MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by johnnyanmac | 2025-12-03 02:02:09+00:00
>Companies have always been for shareholders.

well we can trace that back to the 1920's, for one example.

>Do you people have some kind of contract with Tesla that I don't know about?

Are you aware of what a "social contract" is? There's nothing wrong with seeking to fill in gaps of knowledge.

>This entire discussion sounds crazy to me. If you want socialism, vote for socialism.

I'd be down for it, but this is almost orthogonal to the main point of the discussion. Social contracts exist in all forms of governing. Even rampant capitism has the bare bones social contract of "don't make your customers TOO angry so you can maximize extraction".
by AuthorizedCust | 2025-12-03 02:02:50+00:00
> As a scouter working with teenagers, I feel that most kids with a supportive backgrounds will tame this beast for themselves eventually…

Fellow Scouter here. Lots of Scout units in the USA have cell phone bans. That’s such an obsolete policy. We need to help the Scouts model good choices, and that doesn’t happen when decision opportunities are removed.

Also, if they are buried in their phones, take that as feedback on how much fun they are[n’t] having in your Scout unit.
by marcosdumay | 2025-12-03 02:03:27+00:00
Yep. Moore's law ended at or shortly before the 28nm era.

That's the main reason people stopped upgrading their PCs. And it's probably one of the main reasons everybody is hyped about Risc-V and the pi 2040. If Moore's law was still in effect, none of that would be happening.

That may also be a large cause of the failure of Intel.
by Mistletoe | 2025-12-03 02:03:40+00:00
If they need to contact their kids they can call the school to talk to them in the very rare case that is actually necessary. It was quite nice and refreshing to have the umbilical cut to your parents while you were at school in the past. You had to learn how to be on your own.

If there is a school shooting, what is texting their kid going to do?
by rprend | 2025-12-03 02:04:01+00:00
They sell a product, not a model. ChatGPT is a product, GPT5 is a technology.

If you hope that ChatGPT will be worthless because the underlying technology will commodify, then you are naive and will be disappointed.

If that logic made sense, why has it never happened before? Servers and computers have been commodified for decades! Salesforce is just a database, social media is just a relational database, Uber is just a GPS wrapper, AWS is just a server.

People pay money, setup subscriptions, and download apps to solve a problem, and once they solve that problem they rarely switch. ChatGPT is the fifth most visited website in the world! Facebook and Deepseek making opensource models means you can make your own ChatGPT, just like you can make your own Google, and nobody will use it, just like nobody uses the dozens of “better” search engines out there.
by peteforde | 2025-12-03 02:04:27+00:00
I am genuinely baffled by the notion that experienced developers have a moral obligation to mentor junior developers in additional to their actual job-related tasks.

They do not. Mentoring is rewarding work, but it is work.

I also find it objectionable that if you're simply not interested in mentoring, you're a jerk. Some people just aren't good at it, some people are genuinely swamped with existing responsibilities, and some people might just want to focus on their goals... and that's fine. There is no but.

Some folks <gasp> just don't like other people that much, and prefer working alone. Also fine, and kudos for being self-aware enough to not inflict yourself on people who probably wouldn't enjoy your oversight either. This should be celebrated as a communications success.

All of which brings me to the truth: if a company wants to mentor junior developers - and there are many, many excellent reasons to develop talent long-term - then they should make sure that they have suitably experienced people who have opted-in to mentorship, and make sure that their success metrics and remuneration reflect the fact that a significant portion of their time is acknowledged to be dedicated to mentorship. Otherwise, you're describing a recipe for legitimate resentment.

Likewise, if you're a junior developer desperate for mentorship... I understand that your instinct is to take any offer that will have you. But if you're able to have an honest conversation with the recruiter about what kind of mentorship culture exists in a company, you might be saving everyone a lot of pain and frustration.
by xarope | 2025-12-03 02:06:49+00:00
your answer seems very specific on joules. Could you explain your calculations, since I cannot comprehend the mapping of how you would get a liter of gasoline to 16.8m tokens? e.g. does that assume 100% conversion to energy, not taking into account heat loss, transfer loss, etc?

(For example, simplistically there's 86400s/day, so you are saying that my desktop PC idles at 350/86.4=4W, which seems way off even for most laptops, which idle at 6-10W)
by conradev | 2025-12-03 02:07:32+00:00
They claim that streaming over WiFi to a single mobile device is 37W:

Because phones are extremely energy efficient, data transmission accounts for nearly all the electricity consumption when streaming through 4G, especially at higher resolutions (Scenario D). Streaming an hour-long SD video through a phone on WiFi (Scenario C) uses just 0.037 kWh – 170 times less than the estimate from the Shift Project.

They might be folding in wider internet energy usage?

