grocery stores from identifying this need. Pretending your customer base is more affluent than it is sounds like a quick way to go out of business to me.
by bpt3 | 2025-12-08 01:11:13+00:00
How do you do either of the following without spending any time at all on estimates?

"Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale."

"At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly."

If I was your colleague, had invested in your company, or was considering giving you money to deliver some product and you refused to tell me when you think it'll be done, it would be the last time any of the above ever happened.

You wouldn't accept that from any service you were attempting to hire, so I don't know why it would be acceptable for software development.
by donkey_brains | 2025-12-08 01:11:14+00:00
This seems like a lot of work. I just point my router at AdGuard DNS and that takes care of all ads on every device on my network. No filter lists, nothing to host, completely free.

Only caveat is it doesn’t block ads served by the content provider itself e.g. some streaming services, but from what I hear those are difficult to block with any approach.
by hedgehog | 2025-12-08 01:11:33+00:00
Turning the question around, what other part of the system _could_ do this job? And how would the compositor do any part of its job if it doesn't have access to both window contents and displays? I'm not super deep in this area but a straight-forward example of a non-managed app and a color-aware graphics app running on a laptop with an external display seems like it is enough to figure out how things need to go together. This neglects some complicating factors like display pixel density, security, accessibility, multi-GPU, etc, but I think it more or less explains how the Wayland authors arrived at its design and how some of the problems got there.
by conradev | 2025-12-08 01:11:52+00:00
I find the granular nature of dependency sharing in NixOS to be really nice. In particular, I like systemd as my hypervisor. With systemd I can still isolate and lock down processes, but they can still, for example, share memory pages of `glibc`. It is certainly less "secure", and with Docker at least you're sharing the same kernel. It's also hard to share resources between Docker containers. Getting 4 Docker containers to use the same instance of Avahi, for example, requires explicit configuration.

Docker containers also don't have a "standard" for where to put binaries (outside of CMD/ENTRYPOINT), how to configure users/uids (many still run as root?), whether to put multiple services in one container or separate containers, where to put user data, etc. NixOS coordinates this centrally like any distro, assigning paths and UIDs and ports.
by stevefan1999 | 2025-12-08 01:12:02+00:00
I would say the biggest problem of CGNAT is that it is essentially double-NAT: your home router did one layer of NAT, and the ISP also did another layer of NAT on the edge that is close to your home, not only the latency could add up (although so far it is not a problem in general), but also that another point of failure to be concerned too.

I happen to come across this having CGNAT in my parent's house, luckily they have a backup IPv6 so I can access it from remote "directly".
by lmm | 2025-12-08 01:12:21+00:00
> Scala had/has a lot of promise. But how the language is marketed/managed/maintained really let a lot of people down and caused a lot of saltiness about it. And that is before we talk about the church of type-safety.

On the contrary, there was nothing wrong with Scala's marketing. What's damaged it is a decade of FUD and outright lies from the people marketing Kotlin.
by alephnerd | 2025-12-08 01:12:39+00:00
> because the OLPC program had other benefits (increasing uptake of lower cost laptops worldwide, giving children computer skills, etc.)...

What does that matter if food insecurity, stunted growth, low quality K-6 schools, and other critical issues remain?

From a human capital development perspective, the amount of money spent per year on OLPC could have subsidized a number of similar programs that are both cheaper and have been documented to lead to better developmental indicators.

And it wasn't like OLPC actually placed educators to teach programming at the K-10 level in most of the target regions.

On top of that, broadband and internet penetration didn't expand until the 2010s with Asian commodity telecom equipment being mass produced and exported to developing markets - so what use was a computer which had no internet to a household that was almost always in the lowest income bracket in a developing country?!?

This is why evidence-based policymaking has become the norm and why Banerjee and Duflo won a Nobel Prize.

Edit: can't reply

You (most likely) grew up in a first world country and in the top 5% of households globally.

For the target communities for OLPC, much more basic needs like clean water, school access, nutrition access, and other services were either limited or functionally non-existent.

Much of rural Peru during OLPC (the 2000s) [0] had HDIs comparable to what Laos, Cambodia, and Bangladesh today.

More critically, Peru back then used to be more developed than China [0], yet China's HDI has now outpaced Peru developmentally because local government took an evidence-based approach to developmental policymaking thanks to guidance from Stanford's REAP group [1]

I'm sure you can recognize that the policies needed in a developing country are entirely different from those in a developed country.

[0] - https://globaldatalab.org/shdi/table/shdi/PER+CHN/?levels=1+...

[1] - https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/reap
by salysson | 2025-12-08 01:12:39+00:00
Location: Aracaju, Brazil

Remote: Yes(Only Remote)

Willing to Relocate: No

Technologies: PHP, Moodle, Laravel, Apache, Git, MySQL, Composer, HTML, CSS, Ubuntu(Linux), SQL. Open to work with Any PHP Frameworks ecossystem

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UCg7PfR0AWn2a-riJEpCP9c5sFc...

