MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by postalcoder | 2025-12-04 03:30:29+00:00
This may be one of the happiest days of my life (scoped to apple things in the past 15 years). I'm legitimately more excited and invigorated by this news than any of their product announcements in the Cook era.

The general direction of Apple's design has been the opposite of delight. I hope they right this ship. Their lack of leadership in the design space has trickled down to developers. iOS apps used to be a proud showcase of a company's best work but those days are long gone.

One example of Apple's fall from grace in software design was the perceived "design moat" that people thought that liquid glass would impart of apps that adopted it versus apps that didn't. People speculated that developers had to update their apps because those without liquid glass would look terrible in comparison to those with it. In reality, people (a) didn't care or (b) considered liquid glass a regression.

The human interface guidelines (HIG) used to mean something. Now it's a manual of hypocrisy.

...

Alan Dye is gone! Light the beacons!
by IG_Semmelweiss | 2025-12-04 03:30:33+00:00
Yep. I've followed Micron since before Y2k. I've seen the ups and downs of their stock. Seen a CEO literally crash and burn (RIP).

This is a mistake. The consumer business is a bet , which they excel at. Yes, its not printing money right now, but it is an option. Exiting the consumer business will mean they may miss insights into the next hot consumer trend.

The game for large companies like this should be to keep small bets going and literally, just survive. That's what Micron was doing, that's what NVIDIA did for a better part of a decade. Now that both are printing money.

Yet, Micron has decided its retiring from placing more bets. Mistake.
by justatdotin | 2025-12-04 03:30:51+00:00
I would've thought that in 20 years you would have met other devs who do not think like you?

something I enjoy about our line of work is there are different ways to be good at it, and different ways to be useful. I really enjoy the way different types of people make a team that knows its strengths and weaknesses.

anyway, I know a few great engineers who shrug at the agents. I think different types of thinker find engagement with these complex tools to be a very different experience. these tools suit some but not all and that's ok
by zstscrs | 2025-12-04 03:31:25+00:00
>Yeah, just switch to a non-NPM compatible and inexistant ecosystem just because you need to specify a few parameters in a config.

Yeah.. you do not know what you are talking about.

I run my test suites on both node and bun because I prefer to maintain compatibility with node and it works just fine. I use some of bun's APIs, like stringWidth and have a polyfill module that detects if it's not bun and loads an alternative library through a dynamic import.

Not NPM compatible? Bun is literally a drop in for NPM, in fact you could use it solely as a replacement for NPM and only use node for actual execution if that's your thing. It's much faster to run bun install than npm install and it uses less disk space if you have many projects.

The developer experience on bun is so much better it isn't funny. It remains prudent, I would agree, to not depend too heavily on it, but Bun is many things: a runtime, a set of additional APIs, a replacement for the dogslow npm, a bundler etc. Pick the parts that are easily discarded if you fear Bun's gonna go away, and when using their APIs for their better performance write polyfills.

>Anthropic is trying to IPO at a valuation of $300B so if their engineers nor their AI can be bothered to do this then maybe they're not as good as they think they are.

Or maybe you should have a cold hard look in front of the mirror first and think twice before opening your mouth because the more you write the more the ignorance is shown.
by throwaway-0001 | 2025-12-04 03:32:11+00:00
I think there is a correlation between when you can you expect from something when I know their internals vs someone that doesn’t know but is not like who knows internals is much much better.

Example: many people created websites without a clue of how they really work. And got millions of people on it. Or had crazy ideas to do things with them.

At the same time there are devs that know how internals work but can’t get 1 user.

pc manufacturers never were able to even imagine what random people were able to do with their pc.

This to say that even if you know internals you can claim you know better, but doesn’t mean it’s absolute.

Sometimes knowing the fundamentals it’s a limitation. Will limit your imagination.
by zahlman | 2025-12-04 03:32:15+00:00
Judging from the PR, the program expects you to choose a theme from a hard-coded list of existing options, and adding a new one requires changes to C code. So I'm not even sure it should be called customization.

