MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throw310822 | 2025-12-07 17:55:28+00:00
The problem with current AI is that it's super easy to get half-decent results by hooking up a simple agent to a lot of office software- and when it works it looks like pure magic; but getting reliably good results is way harder. So half assed agents abound (I know, I've added three or four to our apps in the last few months) but they can get frustrating for the users really quickly.
by Yoofie | 2025-12-07 17:56:07+00:00
No, the OP is right in this case. Did you read TFA? It was "peer reviewed".

> Worryingly, each of these submissions has already been reviewed by 3-5 peer experts, most of whom missed the fake citation(s). This failure suggests that some of these papers might have been accepted by ICLR without any intervention. Some had average ratings of 8/10, meaning they would almost certainly have been published.

If the peer reviewers can't be bothered to do the basics, then there is literally no point to peer review, which is fully independent of the author who uses or doesn't use AI tools.
by Nevermark | 2025-12-07 17:56:32+00:00
> training compute looks more like an operating expense with a short payback window than a durable capital asset

Today they are a durable asset functionally, longer than they are economically. So there is no reason in a market with less demand, that their economic payback windows cannot be extended further into their functional lifetimes.

There will be energy cost incentives to replace GPUs. But turnover can respond sensibly to demand as it revives, while older GPUs continue working.

Also, the data centers themselves, and especially any associated increase in power generation, will carry forward as long term functional value.

I doubt any downturn in compute demand lasts long. The underlying trend, aside from AI, was for steady increases in demand. Regardless of bad AI business models, or investment overhangs, a greater focus by more entities on AI product-market fits, along with cheaper compute, will quickly soak up cycles in new and better ways.

The wildflowers will grow fast.
by hnfong | 2025-12-07 17:56:59+00:00
I don't even think GP knows what negligence is.

Generally the law allows people to make mistakes, as long as a reasonable level of care is taken to avoid them (and also you can get away with carelessness if you don't owe any duty of care to the party). The law regarding what level of care is needed to verify genAI output is probably not very well defined, but it definitely isn't going to be strict liability.

The emotionally-driven hate for AI, in a tech-centric forum even, to the extent that so many commenters seem to be off-balance in their rational thinking, is kinda wild to me.
by garden_hermit | 2025-12-07 17:57:04+00:00
> Given the repeatability crisis I keep reading about, maybe something should change?

The replication crisis — assuming that it is actually a crisis — is not really solvable with peer review. If I'm reviewing a psychology paper presenting the results of an experiment, I am not able to re-conduct the entire experiment as presented by the authors, which would require completely changing my lab, recruiting and paying participants, and training students & staff.

Even if I did this, and came to a different result than the original paper, what does it mean? Maybe I did something wrong in the replication, maybe the result is only valid for certain populations, maybe inherent statistical uncertainty means we just get different results.

Again, the replication crisis — such that it exists — is not the result of peer review.
by cjbenedikt | 2025-12-07 17:57:26+00:00
You speak from a position of authority, of course. Not sure who in your view Europe is blaming. I guess, all was well as long as Europe bought US fighter jets. Now that they "grow up" and realize they may be better off with European ones ( Gripen) plus keeping a lid on US social media companies - that doesn't go done all too well. Besides, German company Rheinmetall is biggest supplier of ammunition to Ukraine. https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/media/stories/2023/rheinmetal.... So much so that Moscow attempted to assassinate its CEO.https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-tried-assassinat... Pretty adult all that, no?
by ben_w | 2025-12-07 17:57:29+00:00
We do innovate.

The US frequently buys us up whenever we get something going in tech.

Like DeepMind.

Now, a question: what exactly has been innovative about X specifically after Musk bought it and fired so many of the people working there?

Another question: what can X do that all the free clones can't do?

While I'm at it, what about vice versa? Because if the free clones can do more than X, that would show how un-innovative X has become.

