MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nephihaha | 2025-12-10 11:58:58+00:00
Even if he genuinely supported the working class and struggles against power, he would not be in the World Economic Forum today. He was born into privilege, and now belongs to an organisation which bans proper press coverage... Even though it is where top politicians and business men meet to decide what to do with us. That door opens from the inside. You either pay vast sums to join the WEF or they invite you.

https://www.weforum.org/stories/authors/yanis-varoufakis/
by petre | 2025-12-10 12:00:03+00:00
> Also you can't have a feudal system when the peasantry have been replaced by machines which is the end game here. Feudalism is parasitic but it still requires goods and services to flow up from below. When your food, defence and goods are all supplied by robots or AI, then that is not the case.

Do machines drive your Uber ride? Deliver your food? No. They assign jobs to gig workers. Those are the serfs. Your goods and services are by people managed by AI.

Yes, I know, FSD is just around the corner rendering truck and taxi drivers obsolete. /s
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-12-10 12:00:32+00:00
> There are messed up cows just like people.

Can confirm. A neighbour had a cow that would batter down fences to get out and chase people, and headbutt cars. Didn't matter how we fenced the field off, she'd break out.

Turns out a deep freeze is plenty stockproof. No-one's got time for that nonsense, and every last bit was delicious right down to the last drop of oxtail soup.
by voidUpdate | 2025-12-10 12:01:20+00:00
in part 4, it seems like most of the time was just fighting against rust's semantics for how code should exist, and it made me wonder if rust was really the right tool for this? Every time I see something like this, it just sort of reinforces my belief that to write code in rust, you have to spend half your time fighting with how rust thinks code should work
Show HN: An AI-Powered WordPress Site Plugin Builder
by fasthightimess | 2025-12-10 12:01:24+00:00
Hi HN,

I built steem.dev, a new AI vibe-coding tool that generates fully functional WordPress plugins from natural language prompts. Instead of searching for the right plugin, hiring a developer, or fighting with overbuilt tools like Elementor add-ons, Yoast extensions, WooCommerce tweaks, image compressors, custom dashboards, or random code snippets copied from forums, you just tell steem what you want and it builds the plugin for you.

The idea came from my own workflow. Every time I needed a small tweak or a one-off feature, I found myself opening Gemini or Claude, prompting for code, pasting it into a plugin skeleton, fixing the hooks, debugging naming collisions, adding sanitization, reorganizing files, and trying again. The LLMs were powerful, but the process around them was messy and repetitive. I realized I was still doing all the boring engineering work by hand.

So I built steem.dev. You describe the feature. Steem generates the plugin with proper WordPress structure, correct hooks, security escapes, activation logic, admin pages if needed, AJAX endpoints, REST endpoints, blocks, widgets, or whatever the feature requires. It validates the code, packages it, and you download a ready-to-install zip. No manual setup, no boilerplate, no debugging hallucinated APIs.

Examples of things people have already built with it: a custom post type dashboard widget with analytics, a WooCommerce checkout fee rule, a lightweight SEO field manager, a role-based content lock plugin, a cron-driven RSS importer, a keyword highlighter, and even a full image offloading plugin. All from prompts.

Steem is not a marketplace of prebuilt plugins. It is closer to a personal developer that instantly builds exactly what you want, every time, without any technical knowledge. It is opinionated about correct WordPress architecture, avoids insecure patterns, and prevents the usual mistakes that come from copy-pasting random code.

My goal is to make WordPress development feel like talking to an engineer instead of writing PHP. The tool is free to try, and I would love feedback from people who work with WP, LLM coding tools, or plugin ecosystems. Does this model make sense? What kinds of plugins should I showcase as examples? How deep should the generated architecture go? And if you have thoughts on safety, sandboxing, or plugin validation, I am all ears.

Happy to answer any questions.
by baq | 2025-12-10 12:01:34+00:00
> I don't know what one should even make from that statement.

it's just a fact. by definition of the Rust language unsafe Rust is approximately as safe as C (technically Rust is still safer than C in its unsafe blocks, but we can ignore that.)

