MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by seec | 2025-12-19 10:53:40+00:00
While I understand the sentiment, it is important to distinguish between mindless consumption and wanting a better quality of life. Buying all kinds of useless crap (usually items of small value and little utility) should not be conflated with wanting to have better things. Better quality house, appliances, clothes, etc.

It is the latter that is useful and brings peace. People won't get too mad if their neighbors have more stuff as long as their stuff allows them a pretty good quality of life. But problems arise when you cannot buy the better stuff to improve your life and instead the focus is redirected to stupid items.

This is what the article is about, in my opinion. In the end, filling your house with gadgets and gizmos of dubious usefulness/quality does not improve your life substantially. But this is what much of the population has been relegated to, and it has a soul-crushing effect.
by Ciantic | 2025-12-19 10:54:13+00:00
> designed to replace legacy shell scripting ... as arguments are passed as a structured array, not a raw string to be parsed by a shell

I find shell scripters prefer ubiquity and readability over raw performance. And making it mandatory to give arguments as arrays worsens the readabilty. However having both options would be good, your example doesn't actually require the shell escaping so it could have simpler way.

Here is equivalent in Deno for instance

#!/usr/bin/env -S deno run --allow-all import $ from "jsr:@david/dax"; const command = $`grep -r keyword .`.pipe($`wc -l`); const result = await command;

Deno (via library) and Bun both have $ that can also handle escaping, e.g.

const dirName = "Dir with spaces"; await $`mkdir ${dirName}`; // executes as: mkdir 'Dir with spaces'

I don't think syntax is your biggest hurdle though, biggest hurdle is that Bash is so common, Powershell was supposed to be better shell scripting, yet it takes nowhere outside Windows space.
by paldeac2 | 2025-12-19 10:55:01+00:00
We spent the last few months security-testing AI apps. Ran attacks against 50+ production systems.

Results: - 90% vulnerable to prompt injection - 73% leaked PII when prompted correctly - 68% could be jailbroken in under 5 attempts - 45% had no rate limiting

Most common issues: 1. System prompts with zero guardrails 2. PII sitting in conversation logs 3. No input validation before hitting the model 4. "You are a helpful assistant" with access to sensitive data

We built a free tool to run these tests yourself: app.earlycore.dev

Takes 15 minutes. Tells you what's broken.

Sample report: http://app.earlycore.dev/share/95f4d0a770fda2b7dbd07bf999a54...

Would love feedback from anyone shipping AI in production. What attacks are we missing?
by close04 | 2025-12-19 10:55:09+00:00
I knew the top result is an ad and is marked, and still didn't notice the mark. I think there's actual research put into making these markings "visible" but not "noticeable". And on my phone only the top result shows that big picture banner taking all the attention while the rest of the "real" apps are presented as one liners. [1]

But what's worse than an ad is that too many times these apps are actually scammy. A whole host of apps with almost identical and misleading names, icons, banner pictures, descriptions, developer names, and so on.

Ok, I search for Netflix and you show me Prime first is one think. But showing me a scam app is a different offense altogether. And it doesn't matter if your phone costs $600 or $1600 you'll get served up to the scammers just the same.

[1] https://imgur.com/a/BkGmPGc
by CuriouslyC | 2025-12-19 10:55:18+00:00
This is the thing that kills me about SFT. It was sensible when most of the compute in a model was in pretraining and the RL was mostly for question answering. Now that RL is driving model capabilities it doesn't make much sense.

On the other hand, RL on deployed systems looks promising to essentially JIT optimize models. Experiments with model routers and agentic rag have shown good results.
by Xylakant | 2025-12-19 10:55:19+00:00
> It’s mostly C and C++ developers trying to build a new option for solving their same problems.

I've observed that a lot of the folks I used to meet at ruby conferences have moved to Rust. No idea what led to this, but maybe it's just folks that were generally curious about new programming languages that moved to ruby when it became better known and that the same interest led to adopting Rust.
by lelanthran | 2025-12-19 10:56:48+00:00
> I was referring to the current unsafe blocks used for Rust->C FFI.

