MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by anon291 | 2025-12-10 06:49:38+00:00
Comparing Brazil and India to Russia and China is just retarded.

Also India is more liberal than western Europe in a lot of ways.

For example, French laicite means no display of religious symbols publicly, while India allows a wide variety of religious symbols, having some of the largest mosques, churches and temples in the world

Moreover, in India people openly criticize other religions, while England jails people for such things. This idea that Europe is liberal and no one else is just myopicism

European hubris makes them believe that they are uniquely liberal. European countries can hardly deal with a small number of other cultures.
by petesergeant | 2025-12-10 06:50:30+00:00
> Vibe coding actually works. It creates robust, complex systems that work. You can tell yourself (as I did) that it can’t possibly do that, but you are wrong.

I spend all day in Claude Code, and use Codex as a second-line code reviewer.

They do not create robust systems. They’ve been a huge productivity boost for me in certain areas, but as soon as you stop making sure you understand every line it’s writing, or give it a free reign where you’re not auto-approving everything, the absolute madness sets in.

And then you have to unpick it when it’s trying to read the source of npm because it’s decided that’s where the error in your TypeScript project must lie, and if you weren’t on top of the whole thing from the start, this will be very difficult.

Don’t vibe-code in C unless you are a very strong C developer who can reliably catch subtle bugs in other people’s code. These things have no common sense.
by frm88 | 2025-12-10 06:50:33+00:00
Could you please provide the source for this graph? Something more serious than twitter or Instagram?

Edit: Found it. The data stem from a really radical paper that wants the US government to sanction Europe immediately and harshly [0]. Some guy called David Fant made the graph, presumably using data from said paper. The whole thing was then published on reddit [1] , Instagram and Twitter with a incidentiery headline. So yeah, in terms of credibility this thing falls flat.

[0] https://itif.org/publications/2025/12/01/defending-american-...

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/XGramatikInsights/comments/1pi28x8/...
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-12-10 06:50:35+00:00
It's a bit like asking if there is any significant advantage to ICE motors over electric motors. They both have advantages and disadvantages. Every person who uses one or the other, will tell you about their own use case, and why nobody could possibly need to use the alternative.

There's already applications out there for the "old thing" that need to be maintained, and they're way too old for anyone to bother with re-creating it with the "new thing". And the "old thing" has some advantages the "new thing" doesn't have. So some very specific applications will keep using the "old thing". Other applications will use the "new thing" as it is convenient.

To answer your second question, nothing is inevitable, except death, taxes, and the obsolescence of machines. Rust is the new kid on the block now, but in 20 years, everybody will be rewriting all the Rust software in something else (if we even have source code in the future; anyone you know read machine code or punch cards?). C'est la vie.
by estebank | 2025-12-10 06:50:44+00:00
According to https://4e6.github.io/firefox-lang-stats/, 12%.

I would love an updated version of https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1flUGg6Ut4bjtyWdyH_9e... (which stops in 2020).

For Chrome, I don't know if anyone has compiled the stats, but navigating from https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/refs/heads/... I see at least a bunch of vendored crates, so there's some use, which makes sense since in 2023 they announced that they would support it.
by nevon | 2025-12-10 06:50:58+00:00
Completely disagree. To me, and the OSI, none of those things other than redistribution and forking have anything to do with being open source or not. In fact, you could have a closed source project tick nearly all of those boxes, although that would indeed be very unusual.

I'm not sure if there is a term for what you are describing. Perhaps "community driven project".
by broretore | 2025-12-10 06:51:27+00:00
10 pages for a paper with this groundbreaking of a concept is just embarrassing. It is barely an outline.

"confirming that 40× compression preserves field geometry with minimal distortion. Over 95% of samples achieve similarity above 0.90."

I smell Grok. Grok 3, maybe Grok 4 Fast.

> "Implementation details. Optimal configurations are task and architecture-dependent. Production systems require task-specific tuning beyond baseline heuristics provided in reference implementation."