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2020/03/carbon-footprint-net...
by jpp | 2025-12-03 02:07:46+00:00
Enveritas (YC S18, non-profit) | Backend Software Engineer | Remote (Global) | https://enveritas.org/jobs/

Enveritas is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit working on sustainability issues facing smallholder coffee farmers. We collect field data in 25+ countries and build systems for analyzing risks in coffee supply chains (including EUDR-related deforestation checks).

* Backend Software Engineer (Python, PostgreSQL/PostGIS, Docker, AWS, Terraform) - $135-$155k — https://enveritas.org/jobs/backend-software-eng/#10d7adef8us (worldwide remote)
by kcplate | 2025-12-03 02:08:48+00:00
But how many people is he actually influencing?. His primary audience is probably more like the folks in the HN community and no one here seems to be taking these ramblings seriously.

A half dozen preachers at medium to large congregations reach and influence far more people with these kind of ideas without his billions and press at their disposal. He’s actually small potatoes in this apocalypse space.

I say let him talk, who cares?
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-12-03 02:09:06+00:00
The problem is "Seniors" started becoming worse a decade ago. Not only wouldn't they mentor, but they wouldn't lead by example. Problem-solving on their own, collaborating with peers, sharing information/communication, doing proper due diligence, organizing and improving themselves and their team/product/business. This was around the same time bootcamps started flooding the industry with amateurs with no experience. These neophytes were then competing with more experienced people for the same jobs, because hiring in tech is more Ouija board than accurate assessment of professional engineering.

Amidst this influx of applicants, junior and intermediate staff began getting Senior titles to justify pay raises. Soon those exact same people were moving from job to job as a "Senior", but without the relevant criteria that would've qualified for that title a decade before. You can still see people get promotions without having accomplished anything, much less learned anything, but they did keep the lights on. Today there's a sea of "Senior" engineers that can basically write code (and not especially well), but lack all the other "non-coding" skills that Seniors should have.

Even if you hired 100K new Juniors tomorrow, there's nobody to train them, because most of the people working today are practically Juniors themselves. Each "generation" is getting worse than the one before, because they're learning less from the generation before, and not being required to improve. There's still good engineers around, but finding them is like playing Where's Waldo? - and you have to know what Waldo looks like, which you won't if you're not experienced!

The fix isn't going to be learning to network ("relational intelligence") and mentoring more. The fix is for us to stop letting the industry devolve. Treat it like the real engineering professions, with real school requirements, real qualifications, real apprenticeships, real achievements (and titles that aren't meaningless). Otherwise it'll continue to get worse.
by nathan_douglas | 2025-12-03 02:09:39+00:00
(I'm actually set to complete Mathematical Foundations II next week, after completing Mathematical Foundations I recently.)

Thank you for your comment. I had a very nontraditional path to engineering, even in an era of self-taught programmers, and I feel a lot of pain and despair and bitterness and, uh, a vicarious feeling of disappointment, I guess... so discussing this sort of journey does me some good.

> I feel like I learned "Discrete Math", but in the sense that all the lessons were discrete and I couldn't draw connections between them.

Very reasonable takes. I think you're spot on. I do have a lot of trouble with the abstractness and disjointedness of it. I'm hoping that repetition will improve it. So far I'm still struggling with the same things I struggled with in college - combinatorics, for whatever reason, just seems to slide right out of my brain.

By "modularity" I meant that I could squeeze in 10-15 minutes here or there without having to commit multiple hours to a single concept, and that I could take a day off without destroying anything, but that's probably connected to the "discreteness" you mention, without a holistic, oceanic kind of cohesion or connectedness.

I'm actually working on a project now, an educational site that's kind of along these lines but focused on areas of CS I've always struggled with - Lambda Calculus, Type Theory, Lisp, that sort of thing. I think I have some good ideas. I hope I come up with more, because I definitely want to build a rich mesh of knowledge rather than a catalog of disconnected facts and tools without any underlying meaning.
by throwaway17_17 | 2025-12-03 02:10:50+00:00
This is pretty concise, but is still really technical. That aside, I think the actual bone of contention is that Zig’s IO is not a Reader-esque structure. The talks and articles I’ve read indicate that function needing the IO ‘context’ must be passed said context as an argument. Excepting using a global variable to make it available everywhere, but as I said in a sibling comment, that’s just global state not a monad.

In a manner of speaking, Zig created the IO monad without the monad (which is basically just an effect token disconnected from the type system). Zig’s new mechanism take a large chunk of ‘side-effects’ and encapsulates them in a distinct and unique interface. This allows for a similar segregation of ‘pure’ and ‘side-effecting’ computations that logically unlined Haskell’s usage of IO. Zig however lacks the language/type system level support for syntactically and semantically using IO as an inescapable Monad instance. So, while the side effects are segregated via the IO parameter ‘token’ requirement they are still computed as with all Zig code. Finally, because Zig’s IO is not a special case of Monad there is no restriction on taking IO requiring results of a function and using them as ‘pure’ values.
by maxnajer | 2025-12-03 02:11:09+00:00
Everyone is obsessed on the 'next' AI revolution where we'll train and execute multimodal models inside 'physical bodies. Like humanoids.