What I've seen from X since the purchase has been copying other people's features. Longer messages, videos, that kind of thing. Even getting into GenAI, though on that at least everyone is plagarising everyone else.
by kittikitti | 2025-12-07 17:57:31+00:00
Whenever cost-cutting measures are open for recommendations, I always mention how any company or organization can save on Microsoft licenses by switching to open source alternatives. It's never taken seriously, my competence is always questioned, and I somehow form new enemies from Microsoft fans. In the end, layoffs are conducted meanwhile the bills from Microsoft increase. The worst part about it all is that if my recommendations were implemented, the savings could have been enough to save everyone from a layoff.
Show HN: Honest Reviews Club – Deep, transparent digital product reviews
by launchzilla | 2025-12-07 17:57:37+00:00
Hi HN,

I’m launching Honest Reviews Club.

It is a transparent, community-governed platform for digital product reviews. Unlike major competitors, we have no pay-to-play rankings, no paywalls, and no scrubbed negative comments.

Our goal is to create a "Wikipedia for reviews"—a layer of truth in a market saturated with sponsored content.

Link: https://honest-reviews.club

Feedback is welcome!
by crote | 2025-12-07 17:59:14+00:00
You also can't ignore the mechanisms behind the private "wealth".

Air conditioning and central heating isn't a luxury when you live in a climate incompatible with human live without it. Having a car isn't a luxury when the infrastructure to bike, walk, or take public transit to your destinations does not exist. Having a three-thousand-square-foot home with a two-car garage isn't luxury when it is literally illegal to build the kind of mixed-use apartment building you actually want to live in. All of that is of course made worse when you're being forced to go into heavy debt to sustain this "luxury" lifestyle.

And as the article points out, it gets even more obvious when you look at day-to-day life. Sure, working that 9-hour-a-day job with a three-hour-a-day commute might mean you can afford another iPhone per year, but wouldn't you rather give up that iPhone for a 7-hour-a-day job with a 30-minute-a-day commute? Who care about wealth when you don't have the time and energy to spend that extra cash on things like meeting with your friends, cooking the meals you love, or enjoying a hike in the forest?

Plenty of seemingly asset-wealthy people are cash-poor, and even the cash-rich are usually time-poor. No wonder they aren't happy: they are too busy working to actually live.
by auggierose | 2025-12-07 17:59:40+00:00
Honest or not should not make a difference, after all, the submitting author may believe themselves everything is A-OK.

The review should also determine how valuable the contribution is, not only if it has mistakes or not.

Todays reviews determine neither value nor correctness in any meaningful way. And how could they, actually? That is why I review papers only to the extent that I understand them, and I clearly delineate my line of understanding. And I don't review papers that I am not interested in reading. I once got a paper to review that actually pointed out a mistake in one of my previous papers, and then proposed a different solution. They correctly identified the mistake, but I could not verify if their solution worked or not, that would have taken me several weeks to understand. I gave a report along these lines, and the person who gave me the review said I should say more about their solution, but I could not. So my review was not actually used. The paper was accepted, which is fine, but I am sure none of the other reviewers actually knows if it is correct.

Now, this was a case where I was an absolute expert. Which is far from the usual situation for a reviewer, even though many reviewers give themselves the highest mark for expertise when they just should not.
by throwaway314155 | 2025-12-07 18:00:45+00:00
Somehow I suspect Claude Code (in an interactive session with trial, error, probing, critiquing, perusing, and all the other benefits you get) would do better. This example seems to assume Claude can do things in "one shot" (even the later attempts all seem to conceal information like it's a homework assignment).

That's not how to successfully use LLM's for coding in my experience. It is however perhaps a good demonstration of Claude's poor spatial reasoning skills. Another good demonstration of this is the twitch.tv/ClaudePlaysPokemon where Claude has been failing to beat pokemon for months now.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-12-07 18:01:13+00:00
Why?

It seems to me that if there were as much of a customer base for custom ICs as there is for PCBs, a fabricator like TSMC could easily offer a batch prototyping service on a 28 nm node, where you buy just a small slice of a wafer, provided you keep to some restrictive design and packaging rules.
by intelec1 | 2025-12-07 18:02:06+00:00
The UK is facing a deep crisis: an army short of ammunition and equipment, arsenals depleted by support for Ukraine, senior generals issuing a de facto ultimatum to the government — while at home the welfare system increasingly discourages work.

