MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by abetusk | 2025-12-10 02:24:22+00:00
Yes, it's bullshit.

I wouldn't expect that most people couldn't, with enough time and resources, tell a better story. Isn't the part of the point of giving a talk to convey the ideas so that other people can use them? If they've internalized the ideas and seen your presentation, can't they then improve it and give a better talk? Haven't you failed if they can't do that?

Does me being the best person to teach them matter? Doesn't it matter more that I am the person teaching them when no one else is?

There's room for personalization, making sure the talk compliments your style and gives insight into why you think it's important and how you solved it, but none of this really relies on the uniqueness of the person.

If Stallman got up and gave a talk on "what it's like to be me", I would find it much less interesting than a talk about "how to invent free software and build a movement around it".
by martin-t | 2025-12-10 02:25:27+00:00
This is the first technology in human history which only works if you use an exorbitant amount of other people's work (without their consent, often without even their knowledge) to automate their work.

There have been previous tech revolutions but they were based on independent innovation.

> Thus a law predicated on the assumption that a machine can't do certain things might need to be revisited.

Perhaps using copyright law for software and other engineering work might have been a mistake but it worked to a degree me and most devs were OK with.

Sidenote: There is no _one_ copyright law. IANAL but reportedly, for example datasets are treated differently in the US vs EU, with greater protection for the work that went into creating a database in the EU. And of course, China does what is best for China at a given moment.

There's 2 approaches:

1) Either we follow the current law. Its spirit and (again IANAL) probably the letter says that mechanical transformation preserves copyright. Therefore the LLMs and their output must be licensed under the same license as the training data (if all the training data use compatible licenses) or are illegal (if they mixed incompatible licenses). The consequence is that very roughly a) most proprietary code cannot be used for training, b) using only permissive code gives you a permissively licensed model and output and c) permissive and copyleft code can be combined, as long as the resulting model and output is copyleft. It still completely ignores attribution though but this is a compromise I would at least consider being OK with.

(But if I don't get even credit for 10 years of my free work being used to build this innovation, then there should be a limit on how much the people building the training algorithms get out of it as well.)

2) We design a new law. Legality and morality are, sadly, different and separate concepts. Now, call me a naive sucker, but I think legality should try to approximate morality as closely as possible, only deviating due to the real-world limitations of provability. (E.g. some people deserve to die but the state shouldn't have the right to kill them because the chance of error is unacceptably high.) In practice, the law is determined by what the people writing it can get away with before the people forced to follow it revolt. I don't want a revolution, but I think for example a bloody revolution is preferable to slavery.

Either way, there are established processes for handling both violations of laws and for writing new laws. This should not be decided by private for-profit corporations seeing whether they can get away with it scot-free or trembling that they might have to pay a fine which is a near-zero fraction of their revenue, with almost universally no repercussions for their owners.
by acdha | 2025-12-10 02:25:34+00:00
> Except it turns out people don't want their computer buying things for them.

I think this also hits an interesting problem with confidence: if you could trust the service to buy what you’d buy and get a good price you’d probably use it more but it only saves a couple of seconds in the easy case (e.g. Amazon reorders are already easy) and for anything less clear cut people rightly worry about getting a mistake or rip-off. That puts the bar really high because a voice interface sucks for more complex product comparisons and they have a very short window to give a high-quality response before most people give up and use their phone/computer instead. That also constrains the most obvious revenue sources because any kind of pay for placement is going to inspire strong negative reactions.
by Incipient | 2025-12-10 02:25:56+00:00
I feel like there are definitely two types of people that are after coffee - the morning commute people that need caffeine, and just want it fast. They'd not notice a machine doing it for them (and a lot of them would have a machine at home!)

The other group is like you and I, where we like engaging with the community.

I suppose three - the Starbucks crew that do it for 'likes'.
by gldrk | 2025-12-10 02:26:31+00:00
>How did people even come to this bizarre conclusion?

The first reason is that it is true. All of the best evidence suggests a minor male advantage on g and a major advantage in more specific abilities, such as mental rotation. See https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/2021/04/the-claim-of-substantia...