My experience has been that even among the people invoking a concept of "straight pride", they aren't actually even claiming to be "oppressed" except satirically. The point is to stand on a (particular interpretation of) principle with regards to equal treatment.

As for the rationale, in my experience this sort of rhetoric is completely typical for Jordan Petridis (@alatiera).
by JohnBooty | 2025-12-04 03:32:55+00:00
The Apple Watch knows that it's you, or at least somebody that knows your PIN.

It's tied to your iPhone and Apple account during initial setup.

Each time you put the Apple Watch on, you have to enter your PIN to unlock it. It can only perform automatic unlocking of your Mac and iPhone in this unlocked state.

The watch does automatic wrist detection and it will automatically RE-lock itself as soon as you take it off.

This is reasonably secure for most needs, though of course you can disable all of this automatic unlocking if you want more security. I forget if it's on by default or not. IIRC I had to enable it but I'm not too sure.
by ethbr1 | 2025-12-04 03:33:01+00:00
The entire point of this thread is that there are many things that Valve could do to increase its profits over the short, intermediate, and long terms... that it doesn't (presumably because that's not the kind of company it wants to be).

As the simplest example, they could have stamped HL3 on a third party game and made several millions of dollars with only a minor hit to their brand (in 5 years, "that bad HL").

In more realistic terms, they could have built proprietary, closed source emulation packages (they are funding a lot of development, apparently) to give themselves a unique advantage.

If they were a publicly traded company, they probably would be doing all these things.
by dasil003 | 2025-12-04 03:33:35+00:00
Sorry but from where I sit, this is only marginally closes gap from AI to truly senior engineers.

Basically human junior engineers start by writing code in a very procedural and literal style with duplicate logic all over the place because that's the first step in adapting human intelligence to learning how to program. Then the programmer realizes this leads to things becoming unmaintainable and so they start to learn the abstraction techniques of functions, etc. An LLM doesn't have to learn any of that, because they already know all languages and mechanical technique in their corpus, so this beginning journey never applies.

But what the junior programmer has that the LLM doesn't, is an innate common sense understanding of human goals that are driving the creation of the code to begin with, and that serves them through their entire progression from junior to senior. As you point out, code can be "too DRY", but why? Senior engineers understand that DRYing up code is not a style issue, its more about maintainability and understanding what is likely to change, and what will be the apparent effects to human stakeholders who depend on the software. Basically do these things map to things that are conceptually the same for human users and are unlikely to diverge in the future. This is also a surprisingly deep question as perhaps every human stakeholder will swear up and down they are the same, but nevertheless 6 months from now a problem arises that requires them to diverge. At this point there is now a cognitive overhead and dissonance of explaining that divergence of the users who were heretofore perfectly satisfied with one domain concept.

Ultimately the value function for success of a specific code factoring style depends on a lot of implicit context and assumptions that are baked into the heads of various stakeholders for the specific use case and can change based on myriad outside factors that are not visible to an LLM. Senior engineers understand the map is not the territory, for LLMs there is no territory.
by dreamcompiler | 2025-12-04 03:34:35+00:00
This completely explains why so many engineers are skeptical of AI while so many managers embrace it: The engineers are the ones who understand it.

(BTW, if you're an engineer who thinks you don't understand AI or are not qualified to work on it, think again. It's just linear algebra, and linear algebra is not that hard. Once you spend a day studying it, you'll think "Is that all there is to it?" The only difficult part of AI is learning PyTorch, since all the AI papers are written in terms of Python nowadays instead of -- you know -- math.)

I've been building neural net systems since the late 1980s. And yes they work and they do useful things when you have modern amounts of compute available, but they are not the second coming of $DEITY.
by hedora | 2025-12-04 03:34:35+00:00
I’ll be the one to say it:

I don’t really mind liquid glass.