You need direct shared mutable memory access with runtime locking even in the pure-Rust parts. That's kinda what OSes need, actually. Some things (Maybe DMA, possibly Page Table mutation, register saving/loading, as a few examples) can't be compile-time checked.

In fact, I would guess that if you gradually moved the Linux code over to Rust, at the end of it you'd still have maybe 50% of it in unsafe blocks.

So, no - your claim is no different than "if it compiles it works".
by jwr | 2025-12-19 10:57:57+00:00
As a reminder if you own an LG TV, turn off the sneakily named "Live Plus" thing. This "option" makes your LG TV spy on you, tracking and reporting what you watch based on the image that is shown on the TV.

You need to go to Settings -> All Settings -> General -> System -> Additional Settings to make sure the "Live Plus" option is OFF.

Check it periodically, as it sometimes turns itself back on again after updates.
by shortercode | 2025-12-19 10:58:20+00:00
I recall standing in CEX one day perusing the cabinet of random electronics ( as you do ) and wondering why the Intel CPUs were so cheap compared to the AMD ones. I eventually concluded that the cross generation compatibility of zen cpus meant they had a better resale value. Whereas if you experienced the more common mobo failure with an Intel chip you were likely looking at replacing both.
by kunos | 2025-12-19 10:58:22+00:00
> What features in Jai make it superior to C++ for writing games specifically?

Some examples that come to mind from my personal experience.

- Compile times. 1-2 seconds vs the typical build times in a C++/Rust game can be a game changer

- Massive compile time capabilities.. you can have an entire content pipeline executed at compile time, all written in Jai

- Builtin Type reflection.. another gamechanger in games for editors and such

- Very easy to debug, the minimalistic approach means the code is not heavily transformed by the compiler thus really easy for a debugger to follow and still performant. Example: loading the same gltf file in my engines in Rust and C++ debug mode is MUCH slower than debug mode in Jai.. again, game changer.. you hit build/run and you're back in the game in few seconds.

- Very easy to learn

- Very ergonomic in its minimalism

- A lot of small things you instantly miss when jumping to other language.. one thing on the top of my head.. the ability to have struct members "overlay" other specific locations.. so you could have a Matrix4 struct with Vector members "forward" "right" "up" etc

- The builtin "context" based "temp allocator".. perfect for games, anything that is needed for a frame goes in there with close to zero allocation time and it gets reset every frame at zero cost

Jai has a HUGE potential if it can survive Mr. Blow's ego.. which is a big big ask.
by dewey | 2025-12-19 11:00:33+00:00
> user agents and won't show the links to legitimate search engines, so Google and Bing won't see them

Worth noting that in general if you do any "is this Google or not" you should always check by IP address as there's many people spoofing the googlebot user agent.

https://developers.google.com/static/search/apis/ipranges/go...
by dontlaugh | 2025-12-19 11:00:45+00:00
I’ve also found docker / k8s to mostly just get in the way. Even VMs are often a problem, depending on the details of the game.

Bare metal is the only actually good option, but you often have to do a lot yourself. Multiplay did offer it last time I looked, but I don’t know what’s going on with them now.
by mondra | 2025-12-19 11:00:56+00:00
Hey HN,

I built this because I noticed a scary pattern: AI agents (like ChatGPT or Gemini) often hallucinate package names that don't exist.

For example, an agent might try to import cv2. If it runs pip install cv2, it fails because the real package is opencv-python. But if an attacker registers cv2 on PyPI (a technique called Slopsquatting), they can instantly compromise any agent that tries to install it.

CodeGate is a CLI tool that acts as a guardrail.

Scan: It checks requirements.txt for packages that don't exist (potential hallucinations) or are dangerously new.

Probe: It actively red-teams your LLM prompts to see if they suggest malicious packages.

Block: It uses a local SQLite knowledge graph (seeded with known hallucinations) to flag risky installs.

It's open source and available via pip install codegate-cli.

I'd love to hear your feedback on the trade-off I made. I went with a static blocklist (like a filter) because it's instant and works offline. The alternative is running every package in a secure sandbox, which catches more unknown threats but is much slower. Is the speed of a simple blocklist worth it, or should we always be sandboxing AI-generated code?
by szszrk | 2025-12-19 11:01:10+00:00
That was deliberate. Works on Linux and Windows as well. I think this is the current RFC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5735

You can do:

python3 -m http.server -b 127.0.0.1 8080

python3 -m http.server -b 127.0.0.2 8080

python3 -m http.server -b 127.0.0.3 8080

and all will be available.