> you didn't even bother to look at the code but still presented

of course I did, what I've seen were one-liner trait impls (the 'whole traits' from your own post) and sub-line expressions of unsafe access to bindings.
by nosklo | 2025-12-10 12:02:25+00:00
I asked Gemini, and Gemini said:

The Case for a New HN Guideline on AI-Generated Content

This is a timely discussion. While AI is an invaluable tool, the issue isn't using AI—it's using it to replace genuine engagement, leading to "low-signal" contributions. The Problem with Unfiltered AI Replies

Dilution of Human Insight: HN's core value is the unique, experienced human perspective. Unanalyzed LLM-dumps replace original thought with aggregated, generic consensus. Reading Fatigue & Bloat: Long, copy-pasted blocks of LLM text break the flow of discussion and make comments less scannable, forcing users to sift through machine-generated prose to find human analysis. Lack of Authority/Verification: A comment that just says "$AI said X" is essentially an anonymous opinion. It lacks the critical filter, context, and experience of the human poster, making it less trustworthy, especially given LLM hallucination risk. The Value of AI as a Tool Quick Context/Summary: LLMs can quickly provide neutral, accurate definitions, historical context, or a list of arguments, saving users a separate search. Supporting Evidence: When used properly, AI output can be supporting "data" for a human's core argument or analysis. A Proposed Middle Ground Guideline

Instead of an outright ban, which punishes useful use cases, a new guideline should focus on human value-add and presentation.

The spirit of the guideline should be: If you use an LLM, your contribution must be more than the LLM's output.

Mandatory Analysis: The commenter must add their own critical analysis, personal experience, or counter-argument that contextualizes, critiques, or supports the AI's summary. Clear Attribution and Formatting: All LLM-generated text must be clearly attributed (e.g., "I asked ChatGPT-4...") and visually separated (e.g., using a > blockquote) to maintain scannability. Curation over Dumping: Encourage summarizing or excerpting the most relevant parts of the AI output, rather than pasting a lengthy, unedited wall of text.

Ultimately, the community downvotes already function to filter low-effort posts, but a clear guideline would efficiently communicate the shared norm: AI is a tool for the human conversation, not a replacement for it.
by jamietanna | 2025-12-10 12:03:06+00:00
I will say I didn't disagree with DHH's use of "open source" as I will generally let it slide as its not "Open Source", the version that I attribute to following the Open Source Definition as set out by the Open Source Initiative

I agree that there are many who don't understand the distinction and assume that "Open Source" == "open source", and so I do agree that avoiding the use of "open source" where it instead means "non-OSD" makes sense
by lousken | 2025-12-10 12:03:12+00:00
As a sysadmin I also hate this. Instead, I do block stuff based on DNS requests and I also block any other DNS provider as well as malicious IPs.

At this point in time, Microsoft is the bigger enemy here - some of their policies are just insane and none of this MITM will help [0][1]

[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/roadmap?id=490...

[1] https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/microsoft365copilot...
by hintoftime | 2025-12-10 12:03:13+00:00
Would you consider tools like Temporal, DBOS, Absurd Workflows, PGQueuer as alternatives?

https://temporal.io/

https://docs.dbos.dev/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45797228

https://python-absurd-client.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quicks...

https://pgqueuer.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
by throw0101a | 2025-12-10 12:03:27+00:00
> You actually don't want insane insulation. Alaska is wet, and if you trap condensation and add heat for warmth, you get mold.

Yes, you do want high insulation, and also good air tightness.

* https://buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-031-build...

* https://buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-p...

* https://cchrc.org/wp-content/uploads/media/arctic_wall2013.p...

You want a very good building envelope and you control inside conditions through mechanical means. You control condensation dehumidifiers.
by monerozcash | 2025-12-10 12:04:13+00:00
>These days I hike a lot, I've had bullseye rashes before and the treatment is so much less worrisome than the rare possibility of developing lyme.

Yeah, if you develop a rash from a tick bite that even remotely looks like it could be lyme, just go to a pet store to buy amoxicillin (you can get exactly the same stuff they give to humans) if you can't quickly find a doctor who'll take it seriously enough to immediately write you a prescription (unless, of course, they have a very well reasoned explanation for not doing so).