In this episode, we analyze the latest issue of The Spectator and examine how it portrays modern Britain — from defence and the Labour budget to welfare, migration, artificial intelligence and the climate agenda.

If you value analysis over slogans, subscribe to the channel, like the video, and share your view in the comments: is Britain’s crisis a failure of elites, a flaw in the welfare state, or a symptom of a deeper global shift?

#UK #BritishArmy #TheSpectator #Politics #WelfareState #ClimateAgenda #WorldNews #DeepPressAnalysis
by lagniappe | 2025-12-07 18:02:59+00:00
A tweet I saw earlier:

Mark Gurman @markgurman BREAKING: Apple’s chip chief Johny Srouji informed CEO Tim Cook he is seriously considering leaving the company and would likely continue his career elsewhere rather than retire. Apple is urgently pushing to keep him. He remains at least for now.

Tweet source: https://x.com/markgurman/status/1997352821453447399

Article source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-06/apple-roc...
by dtech | 2025-12-07 18:04:03+00:00
Kotlin heavily uses the inline keyword basically everywhere, to get rid of lamdba overhead for functions like map. Basically every stdlib and 3rd part library function that takes a lamdba is inlined.

In general it's a performance benefit and I never heard of performance problems like this. I wonder if combined with Scala's infamous macro system and libraries like quicklens it can generate huge expressions which create this problem.
by giantrobot | 2025-12-07 18:04:09+00:00
Systems with mod_perl (or just Perl allowing normal CGI) installed, especially shared hosting was so common as to be the norm in the late 90s and early 00s.

I think instead the biggest reason PHP took off was it had far less deployment friction and better aesthetics than Perl did on machines where you didn't have admin access, basically ever shared web hosting ever.

Typically CGI scripts on shared hosting were limited to explicit cgi-bin directories that had +ExecCGI. At the same time hosts would often not enable mod_rewrite because it could get computationally expensive on hardware of the era.

This all meant that all your dynamic content had to live at some "/cgi-bin/" path. It could be difficult to have a main landing page be dynamic without an empty index HTML just having an HTTP-Refresh meta tag to your "/cgi-bin/" path.

Contrast with PHP which would be processed from any directory path and was its own built-in templating language. It was also usually included in the DirectoryIndex list so an index.php would act as a directory index leading to cleaner URLs.

In the era when deployment mean MPUT in an FTP client those small differences made a difference for people trying to make their first dynamic website and look "professional".
by m4rtink | 2025-12-07 18:04:21+00:00
There was a talk from someone from Yahoo back in 2013 on the Fedora Flock conference in Prague about how they can re-provision baremetal machines in less than one minute.

They used the regular Anaconda installer (used for Feodra, RHEL and related distros) to install the rootfs from a tarball, even doing a live demo - tha machine was doingn something - the reybooted it into the installer, which wiped the storage, unpacked the tarball and configured the system. After reboot the new system was up, ready to do something else - all in less than 60 seconds, including 2 reboots, back in 2013.
by sneak | 2025-12-07 18:04:27+00:00
> it is a discourse used solely for the purpose of not doing anything and not addressing anything about the underlying problem

Solely? Oh brother.

In reality it’s the complete opposite. It exists to highlight the actual source of the problem, as both industries/practitioners using AI professionally and safely, and communities with very high rates of gun ownership and exceptionally low rates of gun violence exist.

It isn’t the tools. It’s the social circumstances of the people with access to the tools. That’s the point. The tools are inanimate. You can use them well or use them badly. The existence of the tools does not make humans act badly.
by randycupertino | 2025-12-07 18:04:53+00:00
There's more than just 4 execs and imo an unprecedented level of turnover for a historically very stable company. It’s multiple senior leaders across legal, policy, AI, design, hardware, and operations leaving within a short period, making it one of Apple’s most significant leadership shakeups in years, which is why several outlets are finding it newsworthy.

1) John Giannandrea, Senior VP of Machine Learning & AI Strategy, Apple’s AI chief is leaving in 2026 after setbacks with Siri, his entire team is being reorganized and cut.