It is easy to see why that would be the case from an evolutionary point of view. Ironically, your own post contains a clue: in a male-dominated society where men are far more valued for their intelligence than women, such differences are bound to arise.

The egalitarian bad faith interpretation of this claim is that any man is smarter than Marie Curie. What it actually says is that a hypothetical Mario Curie would almost certainly outshine his real-life counterpart.

The other reason is related to sexual selection. Even if a certain man is less intelligent or physically weaker than most women, it may be adaptive for him to pretend otherwise. What beliefs come to dominate in a given population is determined by reproductive success, not directly by their truth value.
by chirayuk | 2025-12-10 02:26:54+00:00
Fun comments for re-writing sudo in Zig:

> Zig doesn't have traits. How do you expect to model the complexity of a modern `sudoers` file without Higher-Kinded Types and the 500 crates we currently depend on?

> Also, `unsafe` in Rust is better than "trust me bro" in Zig. If you switch, the borrow checker gods will be angry.

from https://sw.vtom.net/hn35/pages/90100066.html
by unplugitalready | 2025-12-10 02:27:42+00:00
You have said it all. I have kids, but it's basically impossible to age gate everything, my solution for a long time besides screen time restrictions was having terrible internet connections. We were still using Verizon copperwire till 3 years ago, slow, high latency, dropped service all the time, had to restart the router daily.

It worked enough for 1 device to watch a movie or 3 people to do basic tasks, but there was no multiple screens displaying madness at all times. Apps just failed to load and you had to restart, it was absolutely fabulous.

The big problem is that schools require them to have and use the internet. I have no idea why. It's not better, it's not like they use Wikipedia, no it's a mish mash of private companies selling edu-ware to buzzword aficionados in administration.

But having no computers would be fine, at least till high school, at minimum.
by marcus_holmes | 2025-12-10 02:28:23+00:00
My point was in response to the parent "there's a lot of things that need to change before we get to Star Trek Federation economy", I pointed out that we have done trials on UBI that seemed to work, maybe we should try that.

I was wondering if your correction from UBI to GBI changes that point; these trials seem to work and solve at least part of the problem that this whole thread discusses, so maybe we should try that at a national scale. Does GBI invalidate that?
by ssl-3 | 2025-12-10 02:30:23+00:00
Huh?

I have no reason to care about staffing or capitalization. Those aren't my concerns. Those concepts are beyond my purvey as a tenant.

I care only about timeliness. My entire relationship any landlord is that of paying money, and receiving housing and services relating to that housing.

When the aircon dies and it takes weeks of pestering for the corpo entity to address it, that's a problem for me that changes the way I view the world in a negative way.

When the aircon dies and it's fixed the next afternoon by the action of some dude who owns some apartments, then I don't really have anything to complain about at all. There was a problem and it was in the past almost as soon as it was discovered.
by kbolino | 2025-12-10 02:30:39+00:00
But why?

There's no reliable source of truth for your home network. Neither the local (m)DNS nor the IP addresses nor the MAC addresses hold any extrinsic meaning. You could certainly run the standard ACME challenges, but neither success nor failure would carry much weight.

And then the devices themselves have no way of knowing your hub/router/AP is legitimate. You'd have to have some way of getting the CA certificate on to them that couldn't be easily spoofed.

EDIT: There is a draft for a new ACME challenge called dns-persist-01, which mentions IoT, but I'm not really sure how it helps that use case exactly: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-acme-dns-pe...
by unscaled | 2025-12-10 02:32:36+00:00
The monotonic behavior is not the default, but I would also be happier if it was removed from the spec or at least marked with all the appropriate warning signs on all the libraries implementing it.