The potential consequences of not getting fast treatment are indeed so so much worse than the practically non-existent consequences of taking amoxicillin when you don't need it, unless you're a crazy hypochondriac who constantly thinks they might have lyme.

But hey, also don't blindly trust medical advice from HN commenters telling you to go buy pet store antibiotics :)
by scotty79 | 2025-12-10 12:06:36+00:00
Parser combinators is more of a concept than a library. You could make your own supporting the stuff you need. I like writing programs in languages I don't know or I barely know. I usually just take one of the popular libraries in any given language.

For Rust I used Nom and I didn't mind it all that much although I noticed it's quite baroque. If I had more to write I'd probably make some wrappers or macros of my own for most commonly used Nom snippets.
by davegri | 2025-12-10 12:06:48+00:00
> "Some groupings have icons and get inset, while other groupings don’t have icons and don’t get inset. Interesting…again I wonder what the rationale is here? How do you choose? It’s not clear to me."

The rationale is clear, they are choosing to use icons only when a widely-recognized icon is available. This makes sense, and it answers the author's concerns perfectly about icons being used arbitrarily when they don't convey anything.

To be honest I find the whole motion of this blog post quite confusing. The user starts with a bad example, people using icons randomly that nobody could recognize without the text, which is evidence of the fact that the icon itself doesn't convey much information.

Then he shows an example where someone doesn't do the thing he complained about, they actually did use icons with a rationale. At which point he asks the question, "What is the rationale" but does not actually attempt to answer it..

To me though, there is a much more interesting paradox beneath all this. If we grant that it only makes sense to show an icon when it's meaning is widely known. How are new icons ever going to be introduced? Presumably every well known went through a period where it was used with text because it was still not well known. So while it might be bad UX to use an icon that is unfamiliar to users, over the long term using such icons has the benefit of creating a shared visual language that we all understand. I guess the litmus test for when to put an icon should then become: Is this functionality widespread enough in other applications that I can imagine this icon becoming standard in the future?
by monerozcash | 2025-12-10 12:07:10+00:00
There are people receiving life-saving medical advice from LLMs every single day.

The problem isn't getting medical advice from LLMs, it's blindly trusting the medical advice a LLM gives you.

You do not need to trust the LLM for it to be able to save your life, you do need to trust the LLM for it to be able to harm you.
by sgerenser | 2025-12-10 12:07:16+00:00
The sweet latte-based drinks are a huge part of Starbuck’s business. They make far more money on these things (and frappucinos and iced lattes, etc.) than coffee or espresso. But it’s mostly just selling them to people who like the taste (and don’t really care for plain coffee at all). The people posing for instagram are a small minority.
by roelschroeven | 2025-12-10 12:07:59+00:00
Are company names even unique within the UK? Sure, there can be only one bank named Barclays because of trademark laws, but can't there be a company in a different sector with the same name? Like Apple the computer business vs Apple the record company?

Or don't you have small local businesses (restaurants, pubs, stores) with duplicate names as long as they're in different locations? I know here in Flanders we have, for example, tens if not more places called "Café Onder den toren" (roughly translated as "Pub beneath the tower"). Do all local businesses in the UK have different names?
by senfiaj | 2025-12-10 12:10:03+00:00
> That's only the problem of floats, with ints this issue doesn't exist.

With ints the results can be dramatically different (often even worse than floats) even though in pure mathematics the order doesn't matter:

1 * 2 * 3 * 4 / 8 --> 3 3 * 4 / 8 * 1 * 2 --> 2

This is a trivial example, but it shows why it's extremely hard for compilers to optimize expressions and why they usually leave this task to humans.

But x % 2 == 0 && x % 3 == 0 isn't such case, swapping operands of && has no side effects, nor swapping operands of each ==.

> Are you sure, that dividing by 6 is actually faster

Compilers usually transform divisions into multiplications when the denominator is a constant.

I wrote another example in other comment but I'll write again.