"Implementation? Idk, uhh, it's task specific or something." Come on, dude. You're better than this.

4.4 Student/Teacher evaluation. What even is the benchmark? You give percentage values but no indication of what benchmark. Seems made up.

4.5. Computational Analysis. Why do you need to do the trivial multiplying out of "savings" for 1B tok/day to $700M/year? This reads like a GPT advertising hallucinated performance.

Three sentence conclusion restating the title?
by kemitchell | 2025-12-10 06:52:14+00:00
Watching what we charitably call this debate flare up yet again gives me an odd mix of feelings. On the one hand, seeing people I've read and listened to for years heave time, attention, and more typing onto this tire fire evokes deep tragedy. On the other hand, I've been there, casting my own vanities to the bonfire, more than a few times. There's comfort in the familiar heat and glow.

I couldn't escape the waste until I was willing to give up the idea of myself as experienced, as an expert. Until I accepted that time served taught me lessons, but didn't bestow authority. Most people coming into this are new. They relearn what's useful and leave the rest behind. That's part of adaptation. I try to see their point of view.

If you ask a newer coder what "open source" means, they might say "like MIT?" or even just "like GitHub?" If you look "open" up in a good thesaurus, "available" is there. The Initiative---really, whoever's on the board now or later---will never own or effectively police the term "open source", much less "open source AI". And nobody claiming "open source" for good or ill will ever summon on themself the kind of attention or cachet that marketing bauble once commanded, no matter what their license says.

As for fellow oldheads, there's no resolving contradictions between ways we learned to frame these issues, decades ago. Can changes to a license be a solution to the funding problem? Can using freedom terms to buttress a business count as truly open? That bizarre conflict of ontologies won't decide where programming goes in the future, if it ever did. I doubt it will even be won or lost. It will just fade away, like the circumstances that started it.

DHH can kick the anthill. The activists can raise their old hue and cry. It's purely elective, demoded dramatics. The real problems of software politics today aren't expressible in either schema. They can even seem tautologically unsolvable. Meanwhile, we've got new aspirational generalities that aren't expressible in the old ways of speaking. "Sustainability", because many doing good aren't doing so well. "Decentralization", because we're all sharecropping on some platform now.

Sometimes I think the best I can do for the younger generations facing today is just to never impose petty trivia about "the movement" ever again. Never deign imply I know what they should consider important. If "free" and "open" meant something to me, let their inheritors tell me what they mean now, in practice. Tell me about the world they built and left for them.

Maybe I don't have to choose. After all, who reads blogs?
by nottorp | 2025-12-10 06:52:48+00:00
Wrong metaphor though?

How does SSL on a -ing public site protect you from being arrested by miniluv?

It’s public, you want everyone to see the cat photos, that’s why you set up the site. On the contrary, SSL certs mean another party through which miniluv can track you. They prove or are supposed to prove identity not hide it.
by apparent | 2025-12-10 06:52:50+00:00
True, you can ride a bicycle/scooter/etc. or just walk on roads without paying. All motor vehicles pay registration fees if I'm not mistaken. And in at least some states, they hit EVs with higher fees, to make up for lost gas tax revenue. I think some states are even moving towards per-mile fees for EVs, for this purpose. But most road damage is done by big rigs and other heavy vehicles, which are basically all ICE.
by rgmerk | 2025-12-10 06:53:01+00:00
We can and do, and there are detailed plans based on those weather scenarios (eg for the Australian east coast grid; there is AEMO’s Integrated System Plan).

Things in the US are a bit more of a mixed bag, for better or worse, but there have been studies done that suggest that you can get very high renewables levels cost effectively, but not to 100% without new technology (eg “clean firm” power like geothermal, new nuclear being something other than a clusterfumble, long-term storage like iron-air batteries, etc etc etc).
by Tiberium | 2025-12-10 06:53:14+00:00
I might be overly pessimistic, but this looks like a case of a person believing LLM hallucinations and making it write a paper.