But I don't think UUIDv7 solves the issue by "having less quirks". Just like you'd have to be careful to use the non-monotonic version of ULID, you'd have to be careful to use the right version of UUID. You also have to hope that all of your UUID consumers (which would almost invariably try to parse or validate the UUID, even if they do nothing with it) support UUIDv7 or don't throw on an unknown version.
by codys | 2025-12-10 02:34:25+00:00
Ya, UUID v7 has been standard for a few years now. Perhaps the author is not familiar with the terminology of RFCs and so is misinterpreting the terminology used by IETF: "Request for Comments" and "Proposed Standard" can sound like they're not complete to folks not familiar with the IETF's process. Even then though, I would think they'd notice all the software that has UUID v7 support.
by joshtbradley | 2025-12-10 02:35:22+00:00
This sounds like the “t-shirt printers” of the 90s. While everyone was busy trying to invent the future, boring old manufacturing got ignored.

Turns out printing t-shirts isn’t that different from printing silicon. Now Taiwan produces 90% of the world’s advanced chips and NVIDIA is the most valuable company in the world.

Boom’s founder, Blake, comes from a e-commerce background. What a legend for this innovation.
by OutOfHere | 2025-12-10 02:35:29+00:00
An LLM is just a hypothesis generator, as is a doctor. Both can be wrong. Only a doctor can be dismissive though; an LLM is never dismissive, which scores it an extra point.

It is up to you to query them for the best output, and put the pieces together. If you bias them wrongly, it's your own fault.

For every example where an LLM misdiagnosed, a PCP could do much worse. People should think of them as idea generators, subjecting the generated ideas to diagnostic validation tests. If an idea doesn't pan out, keep querying until you hit upon the right idea.
by Juminuvi | 2025-12-10 02:36:34+00:00
I know you say you don't use the paid apis, but renting a gpu is something I've been thinking about and I'd be really interested in knowing how this compares with paying by the token. I think gpt-oss-120b is 0.10/input 0.60/output per million tokens in azure. In my head this could go a long way but I haven't used gpt oss agentically long enough to really understand usage. Just wondering if you know/be willing to share your typical usage/token spend on that dedicated hardware?
by pyuser583 | 2025-12-10 02:36:48+00:00
I recently asked an AI about a very important topic in current events. It gave me a shocking answer, which initially assumed was wrong - but seems correct.

The question was something like: “how reliable is the science behind misinformation.” And it said something like: “quality level is very poor and far below what justifies current public discourse.”

I ask for a specific article backing this up, and it’s saying “there isn’t any one article, I just analyzed the existing literature and it stinks.”

This matters quite a bit. X - formerly Twitter - is being fined for refusing to make its data available for misinformation research.

I’m trying to get it to give me a non-AI source, but it’s saying it doesn’t exist.

If this is true - it’s pretty important- and something worth discussing. But it doesn’t seem supportable outside the context of “my AI said.”
by Tiktaalik | 2025-12-10 02:38:29+00:00
Yes it was one of the most successful PC games of the 1990s, but that doesn't say much today. Have a look at its subreddit and it's a ghost town. Wasn't remade and re-released often since and little to no effort has been put into growing the franchise.

In contrast contemporary SNES games have had more remakes and had their audiences grow remarkably over time. The franchise hasn't been cared for and so it's relatively obscure despite being a top tier best in class game on its release.

Tbh in general I think you could say the same of a lot of top tier successful PC games of that era.
by torton | 2025-12-10 02:38:50+00:00
iPhones and MacBooks can be serviced to replace the battery.

My iPhones typically get a fresh battery around the 3-year mark, or whenever the battery health dips below 80%, and do a second tour of duty with someone in the family. In all cases so far, the OS goes out of support and apps stop working before the second battery degrades.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-12-10 02:40:53+00:00
It wasn't a guess. It's a matter of definition.

Your link addresses a different claim than the one I made. So far we have release of stress (true by definition), statistical correlation (foreshocks and aftershocks), and reduction of a future event (your link).

As to objections about relative quantities, earthquake swarms exist. I think it's going to be just about impossible to make claims that are correct while also being applicable to all scenarios. A more limited claim that a particular quake or activity in a particular region does not exhibit a certain sort of relationship is going to be much more defensible.
by boneitis | 2025-12-10 02:41:42+00:00
This is probably the best time as any I'll ever get to mention that Patrick Wyatt's[0] blog[1] is a gold mine of frontline, boots-on-the-ground accounts of making WarCraft II and other games.