Of course, that’s mostly because there are bigger problems this release cycle. For instance, they didn’t test Magnifier on 13 mini sized screens. Now that it doesn’t fit, the other app teams will probably make more stuff uselessly cluttered/embiggened, rendering Apple’s last phone-size devices useless.
by tomhow | 2025-12-04 03:34:39+00:00
What the hell was this for? You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to, but especially not a helpful book suggestion.

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

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46089518 and marked it off topic.
by Ninjinka | 2025-12-04 03:35:12+00:00
Increased demand for computer components for purposes other than gaming constitutes "AI bros murdering your lifelong hobby"?

PC gaming is not "murdered", it's doing better than ever.

In 2015 there were 3,000 games released to Steam, last year there were 18,000. In 2015 Steam's peak concurrent user count was 8.6 million. This year it's 41 million.

The inflation-adjusted price per gigabyte of RAM has dropped from $3/GB to $2/GB over the last 10 years, even including the recent price hikes.

So spare me the hysterics, your hobby is fine.

And you know what? The increased demand for compute always spurs innovation, so you'll probably get a better computer in the end as a result. You're welcome.
by Will_Do | 2025-12-04 03:35:32+00:00
National median home price is $410k[1]. Texas is less than $300k[2]. Only thing that's unrealistic is most people who buy a house for $400k will probably get an FHA loan and put 3% down so will have a higher payment because of (1) mortgage insurance and (2) borrowing more money.

[1]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS [2]: https://www.zillow.com/home-values/6915/san-antonio-tx/
by walterbell | 2025-12-04 03:35:40+00:00
https://www.mooreslawisdead.com/post/sam-altman-s-dirty-dram...

On October 1st OpenAI signed two simultaneous deals with Samsung and SK Hynix for 40% of the worlds DRAM supply... the shock wasn’t that OpenAI made a big deal, no, it was that they made two massive deals this big, at the same time, with Samsung and SK Hynix simultaneously! In fact, according to our sources - both companies had no idea how big each other's deal was, nor how close to simultaneous they were. And this secrecy mattered. It mattered a lot. Had Samsung known SK Hynix was about to commit a similar chunk of supply — or vice-versa — the pricing and terms would have likely been different. It’s entirely conceivable they wouldn’t have both agreed to supply such a substantial part of global supply if they had known more...but at the end of the day - OpenAI did succeed in keeping the circles tight, locking down the NDAs, and leveraging the fact that these companies assumed the other wasn’t giving up this much wafer volume simultaneously…in order to make a surgical strike on the global RAM supply chain…and it's worked so far... OpenAI isn’t even bothering to buy finished memory modules! No, their deals are unprecedentedly only for raw wafers — uncut, unfinished, and not even allocated to a specific DRAM standard yet. It’s not even clear if they have decided yet on how or when they will finish them into RAM sticks or HBM! Right now it seems like these wafers will just be stockpiled in warehouses – like a kid who hides the toybox because they’re afraid nobody wants to play with them, and thus selfishly feels nobody but them should get the toys!
by loveparade | 2025-12-04 03:36:03+00:00
I think what it comes down to, and where many people get confused, is separating the technology itself from how we use it. The technology itself is incredible for learning new skills, but at the same time it incentivizes people to not learn. Just because you have an LLM doesn't mean you can skip the hard parts of doing textbook exercises and thinking hard about what you are learning. It's a bit similar to passively watching youtube videos. You'd think that having all these amazing university lectures available on youtube makes people learn much faster, but in reality in makes people lazy because they believe they can passively sit there, watch a video, do nothing else, and expect that to replace a classroom education. That's not how humans learn. But it's not because youtube videos or LLMs are bad learning tools, it's because people use them as mental shortcut where they shouldn't.
by energy123 | 2025-12-04 03:36:12+00:00
The inflation basket only represent a hypothetical average person, who doesn't even exist.