I asked both Claude Code|Opus 4.5 and Codex|GPT 5.1 Codex Max (funny to ask LLMs, I know) to check the an1-core repo. I don't think they'd hallucinate on something like this (the code is quite small), but I do not claim expertise.

In short, both of them are saying that:

- The repo always runs the full teacher model to extract activations and uses them - see https://github.com/Anima-Core/an1-core/blob/main/an1_core/fi...

- There are weird stub files, e.g. the Hellaswag repro doesn't actually have the code to reproduce https://github.com/Anima-Core/an1-core/blob/main/experiments... "For full HellaSwag reproduction, see the paper" (why include the file at all then?)

- The actual "AN1 head" is just linear probing (freeze a pretrained model, train a classifier on its features). The full flow (as reported by CC) is "Text → [Full Transformer] → activations → [Tiny Head] → prediction"

Basically, there's no code to train a real "student" model that would run without the teacher.

===

The repo/paper say that there's a mythical "commercial version" that has all the goodies:

(repo)

> This reference implementation (an1-core) does not include the FPU, AN4, or other proprietary optimization components covered by these patents. It provides only the core scientific demonstration of the meaning fields phenomenon.

(paper)

> Production deployment: Optimized implementations (AN1-Turbo) with learned layer selection, adaptive loss scheduling, and CUDA-accelerated inference available under commercial license.

But right now we only have the code in the repo.

===

In the paper they show that the student model (30M params) gets ~82% on SST-2 (labels-only). But what what they don't show is that DistilBERT (>5 year old model) already achieves 91% on the same dataset despite only having 66M params.

Another weird tidbit from the paper - in the section where they show the economic impact, they claim that LLaMA 70B runs at 2 tok/s at batch size=1 on an H200. In reality that number is at least a magnitude bigger even without quantization, like 20-40 tok/s. With quantization it can easily be above 100 tok/s.
Show HN: The Box – Run multiple Claude CLI agents in parallel in the cloud
by firdavs9512 | 2025-12-10 06:53:48+00:00
Hey HN,

I'm a solo developer and kept running into the same problem: I'd want Claude CLI to work on multiple tasks at once, but locally I could only run one instance at a time. So I built The Box.

It lets you spin up isolated sandbox environments in the cloud and run Claude CLI agents in parallel. You write the prompt, pick a GitHub repo, and it handles the rest – creates a branch, does the work, and opens a PR.

The core workflow: - Connect your GitHub repos - Create tasks with prompts - Claude CLI runs in isolated sandboxes - Get notified when done (browser push or Telegram) - Review and merge PRs

Tech stack: Go (Fiber) for backend services, Next.js for frontend, PostgreSQL, Redis for signaling, RabbitMQ for task queue. Workers run Claude CLI in Docker containers.

Currently free to use (with limits) while I finish payment integration. Would love feedback from anyone who's tried to scale their AI coding workflow.

https://the-box.dev
by mrandish | 2025-12-10 06:54:14+00:00
> it can’t prevent deaths from accidents or foul play

Cory Doctorow's wonderful sci-fi book "Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom" explored exactly this in interesting ways. In the book people in the future can live essentially forever by transferring their consciousness into new bodies. They can also back up the contents of their consciousness, something most people do nightly but certainly before doing some dangerous extreme sport. Doing dangerous things without backing yourself up is considered tantamount to suicide since you lose all the memories and personal growth, essentially the person you became since your last backup.