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

[1]: https://www.codeofhonor.com/
by cameronrye | 2025-12-10 02:42:38+00:00
Location: Berkley, Michigan, USA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: TypeScript, React, Next.js, Node.js, C#, .NET Core, GraphQL, PostgreSQL, SQL Server, AWS, Azure, Docker, Kubernetes, Redis, CI/CD, GitHub Actions, LLM/AI Integration, MCP

Résumé/CV: https://rye.dev

Email: cameron@rye.dev

Senior Full-Stack Engineer with 15+ years of experience building and scaling web applications. Proven track record: scaled platforms to 200K users, reduced payment processing latency by 65%, mentored 20+ developers (75% promotion rate).

Recent highlights:

• Architected microservices-based warehouse management system processing 50K+ daily shipments

• Built payment platform handling $50M+ annual transaction volume with 99.9% uptime

• Led teams of 6-8 engineers through rapid growth phases and company acquisitions

• Currently building AI tooling: MCP servers, CLI agents, and LLM integrations

Strong background in fintech, logistics, and e-commerce. I enjoy both technical leadership and hands-on development. Looking for senior/staff IC or tech lead roles on product-focused teams.

GitHub: https://github.com/cameronrye LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/cameronrye
by andrewf | 2025-12-10 02:42:54+00:00
This is nuts, in the best way.

The operand fields of a WTL 3167 address have been specifically designed so that a WTL 3167 address can be given as either the source or the destination to a REP MOVSD instruction. [

Single-precision vector arithmetic is accomplished by applying the 80386 block move instruction REP MOVSD to a WTL 3167 address involving arithmetic instead of loading or storing.
by btown | 2025-12-10 02:43:53+00:00
BIMI, as misguided as it is, does aim to solve this by tying registration to insanely high prices and government-registered trademark verification. You would have a hard time registering the Stripe trademark nowadays in a way that would get you a BIMI certificate for that name/logo.

https://www.thesslstore.com/resources/bimi-certificate-cost-...

But I'm glad that it hasn't caught on as strongly-expected by the public (or even commonly used). Big brands shouldn't be able to buy their way into inbox placement in ways that smaller companies can't replicate.
by nixonpjoshua | 2025-12-10 02:46:17+00:00
I don't think it will be possible to make wireless earbuds or a ring with replaceable batteries without seriously compromising the ergonomics of fitting onto or into the human body.

I have a pair of earbuds designed to be as diminutive for sleeping comfortably and I have no idea how you would do that with a replaceable battery even if Airpod sized devices can be done.
by jacquesm | 2025-12-10 02:46:38+00:00
I have an uncle that is extremely old and until a year and a half ago he was still working. But he needed a car for his job and he decided that he's going to get rid of the car before he ends someone else's life and so he had to give up his job too. He's a super nice character, has a great sense of humor and in general is probably one of the most fun and optimistic people that I know. He'd be working still if not for the car and I know that the loss of the job and a chunk of his independence is hard for him. But he does not let it get him down for long, just finds new things to do (he's currently studying bridge like his life depends on it).
by snowwrestler | 2025-12-10 02:48:12+00:00
An LLM on your phone can know everything else that is on your phone. Even Signal chat plaintexts are visible on the phone itself.

People definitely will care that such private data stays safely on the phone. But it’s kind of a moot point since there is no way to share that kind of data with ChatGPT anyway.

I think Apple is not trying to compete with the big central “answer machine” LLMs like Google or ChatGPT. Apple is aiming at something more personal. Their AI goal may not be to know everything, but rather to know you better than any other piece of tech in the world.