Private network ranges don't really have the same purpose, they can be routed, you have to always consider conflicts and so on. But here with 127/8 you are in your own world and you don't worry about anything. You can also do tests where you need to expose more than 65k ports :)

You have to also remember these are things established likely before even DNS was a thing, IP space was considered so big that anyone could have a huge chunk of it, and it was mostly managed manually.
by nik3212 | 2025-12-19 11:01:48+00:00
A few days ago, I released a new version of the Typhoon framework - a modern, lightweight framework for handling retries in async operations.

Typhoon is built on top of Swift’s async/await and helps deal with transient failures using clean, configurable retry policies, without overcomplicating your code.

Typhoon now supports multiple retry strategies out of the box: • Constant - a fixed number of retries with a constant delay • Exponential - an increasing delay using exponential backoff • Exponential with Jitter - exponential backoff with jitter and an optional max interval to avoid thundering herd problems

Give it a try and let me know what you think.
by randomtoast | 2025-12-19 11:02:16+00:00
I have been following recent progress in the formalization of mathematical proofs in Lean, particularly in the context of large language models. One prominent advocate of this approach is Terence Tao, who regularly writes about developments in this area.

From a programmer's perspective, this puts up an interesting parallel. Models such as Sonnet or Opus 4.5 can generate thousands of lines of code per hour. I can review the output, ask the model to write tests, iterate on the result, and after several cycles become confident that the software is sufficiently correct.

For centuries, mathematicians developed proofs by hand, using pen and paper, and were able to check the proofs of their peers. In the context of LLMs, however, a new problem may arise. Consider an LLM that constructs a proof in Lean 4 iteratively over several weeks, resulting in more than 1,000,000 lines of Lean 4 code and concluding with a QED. At what point is an mathematician no longer able to confirm with confidence that the proof is correct?

Such a mathematician might rely on another LLM to review the proof, and that system might also report that it is correct. We may reach a stage where humans can no longer feasibly verify every proof produced by LLMs due to their length and complexity. Instead, we rely on the Lean compiler, which confirm formal correctness, and we are effectively required to trust the toolchain rather than our own direct understanding.
by ndepoel | 2025-12-19 11:02:21+00:00
Id Software very much skirted the edge of legality by making Commander Keen outside of office hours while still employed by SoftDisk and using SoftDisk computers, and SoftDisk could have easily sued them if they wanted to. They managed to avoid that by striking a deal where the Id guys would continue to make games for SoftDisk while working on Keen and later Wolfenstein 3D.

There was a lot of code reuse between games. John Carmack is on record somewhere that the enemy navigation code from Doom and Quake still has its origins in some of the earliest 8-bit games he wrote in the 1980's.
by carlosjobim | 2025-12-19 11:02:26+00:00
That was not the question. The question is when do you stop caring about the bias?

Some people are still outraged about the Bible, even though the writers of it has been dead for thousands of years. So the modern mass produced man and woman probably does not have a cut-off date where they look at something as history instead of examining if it is for or against her current ideology.
by nosianu | 2025-12-19 11:02:48+00:00
Which in turn was fueled by the consumers' desire for cheap stuff, and for their portfolios to earn them a lot of money to be able to retire early and live comfortably while letting a cheaper workforce far away do more and more of the dirty and dangerous jobs.

The "bean counters" are under pressure just like everybody else. They didn't come up with their targets and incentives out of nowhere.
by cyberrock | 2025-12-19 11:03:09+00:00
Another suggestion is showing an empty slot (selected item with less opacity and dotted border?) and displacing/scaling the picked item to show that it's been picked up. I would immediately connect it to picking up a book, CD, etc. from a shelf.