People do get bored and will sometimes choose to "deadhead" for hundreds of years at a time, which is putting yourself into stasis and skipping those centuries. The book is full of provocative ideas about how practical immortality might actually work on a personal and societal level.
by veunes | 2025-12-10 06:54:19+00:00
That is exactly why Apple's on-device strategy is the only economically viable one. If every Siri request cost $0.01 for cloud inference, Apple would go bankrupt in a month. But if inference happens on the Neural Engine on the user's phone, the cost to Apple is zero (well, aside from R&D). This solves the problem of unmonetizable requests like "set a timer," which killed Alexa's economics
by businessmate | 2025-12-10 06:54:31+00:00
A growing share of discovery now happens through assistants rather than traditional search. These systems guide buyers, analysts, investors, journalists, and procurement teams long before they ever reach owned channels. Yet inside many large organisations the response to this shift remains slow. Leadership teams continue to lean on SEO and marketing assurances that the issue is covered or can wait until 2026. Controlled multi run tests across several enterprise categories show that this confidence is misplaced and increasingly risky.
by joegibbs | 2025-12-10 06:56:00+00:00
Most of those stories are just sour grapes. Dying has been the biggest fear for all of history for most people, and especially back then people were losing their family and friends at young ages.

You have to have some kind of belief in that situation that dying has a special purpose, or something happens after you die so that you’re rewarded.

It’s the same as the suffering of a medieval peasant, which they thought was so important. Nowadays we have eliminated that. Was it really giving them such an important meaning and rich life? No, they just thought it did to cope.

Besides, even if we cured aging it wouldn’t mean we’re trapped living forever, you’d be guaranteed to get killed some other way anyway.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-12-10 06:56:48+00:00
> Google has probably the largest C++ codebase in the world. Migrating to Rust would be so expensive that the board would squash it.

Google is transitioning large parts of Android to Rust and there is now first-party code in Chromium and V8 in Rust. I’m sure they’ll continue to write new C++ code for a good while, but they’ve made substantial investments to enable using Rust in these projects going forward.

Also, if you’re imagining the board of a multi-trillion dollar market cap company is making direct decisions about what languages get used, you may want to check what else in this list you are imagining.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-12-10 06:57:37+00:00
New high-scale data infrastructure projects I am aware of mostly seem to be C++ (often C++20). A bit of Rust, which I’ve used, and Zig but most of the hardcore stuff is still done in C++ and will be for the foreseeable future.

It is easy to forget that the state-of-the-art implementations of a lot of systems software is not open source. They don’t struggle to attract contributors because of language choices, being on the bleeding edge of computer science is selling point enough.
by evanelias | 2025-12-10 06:57:38+00:00
> It's actually implying a MTBF of over 5 years [...] Pretty sure that lines up with the depreciation period.

You're assuming this is normal, for the MTBF to line up with the depreciation schedule. But the MTBF of data center hardware is usually quite a bit longer than the depreciation schedule right? If I recall correctly, for servers it's typically double or triple, roughly. Maybe less for GPUs, I'm not directly familiar, but a quick web search suggests these periods shouldn't line up for GPUs either.
by lmm | 2025-12-10 06:59:06+00:00
> So, written in C/C++?

Not in the sense that people who are advocating writing new code in C/C++ generally mean. If someone is advocating following the same development process as Chrome does, then that's a defensible position. But if someone is advocating developing in C/C++ without any feature restrictions or additional tooling and arguing "it's fine because Chrome uses C/C++", no, it isn't.
What if AI was used to distribute work instead of doing the work?
by mobileturdfctry | 2025-12-10 07:01:01+00:00
This is just a random thought on my part, but it feels like it could be an interesting and new way of thinking about AI's impact on our future.

Obviously AI will continue to get better at doing work. But what if we started leveraging AI to distribute the work.

For example, in any relatively complex situation you need coordination and a clear understanding of responsibilities and a clear understanding of the project in order to be able to distribute the work effectively. AI could be in a unique position to analyze a situation, learn from the situation, and understand (based on what it learns about the work itself and the people doing that work) how best to distribute the work in a way that keeps everyone busy but not overwhelmed, and able to break down the work to such a precise degree that you would (for example) almost never run over a budget on a software project.
by qalmakka | 2025-12-10 07:01:58+00:00
> Embedded - This will always be C. No memory allocation means no Rust benefits. Rust is also too complex for smaller systems to write compilers.