2) Alan Dye, VP of Design and responsible for liquid glass left for Meta Bloomberg

3) Kate Adams, the top lawyer and general counsel is leaving

4) Lisa Jackson, VP of Policy & Social Initiatives also leaving

5) Johny Srouji, hardware/chip head, said he is "seriously considering leaving" which is really interesting seeing as he actually said that out loud for press to report on.

6) Jeff Williams, COO retired

7) Luca Maestri the CFO left ealier this year

8) Ruoming Pang the AI foundation leader left for Meta

9) Ke Yang, head of Siri search also left for Meta.

A lot of other AI engineers have also left.
by thecr0w | 2025-12-07 18:04:54+00:00
Not a homework assignment, and no deliberate attempt to conceal information, just very long and repetitive logs. A lot of the same "insights" so I just didn't provide them here.

> That's not how to successfully use LLM's for coding in my experience.

Yeah agree. I think I was just a little surprised it couldn't one-shot given the simplicity.
by 999900000999 | 2025-12-07 18:05:23+00:00
Space Jam website design as an LLM benchmark.

This article is a bit negative. Claude gets close , it just can't get the order right which is something OP can manually fix.

I prefer GitHub Copilot because it's cheaper and integrates with GitHub directly. I'll have times where it'll get it right, and times when I have to try 3 or 4 times.
by lesam | 2025-12-07 18:05:58+00:00
If there’s anything I would want to run to verify, I ask the author to add a unit test. Generally, the existing CI test + new tests in the PR having run successfully is enough. I might pull and run it if I am not sure whether a particular edge case is handled.

Reviewers wanting to pull and run many PRs makes me think your automated tests need improvement.
by osigurdson | 2025-12-07 18:06:13+00:00
It will entirely be about trust. I don't think fakery is worth it for any company with > $1B market cap as trust is such a valuable commodity. It isn't like we are just going to have a single state broadcaster or something like that (at least, I hope not). However it is going to favour larger / more established sources which is unfortunate as well.
by crote | 2025-12-07 18:07:15+00:00
Yes. The forced two-party system inevitably leads to an us-versus-them mentality. Everything gets divided into Good Things done by Us, and Bad Things done by Them. There's no room for nuance, everything has to be pushed to the extremes in order to get a handful of voters to flip.

In a healthy democracy with at least a handful of political parties the small groups of lunatics aren't going to poison the entire spectrum: they are mostly contained into the tiny extremist parties served by heavily biased extremist media. The vast majority of the population, however, is served by more moderate parties and more neutral media - where misinformation and blatant corruption is heavily frowned upon.

Turns out when people have a genuine alternative, they don't just stick with whatever shit they are trying to pull this time just because "the other guy is even worse".
by lagniappe | 2025-12-07 18:09:24+00:00
Models are trained with content scraped from the net, for the most part. The availability of content pertaining to those specs is almost nil, and of no SEO value. Ergo, models for the most part will only have a cursory knowledge of a spec that your browser will never be able to parse because that isn't the spec that won.

Nonetheless, here is a link to a list of the specs you asked for: https://www.w3.org/Style/History/Overview.en.html
by semi-extrinsic | 2025-12-07 18:09:41+00:00
It's also a consequence of the sheer number of building blocks which are involved in modern science.

In the methods section, it's very common to say "We employ method barfoo [1] as implemented in library libbar [2], with the specific variant widget due to Smith et al. [3] and the gobbledygook renormalization [4,5]. The feoozbar is solved with geometric multigrid [6]. Data is analyzed using the froiznok method [7] from the boolbool library [8]." There goes 8, now you have 2 citations left for the introduction.
by sansseriff | 2025-12-07 18:09:44+00:00
I don’t see why this would be the case with proper tool calling and context management. If you tell a model with blank context ‘you are an extremely rigorous reviewer searching for fake citations in a possibly compromised text’ then it will find errors.

It’s this weird situation where getting agents to act against other agents is more effective than trying to convince a working agent that it’s made a mistake. Perhaps because these things model the cognitive dissonance and stubbornness of humans?
by toast0 | 2025-12-07 18:09:52+00:00
Ukraine gave up nukes that they couldn't afford to maintain and got unenforcable security guarantees 'assurances' in return.