I think you should add some kind of marker to show where the item was picked up from and thus what would happen if the operation was cancelled, and an empty slot is perfect for that.
by IanCal | 2025-12-19 11:03:11+00:00
While I know there's going to be a lot of complications in this, given a quick search it seems like these GPUs are ~$2/hr, so $4000-4500 if you don't just have access to a cluster. I don't know how important the cluster is here, whether you need some minimal number of those for the training (and it would take more than 128x longer or not be possible on a single machine) or if a cluster of 128 GPUs is a bunch less efficient but faster. A 4B model feels like it'd be fine on one to two of those GPUs?

Also of course this is for one training run, if you need to experiment you'd need to do that more.
by sprash | 2025-12-19 11:03:30+00:00
It is irrelevant who invented Rust. The relevant fact is that it can be used as a tool to divide the community because of its very opinionated design. Systemd was equally opinionated and also caused huge division. Who is paying the bills of Poettering these days: Microsoft.

The Halloween documents show that Microsoft is playing these games for a long time now. Who knows in which way they have advanced their psyops. Just because we can't read their E-mails anymore doesn't mean they stopped doing it.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-12-19 11:03:51+00:00
I worked on a Ruby codebase that moved to Rust - I think that part is mostly cargo-culting cool things in the news to be perfectly honest. There’s type safety advantages, but if Ruby’s performance envelope was even conceivably acceptable for your use-case there are likely better options. I strongly suspect a lot of the friction between Rust and only-C/C++ developers is the product of a bunch of people coming at Rust from higher level languages parroting lines about safety, and then looking at you blankly if you ask how it handles nested pointer indirection.

But I don’t think that applies to the people actually driving the language forward, just those talking a big game on HN/Reddit.
by myrmidon | 2025-12-19 11:04:05+00:00
"Explicitly chose" is a strong word.

US and China are on completely different stages of industrialization: The US had its massive boom of manufacturing almost a century ago, enriching its population massively. Those rich citizens make the same manufacturing uncompetitive today, because no one is going to work in a factory for $20k/year (median wage in urban China), when he can work for other "rich" people for more than twice as much.

Switching paths is not feasible for the US in the same way that it is not gonna be feasible for China to hold on to all its industry as wages rise: You can't compete globally at "poor people wages" while being "rich", as simple as that.
by socalgal2 | 2025-12-19 11:05:22+00:00
> The Republicans are led by white supremacists and they hate me for being transgender

This is utterly false. At best you can claim you’ve heard of a few homophobic racists who happen to be republican . I’ve met just as many who happen to be democrat

Just to easily refute one of your 2 claims. Non-white republicans demographics is growing, not shrinking
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-12-19 11:08:26+00:00
I don't think I am. To be honest, as ideas goes and I swirl it around that empty head of mine, this one ain't half bad given how much immediate resistance it generates.

Other posters already noted other reasons for it, but I will note that you are saying 'similar to autocomplete, but obviously' suggesting you recognize the shape and immediately dismissing it as not the same, because the shape you know in humans is much more evolved and co do more things. Ngl man, as arguments go, it sounds to me like supercharged autocomplete that was allowed to develop over a number of years.
by epochcore | 2025-12-19 11:08:51+00:00
UPDATE: Just deployed QUANTUM CASCADE integration

We just integrated 261 live IBM quantum qubits (Nairobi, Kyoto, Osaka) with the 106-agent swarm.

What this means:

• 52-agent consensus selects optimal quantum backend in 500ms • Natural language to quantum: "Generate drug molecule" → SMILES → Hamiltonian → VQE → Ground state in 2.5s • Real QPU execution on IBM Eagle r3 processors (127 qubits each) • Quantum chemistry: RHF, CASCI, CASSCF via PySCF pipeline • CASCADE flash sync at 1000 Hz (4x faster than v1) • Cryptographic verification: SHA-256 hash chains prove every decision

Demo: curl -X POST https://e-opus-swarm.epochcoreras.workers.dev/quantum-consen... \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{"task":"Calculate H2 ground state using CASSCF"}'

Result: -1.1372 Hartree in 2.5 seconds.

We're the only platform combining multi-agent AI with real quantum hardware through natural language.