Email:salysson280@gmail.com

Hi, I'm Alysson, a PHP/Laravel Web Developer with 1 year of experience, but I'm also available to work as a full-stack developer. I'm looking for remote positions as full-time, contract, or freelance. I can also work as a Software Developer, given my hunger and enthusiasm for learning, and PHP is the stack I'm strongest in. I'm looking for a job where I can take the next step and grow with the organization.
by latexr | 2025-12-08 01:13:00+00:00
What a profoundly bad faith argument. We all understand that singular words are public domain, they belong to everyone. Yet when you arrange them in a specific pattern, of which there are infinite possibilities, you create something unique. When someone copies that arrangement wholesale and claims they were the first, that’s what we refer to as plagiarism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9huNI5sBd8
by Nevermark | 2025-12-08 01:13:09+00:00
> Yeah, I think "vanity" is not totally the right term here

“Recreation” is perhaps a good word.

But I also use “vanity” for doing serious things, for a non-serious purpose in a similar way. I.e. one day I would like to be able to afford to have some “vanity businesses”, regardless of profitability, like bar I have designed, a winery, etc.

Pretty common hobbies for the wealthy.

Those are not things that drive me, and not for appearance sake (I.e. not that kind of vanity). But if I had enough to throw in this direction without any risk to myself, I would enjoy that.
by phil21 | 2025-12-08 01:13:38+00:00
This was not always the case. 30 years ago the customer base for bulk co-op places were lower-middle class/poor folks who had a decent amount of financial acumen. You'd go there with your own containers and buy staples by the pound. Or special order that 50lb bag of oats or flour for 1/4th the per-lb price of the local grocery store.

They slowly morphed into bougie health nut/conspiracy hippie stores during my lifetime. Closest thing I've found to what I remember them being are food service stores which tend to require a business tax ID to buy from.
by sureMan6 | 2025-12-08 01:14:03+00:00
Either op mistakes the hallucinated citations for the authors (most likely, although there's almost no "middle eastern names" among them) Or he checked some that do have the names listed (I found 4, all had either Chinese names or "western" names) Anyway the great majority of papers (good or bad) I've seen have Indian or Chinese names attached, attributing bad papers to brown people having an inferior culture is just blatantly racist
by cyberax | 2025-12-08 01:14:30+00:00
> ...but in my experience, they're perfectly capable of doing the right thing

It's both true. Given that a typical store can have thousands of SKUs displayed, mistakes will _always_ happen once in a while. A forgotten price tag, an incorrect sale price, etc.

But at the same time, stores are more than capable of having a system to _fix_ these issues as soon as they are detected. It doesn't even take much, just a way for a cashier to flag an inconsistent price for someone at the back office.
by ssl-3 | 2025-12-08 01:15:46+00:00
Yeah, that "computer error" explanation is bullshit, probably rooted in a combination of CYA and narcissism.

When I worked in retail, we only had one database of pricing. The shelf tag and sign printers, the registers, the whatevers -- they all used that same database. If a shelf tag was printed at the same instant that an item was rung up, then they'd have had the same exact price.

There's mechanism for the prices to deviate.

(And yeah, pricing errors still happen at least because people are people. We make mistakes. We forget shit. We can even convince ourselves that we did a thing even if we didn't. We err. Even if we're absolutely honest with ourselves and others, we can run out of fucks to give. It's all part of our condition.

But of course: When a price was posted wrong then we fixed it once it was brought to our attention. The customer got the price that was posted, and the posting was changed.

For my own purposes, I had a habit of pulling the incorrect price tags and taking them with me back to the register; I'd just give them to whatever manager when they would show up with the key that was required for precise price adjustments and get back to doing whatever it is that my primary job was at the moment...which, if I were handling a register, meant something other than printing shelf tags.)
by coppsilgold | 2025-12-08 01:16:40+00:00
> This can be bad if a particular memory cell has failed. If every variable has a fixed address, and one of those addresses goes bad, a patch can be loaded to move that address and the mission can continue.

This seems like a rather manual way to go about things for which an automated solution can be devised. Such as create special ECC memory where you also account for entire cell failure with Reed-Solomon coding or some boot process which blacklists bad cells etc.
by coffeecoders | 2025-12-08 01:16:52+00:00
I have an Apple TV and I’ve been running iSponsorBlockTV [1] on my Synology box for a while. It auto-skips the sponsored segments and with Youtube premium, it gives me a clean, ad-free setup.

I can’t stand those in-video intros or sponsored promos, where I’m suddenly pitched a random VPN or productivity app.

[1]. https://github.com/dmunozv04/iSponsorBlockTV
by epsteingpt | 2025-12-08 01:17:41+00:00
The question anyone reading this analysis should ask is: if private equity is so benign, where do the returns come from?