I also tried this

bool is_divisible_by_15(int x) { return x % 3 == 0 && x % 5 == 0; } bool is_divisible_by_15_optimal(int x) { return x % 15 == 0; }

is_divisible_by_15 still has a branch, while is_divisible_by_15_optimal does not

is_divisible_by_15(int): imul eax, edi, -1431655765 add eax, 715827882 cmp eax, 1431655764 jbe .LBB0_2 xor eax, eax ret .LBB0_2: imul eax, edi, -858993459 add eax, 429496729 cmp eax, 858993459 setb al ret is_divisible_by_15_optimal(int): imul eax, edi, -286331153 add eax, 143165576 cmp eax, 286331153 setb al ret

My point is that the compiler still doesn't notice that 2 functions are equivalent. Even when choosing 3 and 5 (to eliminate the questionable bit check trick for 2) the 1st function appears less optimal (more code + branch).
by griffzhowl | 2025-12-10 12:10:16+00:00
That's reminiscent of Livingstone's description of the time he was mauled by a lion:

"The shock produced a stupor similar to that which seems to be felt by a mouse after the first shake of the cat. It caused a sort of dreaminess, in which there was no sense of pain nor feeling of terror, though quite conscious of all that was happening."

https://historyweblog.com/2014/10/lion-attacks-livingstone/
by josephg | 2025-12-10 12:10:22+00:00
> if the safe wrappers let you write arbitrary data to a PCIe network card’s registers

Functions like that can and should be marked unsafe in rust. The unsafe keyword in rust is used both to say “I want this block to have access to unsafe rust’s power” and to mark a function as being only callable from an unsafe context. This sounds like a perfect use for the latter.
by Danborg | 2025-12-10 12:10:25+00:00
Vibe coding should be done in Python, and probably only in Python.

If a project is important enough to require C or x86 assembly, where memory management and undefined behavior have real consequences, then it’s important enough to warrant a real developer who understands every line. It shouldn’t be vibe coded at all.

Python’s “adorable concern for human problems” isn’t a bug here, it’s a feature. The garbage collection, the forgiving syntax, the interpreted nature: these create a sandbox where vibe coded solutions can fail safely. A buggy Python script throws an exception. A buggy C program gives you memory corruption or security holes that show up three deployments later.

The question isn’t what language should AI write. It’s what problems should we trust to vibe coding. The answer: problems where Python’s safety net is enough. The moment you need C’s performance or assembly’s precision, you’ve crossed into territory that demands human accountability.
by gnoll_of_gozag | 2025-12-10 12:11:40+00:00
this is a joke right?

why would a ring need a whole ass microphone and a non rechargable battery like yeah dude gotta have a $100 dongle you just throw away once in a while

if it's already compatible with the watch then why not just make it emit some sort of signal that turns on the watch's mic? or put the button on the watch itself?
by renewiltord | 2025-12-10 12:11:46+00:00
It is SEO-y and I’m sure no small impulse is to drive traffic to his website since he’s primarily an AI influencer.

However, there are always people who are “native” to a platform and field. Pieter Levels is native to Twitter and the nomad community. Swyx is native to Twitter/HN and the devtools community. And simonw is native to at least HN and the LLM-interest community. And various streamers and onlyfans creators do the same with theirs.

Through some degree of releasing things that whatever that community values they build a relationship that allows them greater freedom in participating there. It does create a positive feedback cycle for them (and hopefully the community) that most of them will try to parlay into something else: Levels and the OnlyFans creators are probably best at this monetization of reputation but each of them is doing this. One success step for simonw would be “Creator of Pelican LLM benchmark”.

Once you’ve breached some stable point in the community the norms are somewhat relaxed. But it’s not easy to do that. You have to produce some extraordinary volume of things that people value.

I think, tbh, tptacek here could most effectively monetize if he decided to. But he doesn’t appear to want to so he’s just a participant not an influencer so to speak. Whereas someone like Levels or simonw is both.

It’s just creator economy stuff. Meta discussions like this always pop up. But ultimately simonw is past the threshold of trust. There are people who say “wtf? Why is levels making $50k/mo on a stupid vibe-coded flying game?”

It ain’t the game. It’s the following before the game. The resource is the audience.
by bayindirh | 2025-12-10 12:11:53+00:00
Some pretext: I'm a Rust skeptic and tired of Rust Evangelism Task Force and Rewrite in Rust movements.