It's more useful to construct multiple separate inflation measures that represent different types of people. Like a "typical renter" inflation figure vs a "typical homeowner" inflation figure. It wouldn't be hard to do and would shine a light on inequality and help explain the rise of populism in certain segments of society.

An even better measure would somehow appropriately normalize the figure by the average disposable income in each of the segments to come up with a figure that measures the felt impact better.

The figure would be negative for wealthy people (who actually benefit from inflation because of asset price inflation) and positive for poor people (whose disposable income mostly goes to rent).
by robot-wrangler | 2025-12-04 03:36:24+00:00
Big thank you to author and OP. This is exactly the kind of homebrew recipe post I've been waiting for. I knew it had to be basically cookbook by now but really simple examples like this with no fluff are surprisingly hard to find. (Anyone got others?)

I've been thinking about similar experiments with some obscure esolang for a long time, so more detail on total time/cost would be nice. Also.. if it's correct that this size model is about the right minimal choice for starting such efforts.. what are the next steps if you wanted to shrink it to only specialize in the target? Should you go for distillation or ablation?
by dchftcs | 2025-12-04 03:36:30+00:00
Micron cuts off the business because there is a much more profitable place to deploy their capacity. The real reason Micron has a resource crunch that forces them to exit a steady business is that enterprise now places a huge premium on things didn't use to be that important.

This massive tide floats all boats and there will be smaller players filling the gap. With slightly worse chips at first yes, but historically DRAM had been a cyclical businesss where new manufacturing capabilities were brought online en masse after a boom.
by josephg | 2025-12-04 03:36:55+00:00
I don't think this disproves my claim, for several reasons.

First, I don't know where those human participants came from, but if you pick people off the street or from a college campus, they aren't going to be the world's best programmers. On the other hand, github users are on average more skilled than the average CS student. Even students and beginners who use github usually don't have much code there. If the LLMs are weighted to treat every line of code about same, they'd pick up more lines of code from prolific developers (who are often more experienced) than they would from beginners.

Also in a coding contest, you're under time pressure. Even when your code works, its often ugly and thrown together. On github, the only code I check in is code that solves whatever problem I set out to solve. I suspect everyone writes better code on github than we do in programming competitions. I suspect if you gave the competitors functionally unlimited time to do the programming competition, many more would outperform GPT-4.

Programming contests also usually require that you write a fully self contained program which has been very well specified. The program usually doesn't need any error handling, or need to be maintained. (And if it does need error handling, the cases are all fully specified in the problem description). Relatively speaking, LLMs are pretty good at these kind of problems - where I want some throwaway code that'll work today and get deleted tomorrow.

But most software I write isn't like that. And LLMs struggle to write maintainable software in large projects. Most problems aren't so well specified. And for most code, you end up spending more effort maintaining the code over its lifetime than it takes to write in the first place. Chatgpt usually writes code that is a headache to maintain. It doesn't write or use local utility functions. It doesn't factor its code well. The code is often overly verbose. It often writes code that's very poorly optimized. Or the code contains quite obvious bugs for unexpected input - like overflow errors or boundary conditions. And the code it produces very rarely handles errors correctly. None of these problems really matter in programming competitions. But it does matter a lot more when writing real software. These problems make LLMs much less useful at work.
by bgbntty2 | 2025-12-04 03:37:12+00:00
Precisely - they view security as just one part of many of their business, instead of viewing it as one of the most important parts. They've insured themselves against a breach, so it's not a big deal for them. But it should be.

The more casualties, the more media attention -> the more likely they, and others in their field, will take security more seriously in the future.

If we let them do nothing for a month, they'll eventually fix it, but in the mean time malicious hackers may gain access to the PII. They might not make it public, but sell that PII via black markets. The company may not get the negative publicity it deserves and likely won't learn to fix their systems in time and to adopt adequate security measures. The sale of the PII and the breach itself might become public knowledge months after the fact, while the company has had a chance to grow in the meantime, and make more security mistakes that may be exploited later on.