Giving up the nukes allowed Ukraine to attract foreign aid and build an economy for 20 years before invasions began. Who knows what would have happened if they kept nukes and didn't get necessary aid and couldn't build their economy or maintain the weapons.
by Nevermark | 2025-12-07 18:10:44+00:00
Living things are relentless survival outcome machines.

Actively and adaptively. With every part and behavior continuously tuned, within and across generations, to support that one outcome. Carried out by inventive means and intricate strategies. With hierarchies of structure, function and interaction. And statistically successful over all kinds of environmental challenges and variation.

"Consistently, actively and adaptively, X outcome aligned", over all other potential outcomes, is as good a phrase for "goal of X" as any.

Yes, you can narrow the definition of "goal" in any way you want, for yourself. But my use of the term is consistent with normal use of the term, and its definition. It is not a technically defined term.

If you want to argue that there is a difference between "effective goals" for things that relentlessly and adaptively pursue some outcome, but without cognitive support, vs "reflective goals", created and/or carried out cognitively, often idiosyncratically to particular individuals, I would agree.

There is also a clear distinction between artifacts without structure and function aligned for some outcome, and those that "consistently, actively and adaptively" maximize the reliability of some very specific class of outcome. And calling the latter a "goal" is reasonable.
by roryirvine | 2025-12-07 18:11:32+00:00
Co-codamol 8/500 (8 mg codeine and 500 mg paracetamol) is still available in the UK without a prescription. As far as I'm aware, though, it's always been OTC (over-the-counter, ie. you have to ask the pharmacist) rather than off the shelf.

The big change recently (mid 2010s) was that the pharmacist now has to verbally warn against driving, whereas previously it was just a prominent warning on the packaging & advice leaflet.
by AbrahamParangi | 2025-12-07 18:11:44+00:00
Candidly, the accusation of short-sightedness doesn't really make sense when it comes to enthusiasm in a technology which often in practice falls short today but which in certain cases and in more cases tomorrow than today is worth tremendous business value.

If anything, you should accuse them of foolhardy recklessness. They are not the sticks in the mud.
by jijijijij | 2025-12-07 18:11:49+00:00
> Edit: I just checked and the average German nurse salary is (43k in USD vs 88k USD) less than half the average US RN salary,

Where did you get this figure?

23.70€/h (~27.60 USD/h) apparently is the average wage for nurses. Working full-time, 38 hours per week, that's 46,831.2€ (54,492.34 USD) per year. Mind you, half of socialized costs, like health insurance is payed by the employer, so you need to adjust figures accordingly. It's of course a totally ridiculous comparison without adjusting for living costs, etc.. Also typically there are 5-6 weeks of paid vacation per year.

https://www.allgaeuer-zeitung.de/pflege/durchschnittsgehalt-...
by igouy | 2025-12-07 18:11:50+00:00
Supposedly —

“Yes, the ‘ceramics story’ in ‘Art & Fear’ is indeed true, allowing for some literary license in the retelling. Its real-world origin was as a gambit employed by photographer Jerry Uelsmann to motivate his Beginning Photography students at the University of Florida.

(See the notes in "Atomic Habits" "The Danger of Aiming for Perfection" — "As retold in ‘Art & Fear’ it faithfully captures the scene … except I replaced photography with ceramics as the medium being explored.")

~

What would we need to do to make the photography course an experiment rather than a parable?
by brennanpeterson | 2025-12-07 18:12:00+00:00
Variance, data rate/cost, and lithography.

You can do lithography small but slow and expensive. But small means you need a stack, which is even more expensive. At small sizes, defectivity/variation are really difficult.

So if you want a paradigmatic shift, you need low cost patterning, and the best way I can see is to use clever chemistry and a much different design style.
by hulitu | 2025-12-07 18:13:13+00:00
> This processor has a total of eight ARM Cortex-A720 performance cores, the two fastest can hit boost clock speeds of up to 2.6 GHz

Impressing. Athlon speed. And boost, and only 2 of them. Trully impressing.

> This chipset is likely slower than the Snapdragon X Elite or a current flagship smartphone chip, but it should still provide enough performance for many everyday tasks.

This read out like: 640k should be enough for anybody.