---

Yes. I remember that message.

Also let's not forget what marcan said [0] [1].

In short, a developer didn't want their C codebase littered with Rust code, which I can understand, then the Rust team said that they can maintain that part, not complicating his life further (Kudos to them), and the developer lashing out to them to GTFO of "his" lawn (which I understand again, not condone. I'd have acted differently).

This again boils down to code quality matters. Rust is a small child when compared to the whole codebase, and weariness from old timers is normal. We can discuss behaviors till the eternity, but humans are humans. You can't just standardize everything.

Coming to marcan, how he behaved is a big no in my book, too. Because it's not healthy. Yes, the LKML is not healthy, but this is one of the things which makes you wrong even when you're right.

I'm also following a similar discussion list, which has a similar level of friction in some matters, and the correct thing is to taking some time off and touching grass when feeling tired and being close to burnout. Not running like a lit torch between flammable people.

One needs to try to be the better example esp. when the environment is not in an ideal shape. It's the hardest thing to do, but it's the most correct path at the same time.

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250205004552mp_/https://lwn.ne...

[1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/6/404
by rramadass | 2025-12-10 12:11:54+00:00
Aswath Damodaran (https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/) from Stern School of Business at NYU says; 'Something bad is coming': Aswath Damodaran is ditching diversification, eyeing hard assets - https://www.businesstoday.in/markets/stocks/story/something-...

Also see books/papers/etc. under the "Writing" section of his webpage for insights.
by rvnx | 2025-12-10 12:12:00+00:00
Not at all. The majority with the current AI craze not really about credibility or skills. It's like a kitchen.

Take a genius chef but give him rotten ingredients. He sweats, he tries, but the meal is barely edible. That's the $100 exercise, but only experts recognize the talent behind.

Take an unskilled cook but give him A5 Wagyu and prepared truffles. The result tastes amazing to the average person who will claim the chef is great (the investors).

It's about access to capital and selling a story ('ex'-Googler doesn't make you competent), not skills.

Great chefs in dark alleys go unnoticed.

Mediocre tourist traps near the Eiffel Tower are fully booked.

Look at Inflection AI. Average results, yet massive funding. They have the "location" and the backing, so they win. It's not about who cooks better; it's about who owns the kitchen but who sells a dream that tomorrow the food will be better.

We don't talk about small funding, we talk about 1.3 billion USD, just for that specific example, yet a tourist trap (using name-dropping / reputation instead of talent)

Snake-oil is rewarded as much as, or even more than real talent; a lot of people cannot see the difference between a chef and the ingredients, this is what I think is sad.
by meindnoch | 2025-12-10 12:12:08+00:00
But is it really 1 MWh of _electricity_, or could you replace a good chunk of that with a huge tank of boiling water? In the winter, about half of my electricity consumption goes to my heat pump, to produce 45-50C water for heating and tap water. But if we could increase the reservoir temperature to 95C (or even go superheated to 160C at 6 bar), then it could supply the 45-50C flow temperature much longer without needing to recharge.
by monerozcash | 2025-12-10 12:12:37+00:00
Nobody here is advocating blindly trusting medical advice from LLMs, that is not "dangerous medical misinformation".

Even if you absolutely despise LLMs, this is just silly. The problem here isn't "AI enthusiasts", you're getting called out for the absolute lack of nuance in your article.

Yes, people shouldn't do what you did. Yes, people will unfortunately continue doing what you did until they get better advice. But the correct nuanced advice in a HN context is not "never ask LLMs for medical advice", you will rightfully get flamed for that. The correct advice is "never trust medical advice from LLMs, it could be helpful or it could kill you".
by geokon | 2025-12-10 12:12:54+00:00
Are there any gotchas you've come across?

From the video tutorial is seems relatively straightforward. I guess the basis selection is a fundamental issue that will be problem-specific.

I will have to try it with some concrete examples. The first question I have is, will it still work if you have a lot of high frequency noise? In the cases I'm thinking either there is measurement noise or just other jitter. So while the lower frequencies are sparse but I guess the higher frequencies not so much. I can't bandpass the data b/c it's got lots of holes or it's irregularly spaced.

Maybe it'll still work though!