And yes, I know it may be a crime - that's why I said I'd report it anonymously from now on. But if the company sits on their asses for a month, shouldn't that count as a crime, as well? The current definition of responsible disclosure gives companies too much leeway, in my opinion.

If I knew I operated a service that was trivial to exploit and was hosting people's PII, I'd shut it down until I fixed it. People won't die if I make everything in my power to provide the test results (in my example of medical labs) to doctors and patients via other means, such as via paper or phone. And if people do die, it would be devastating, of course, but it would mean society has put too much trust into a single system without making sure it's not vulnerable to the most basic of attacks. So it would happen sooner or later, anyway. Although I can't imagine someone dying because their doctor had to make a phone call to the lab instead of typing in a URL.

The same argument about people dying due to the disruption of the medical communications system could be made about too-big-to-fail companies that are entrenched into society because a lot of pension funds have invested in them. If the company goes under, the innocent people dependent on the pension fund's finances would suffer. While they would suffer, which would be awful, of course, would the alternative be to not let such companies go bankrupt? Or would it be better for such funds to not rely so much on one specific company in the first place? That is to say, in both cases (security or stocks in general) the reality is that currently people are too dependent on a few singular entities, while they shouldn't be. That has to change, and the change has to begin somewhere.
by chii | 2025-12-04 03:37:16+00:00
> that could be much better for them in the long term.

i agree. Valve's money machine is with the steam platform, rather than any hardware sales - breaking even on hardware is sufficient imho.

Valve's existential threat is from microsoft closing off windows somehow (or extracting rent...like a store!). Therefore, pushing steam machines which can be run without windows, is both business expansion as well as an insurance policy.
by kragen | 2025-12-04 03:37:20+00:00
The most common reason is to do optimizations such as replacing strlen("hello") with 5 or open-coding strlen (or, more commonly, memcpy or memcmp). If you're linking with a non-conformant strlen (or memcpy or whatever) the usual thing that happens is that you get standards-compliant behavior when the compiler optimizes away the call, but you get the non-conformant behavior you presumably wanted when the compiler compiles a call to your non-conformant function.

But the orthodox answer to such questions is that demons fly out of your nose.
by Just_Clive | 2025-12-04 03:38:32+00:00
One-command patch for the React Server Components RCE disclosed today:

npx @neurolint/cli security:cve-2025-55182 . --fix

Detects vulnerable React 19 + Next.js 15-16, updates to patched versions, creates backup before changes.

Built NeuroLint for deterministic code transformations - this CVE is exactly the use case.

GitHub: github.com/Alcatecablee/Neurolint
by walterbell | 2025-12-04 03:38:46+00:00
> DRAM manufacturers don’t list a price and then let OpenAI buy it all up.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46143535

Had Samsung known SK Hynix was about to commit a similar chunk of supply — or vice-versa — the pricing and terms would have likely been different. It’s entirely conceivable they wouldn’t have both agreed to supply such a substantial part of global supply if they had known more...but at the end of the day - OpenAI did succeed in keeping the circles tight, locking down the NDAs, and leveraging the fact that these companies assumed the other wasn’t giving up this much wafer volume simultaneously…in order to make a surgical strike on the global RAM supply chain..

https://thememoryguy.com/some-clarity-on-2025s-ddr4-price-su...

The Chinese government directed CXMT to convert production from DDR4 to DDR5 as soon as the company was able. The order was said to have been given in the 4th quarter of 2024, and the price transition changed from a decrease to an increase in the middle of March 2025.. A wholesale conversion from DDR4 to DDR5 would probably be very expensive to perform, and would thus be unusual for a company that was focused on profitability. As a government-owned company, CXMT does not need to consistently turn a profit, and this was a factor in the government’s decision to suddenly switch from DDR4 to DDR5.