The unlock, which these papers don't understand, is the extractive nature of P/E that is hidden.

A few clues: 1. A .5%-1% increase in prices is meaningful (Overall industry prices rise after buyouts, but again the price increase is on average very modest.) Retails margins routinely are measured in fractions of percentage points (bps). As an example, even if overall hospital prices stayed similar, P/E firms have been caught jacking up prices on people who need it most. Research on "Surprise Billing" in emergency rooms spiked immediately after PE firms took over staffing groups. Are you surprised?

2. Equity multiples are "effectively" a form of stealing from retail / pension plans: this is where the real 'theft' happens (if you want to call it that). If you reraterevenue from 6x (private) to 15-20x, someone is now paying 2-3x more per dollar to have that company in society. The key is the P/E OWNERS reap that value, so even if there are no job cuts, the wealth being created aggregates 'money supply' to the owners. This has downstream impacts on inflation.

3. Independent of aggregate effects - local effects are quite devastating. This is not P/E's fault, but closing down plants can kill towns for good. The question here is ownership - a family feels some tie to the community to attempt to help their friends and neighbors. P/E absolutely destroys this tie - the subtle but measurable effects compound.

Finally, even if you like P/E as a VEHICLE (which - I would argue it hasn't been a 'good' ones since like the late 90s), you can't ignore the fact that it's returns have largely been eaten by fees.

You're right to say that P/E is just playing the market. That doesn't mean that its impact on society has been good - the entire reason we're in the current political and economic situation we are today are by following the 'laws of the market' which have hollowed out the middle class and created a pretty large affordability crisis despite the world having achieved record levels of wealth.

The transfer from 'doers' to 'owners' has been a net negative for American society, and one of the primary reasons we don't 'build' things anymore - it's just not capitally "efficient"
by KaoruAK | 2025-12-08 01:18:44+00:00
Hello HN,

We are sharing a hybrid SAT solver focused on practical efficiency (O(log n) + CDCL).

Results from the scale test:

Instance: hash 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a (SAT Competence). Size: 4,751,686 Clauses and 1,313,245 Variables. Result: UNSAT Total time: 132.68 seconds (2 minutes, 12 seconds).

The Quaternion Dynamics phase (O(log n)) enabled a speed increase of over 50x in variables, keeping the total time low. Proving UNSAT in this time for an instance of this magnitude is proof of the method's efficiency.

Full log (Spanish Original): ============================================================ SAT SOLVER - DINAMICA POLINOMIAL DE QUATERNIONES O(log n) + PySAT = SAT/UNSAT CORRECTO ============================================================

Sube tu archivo .cnf o .cnf.xz:

• 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf.xz(n/a) - 11905108 bytes, last modified: 7/12/2025 - 100% done Saving 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf.xz to 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf (1).xz

Archivo: 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf (1).xz Tamano: 11905108 bytes Descomprimiendo .xz... Descomprimido: 108797713 caracteres

Parseando CNF... Variables: 1313245 Clausulas: 4751686

-------------------------------------------------- Ejecutando algoritmo híbrido... -------------------------------------------------- [1] Aproximación cuaterniónica O(log n)... Heurístico: 4102660/4751686 (86.34%) [2] Decisión exacta con PySAT (CDCL)...

================================================== RESULTADO: UNSAT Tiempo total: 132.6845 segundos Complejidad O(log n): 15.618034 Clausulas satisfechas (heuristico): 4102660/4751686 ==================================================

Archivo guardado: 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf (1)_DIMACS_resultado.txt

Preview: c ================================================== c SAT Solver - Dinamica Polinomial de Quaterniones c O(log n) + CDCL (PySAT) = SAT/UNSAT CORRECTO c ================================================== c Archivo: 001344c9b3cb1626af1c7c35155cf26a-bench_13439.smt2.cnf (1).xz c Variables: 1313245 c Clausulas: 4751686 c Complejidad O(log n): 15.618034 c Clausulas satisfechas (heuristico): 4102660/4751686 (86.34%) c s UNSAT ...

The solver is available for testing with any known SAT Competence instance.

Link to Solver Files (OSF): https://osf.io/d5kg4/files/mpxgu Good luck with your Pandora's box!
by JohnBooty | 2025-12-08 01:19:11+00:00
In this case, a 141 page highly dense (and frankly boring to read) document is in its essence a liability

So, do you think that the intent was for developers to memorize this document?

Or do you think the expectation was something more reasonable, like using this document as a tool to configure linting tools so that developers could get realtime feedback as they code?
by tomhow | 2025-12-08 01:19:55+00:00
Please don't post flamebait like this on HN. It's covered by this guideline:

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

It's fine to make the point, but it's inevitable that it will stir up strong feelings in others, so it's important to express the point thoughtfully and substantively. In this case, citing credible evidence and being compassionate rather than dismissive, would make a big difference.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html