Modern embedded isn't your grandpa's embedded anymore. Modern embedded chips have multiple KiB of ram, some even above 1MiB and have been like that for almost a decade (look at ESP32 for instance). I once worked on embedded projects based on ESP32 that used full C++, with allocators, exceptions, ... using SPI RAM and worked great. There's a fantastic port of ESP-IDF on Rust that Espressif themselves is maintaining nowadays, too.
by alephnerd | 2025-12-10 07:02:17+00:00
What do you mean by alliance? India already has defense agreements with Greece, Cyprus, and France that consist of intel collection, IP transfer (in the case of France), and free naval berthing rights along with dual use ports port development deals in the Mediterranean.

Anything beyond that at this stage would be unnecessarily hemming both India as well as France, Greece, and Cyprus' relationships in their backyard.
by veunes | 2025-12-10 07:02:26+00:00
That's true for current LLMs, but Apple is playing the long game. First, they are masters of quantization optimization (their 3-4 bit models perform surprisingly well). Second, Unified Memory is a cheat code. Even 8GB on M1/M2 allows for things impossible on a discrete GPU with 8GB VRAM due to data transfer overhead. And for serious tasks, there's the Mac Studio with 192GB RAM, which is actually the cheapest way to run Llama-400B locally
by roenxi | 2025-12-10 07:03:51+00:00
To even consider "immortal" as possible suggests someone hasn't had a lot of formal math training. Infinity is rather large. In an infinite amount of time, any possible conjunction of circumstances that could cause an immortality system to fail will happen. Talking in thousands, millions or even billions of years doesn't even need to be rounded to be basically zero when compared to eternity.

Death is a certainty. No amount of technology can change that even theoretically. We don't even have reason to be confident that the universe itself is eternal, let alone any component of it.
by lurk2 | 2025-12-10 07:04:12+00:00
The first article does not look to be informative; it values the EU smartphone market at around 465 million USD, which is impossibly low. If you assume a smartphone is valued at $1,000, a market of that size would only amount to 465,000 devices sold; this is around 0.01% of the EU’s population.

The second article links to a paper which appears to be more informative (though it has not been peer reviewed):

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5117319

Notably:

> For example, in the United States, the average expected life span (replacement cycle length) of consumer and enterprise smartphones was 2.67 and 2.54 years, respectively, in 2023, while in the UK almost 30% of surveyed consumers use their smartphone up to two years and 41% up to 4 years.

and

> Furthermore, evidence shows that European, American and Chinese consumers have reduced the replacement rate of their smartphones, increasing their average life cycle (see Figure 1). These data suggest that consumer preferences are changing, and new opportunities arise for companies who want to find new profitable ways to meet the needs of their customers.
by globular-toast | 2025-12-10 07:04:17+00:00
Exactly. There are a few libraries to achieve a similar thing in Python:

* https://htpy.dev/

* https://pypi.org/project/fast_html/

* https://fastht.ml/ (different to above, I think)

* https://github.com/volfpeter/fasthx

Probably others. I strongly prefer this to templating, but I find it makes dyed in the wool Django people squirm.
by kirb | 2025-12-10 07:04:30+00:00
Legacy Update is my project, appreciate the thoughts. I’ll look at both. OpenCollective would be a great idea going forward for better transparency, as much as it requires more paperwork.

I do consolidate most of the expenses with my other projects, and ads cover most of the costs, but we’re planning some future projects such as hosting of custom Windows updates (opt-in) that will get expensive. So this will matter a lot more soon enough.
by throwaway2037 | 2025-12-10 07:04:46+00:00
> Rust is also too complex for smaller systems to write compilers.

I am not a compiler engineer, but I want to tease apart this statement. As I understand, the main Rust compiler uses LLVM framework which uses an intermediate language that is somewhat like platform independent assembly code. As long as you can write a lexer/parser to generate the intermediate language, there will be a separate backend to generate machine code from the intermediate language. In my (non-compiler-engineer) mind, separates the concern of front-end language (Rust) from target platform (embedded). Do you agree? Or do I misunderstand?