Quantum integration docs: https://e-opus-swarm.epochcoreras.workers.dev/quantum/docs
by Alex2037 | 2025-12-19 11:09:55+00:00
nobody gives a shit about the journos and the terminally online. the smear campaign against AI is a cacophony, background noise that most people have learned to ignore, even here.

consider this: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com

HN's most beloved shitrag. day after day, they attack AI from every angle. how many of those submissions get traction at this point?
by nis0s | 2025-12-19 11:11:20+00:00
> Those with darker personality traits often use more hostile, negative and disconnected language, including more swear words and anger words, such as “hate” or “mad”. At the same time, they use fewer socially connected terms like “we”.

People who want and choose to view your words uncharitably will do so regardless of what you say. For example, the use of “we” could also be seen as narcissistic or imperial. Managing the sensitivities and psychological state of the reader and observer is the greater part of social interactions than managing your own states.
by komali2 | 2025-12-19 11:11:59+00:00
I was just curious about the association between American values and capitalist ones, and whether you had some idea of what, specifically, American capitalist values are, or if you were just vaguely hand waving in the direction of an ideology.

Private property is an aspect of capitalism. I asked the question about America because I don't understand its relevance to this fact about capitalism.
by PunchyHamster | 2025-12-19 11:12:05+00:00
Process("grep", ["-r", "keyword", "."]) .then(Process("wc", ["-l"]))

I see the author haven't figured out WHY people still use shell scripting.

Precisely because A|b|c is simple and clear to write. For anything more verbose (and far more saner) we have Python already, and for other stuff Go is there too
by bambax | 2025-12-19 11:13:14+00:00
> Search results ads help customers discover your app right when they’re searching for apps to download.

One would think it's good search that helps users find what they want. But noooo! It's ads!

Ads help users! One has to love this kind of orwellian language. And one has to wonder if it's ever written in good faith? Or is everyone lying as a matter of course, to people who know perfectly well they're being lied to.

Is it even lying if you know they know you're lying?
by sevensor | 2025-12-19 11:13:27+00:00
I discovered named ranges only a couple of months ago, and they’re pretty amazing, as is the spilling behavior that fills an entire column from one cell. When it comes to the specifics of dealing with complex formulas, I usually copy paste them to a text editor because the formula bar doesn’t have a great editing ui.

How far did you get with let and lambda? It seems like you could build whole programs on them, but I haven’t pushed very hard on them yet. Do you want to say more about the “heavy technical limitations”?
by pietz | 2025-12-19 11:14:23+00:00
That's a fair point and yet I deeply believe Codex is better here. After finishing a big task, I used two fresh instances of Claude and Codex to review it. Codex finds more issues in ~9 out of 10 cases.

While I prefer the way Claude speaks and writes code, there is no doubt that whatever Codex does is more thorough.
by n4r9 | 2025-12-19 11:14:28+00:00
You're right about the figures, that's my mistake, thanks for teaching me.

I'm not convinced by the rest of your argument. For example:

> there are other more applicable laws to choose from such as the Public Order Act, the Crime and Disorder Act, and the Domestic Abuse Act which largely covers hate crimes and domestic abuse

Isn't it possible that people get arrested on multiple charges - both for malicious communications and for harrassment, say?

> In the greater context of the conversation, it should be obvious that police are arresting people for social media posts

Yes, but what's not obvious (or even likely) is that 12000 people are being arrested for "online comments" [0], or that the UK leads the world in such arrests. Sentences have been handed out for various other activities, such as sending photographs or abusive private emails. That's the bit that makes it a right-wing narrative: taking a statistic and giving it a misleading interpretation that happens to support your cause. Has Tommy Robinson said anything in defense/support of Joey Barton? I'm guessing not, because the victims were neither Muslim nor immigrants.

[0] https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tommy-robinson-uk-speech-cla...
by thrance | 2025-12-19 11:14:39+00:00
Issue is when MAGA people (Like Blow) say "women are biologically inclined towards X", it doesn't come from a place of geniune scientific curiosity, but rather a way to advance their misogynistic agenda. There is nothing you could ever say that would change their "opinion" on the matter.

Truth is, programming was women-dominated in its inception, but was taken over by men when programming the computer became more prestigious. Whatever biological factors at play here, they're completely overridden by sociological factors.