And monetization is easy: just keep selling devices that are more capable than the last one.
by mbf1 | 2025-12-10 02:48:15+00:00
There were a couple interesting points about the market for 8087 chips -- Intel designed the motherboard for the IBM PC, and they included an 8086 slot and a slot for either an 8087 or 8089. IBM didn't populate the slot for the coprocessor chip as it would compete with their mainframes, but Intel went around marketing the chips to research labs. One of them ended up with Stephen Fried who founded Microway in 1981 to create software for the 8087 and sell the chips, and the company is still in business after 44 years of chasing high performance computing. That's how I first got started with computing - a Microway Number Smasher (TM) card in an IBM PC.

The 80287 (AKA 287) and 80387 (AKA 387) floating point microprocessors started to pick up some competition from Weitek 1167 and 4167 chips and Inmos Transputer chips, so Intel integrated the FPU into the CPU with the 80486 processor (I question whether this was a monopoly move on Intel's part). This was also the first time that Intel made multiple versions of a CPU - there was a 486DX and a 486SX (colloquially referred to as the "sucks" model at the time) which disabled the FPU.

The 486 was also interesting because it was the first Intel x86 series chip to be able to operate at a multiple of the base frequency with the release of the DX2, DX3, and DX4 variants which allowed for different clock rates of 50MHz, 66MHz, 75MHz, and 100MHz based on the 25MHz and 33MHz base clock rates. I had a DX2-66MHz for a while and a DX4-100. The magic of these higher clock rates came from the introduction of the cache memory. The 486 was the first Intel CPU to utilize a cache.

Even though Intel had superseded the 8087/287/387 floating point coprocessor by including the latest version in the 80486, they introduced the 80860 (AKA i860) which was a VLIW RISC-based 64-bit FPU that was significantly faster, and also was the first microprocessor to exceed 1 million transistors.

The history of the FPU dedicated for special purpose applications is that it eventually became superseded by the GPU. Some of the first powerful GPUs from companies like Silicon Graphics utilized a number of i860 chips on a card in a very similar structure to more modern GPUs. You can think of each of the 12x i860 chips on an SGI Onyx / RealityEngine2 like a Streaming Multiprocessor node in an NVIDIA GPU.

Obviously, modern computers run at significantly faster clock speeds with significantly more cache and many kinds of cache, but it's good to look at the history of where these devices started to appreciate where we are now.
by didibus | 2025-12-10 02:48:16+00:00
Because the learned function to generate binary code is likely more complex than that for Python.

I admit I can't say for sure until we try it. If someone were to train a model at the same scale on the same amount of raw binary code as we do these models on raw language and code, would it perform better at generating working programs. Thing is, it would now fail to understand human language prompts.

From what I know and understand though, it seems like it would be more complex to achieve.

My meta point is, you shouldn't think of it as what would a computer most likely understand, because we're not talking about a CPU/GPU. You have to think, what would a transformer architecture deep neural net better learn and infer? Python or binary code? And I think from that lens it seems more likely it's Python.
by lisbbb | 2025-12-10 02:49:20+00:00
My solution as a consultant was to build some artifact that we could use as a starting point. Otherwise, you're sitting around spinning your wheels and billing big $ and the pressure is mounting. Building something at least allows you to demonstrate you are working on their behalf with the promise that it will be refined or completely changed as needed. It's very hard when you don't get people who can send down requirements, but that was like 100% of the places I worked. I very seldom ran into people who could articulate what they needed until I stepped up, showed them something they could sort of stand on, and then go from there.

Mythical Man Month had it all--build one to throw away.
by anon84873628 | 2025-12-10 02:49:32+00:00
My bet is that it will be good enough to devise the requirements.

They already can brainstorm new features and make roadmaps. If you give them more context about the business strategy/goals then they will make better guesses. If you give them more details about the user personas / feedback / etc they will prioritize better.

We're still just working our way up the ladder of systematizing that context, building better abstractions, workflows, etc.

If you were to start a new company with an AI assistant and feed it every piece of information (which it structures / summarizes synthesizes etc in a systematic way) even with finite context it's going to be damn good. I mean just imagine a system that can continuously read and structure all the data from regular news, market reports, competitor press releases, public user forums, sales call transcripts, etc etc. It's the dream of "big data".