But let's try to imagine the revolution after the revolution; where by fusing all types of live geospatial data (satellite, drone, IoT, etc.) into a cohesive onthology where (literal) world models understand natively this onthology, this system can coordinate other systems and robotics on the ground based on what our 'eyes in the sky' see, in real time. Without human intervention.

For me this is a perfectly logical next step towards a Kardashev I scenario. Thoughts?
by refactor_master | 2025-12-03 02:11:44+00:00
I honestly don't get why you'd hate pandas more than anything else in the Python ecosystem. It's probably not the best tool in the world, and sure, like everybody else I'd rewrite the universe in Rust if I could start over, and had infinite time to catch up.

But the code base I work on has thousands and THOUSANDS of lines of Pandas churning through big data, and I can't remember the last time it lead to a bug or error in production.

We use pandas + static schema wrapper + type checker, so you'll have to get exotic to break things.
by setupminimal | 2025-12-03 02:13:01+00:00
Daroc here — I've gone ahead and applied two corrections to the article based on this comment. If you want to be sure that feedback or corrections reach us in the future (and not, as in this case, because I'm reading HN when I should be getting ready for bed), you're welcome to email lwn@lwn.net.

Thanks for the corrections, and for your work on Zig!
by codingdave | 2025-12-03 02:14:15+00:00
Sounds like the crappiest data source for AI training yet.

But in all seriousness, of course they can access the data. Otherwise who else would process it to give any health results back? I don't think encryption in transit is relevant to privacy concerns because the concerns are about such data being tied to you at all, in any way. At the same time, yes, this could product valuable health information.

Their better bet would be to allow full anonymity, so even if there is a leak (yeah, the puns write themselves), there is never a connection between this data and your person.
by carlosjobim | 2025-12-03 02:15:29+00:00
I'd say that Microsoft is doing everything right! They have managed to get such high customer loyalty that they can treat you lower than dirt and laugh and spit in your face. And you still do absolutely everything in your power to be able to be a customer of theirs. Even though there are many better options offered by competitors.

People and especially businesses will abuse you as much as you let them. So this is what you get and what you deserve.
by keeda | 2025-12-03 02:16:22+00:00
This goes back to how we define "novel problems." Is a dev building a typical CRUD webapp for some bespoke business purpose a "novel problem" or not? Reimplementing a well-known standard in a different language and infrastructure environment (e.g. https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-oauth-provider/)?

I'm probably just rephrasing what you mean, but LLMs are very good at applying standard techniques ("common solutions"?) to new use-cases. My take is, in many cases, these new use-cases are unique enough to be a "novel problem."

Otherwise, this pushes the definition of "novel problems" to something requiring entirely new techniques altogether. If so, I doubt if LLMs can solve these, but I am also pretty sure that 99.99999% of engineers cannot either.
by atonse | 2025-12-03 02:16:36+00:00
I pay $100/month for Claude Max, and I've already said it, I would go up to $500 a month and wouldn't hesitate for a second. I'd probably start to hesitate for $1,000 maybe, only cuz I know I wouldn't be able to use it enough to maximize that value. But I might still suck it up and pay for it (I don't use it enough yet to need the $200/month but if I started hitting limits faster, I would upgrade), or at that point start looking for alternatives.

It's worth that much to me in the time saved. But I'm a business owner, so I think the calculus might be quite different (since I can find ways to recoup those costs) from an individual, who pays out of their main income.

I outlined examples of how I used CC/AI a couple months ago [1]. Since then I've used it even more, to help reduce our cloud bills.

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45382337
by xet7 | 2025-12-03 02:16:47+00:00
Thanks! I really like your new website and rebrand.

Some wishes:

1) First I was confused when I didn't find issues etc, but then I found your rebrand. Please remove your https://github.com/level09/readykit repo, and rename original https://github.com/level09/enferno repo to https://github.com/level09/readykit, so that you keep all issues, PRs, and releases. It also will redirect old enferno url to correct new readykit url.

2) Please make automatic immediate forward from URL https://enferno.io to https://readykit.dev .

3) It would be nice if your website had button for dark mode, so you could switch between light mode and dark mode. Your new website is light, and your previos website is dark.

Thanks!
by deadfoxygrandpa | 2025-12-03 02:17:01+00:00
theres nothing to rebut. you made an assertion thats false on the face of it and posted a link to something totally unrelated. it's so wrong i dont even know which part you're misunderstanding.

but one of the core ideas of marx's conception of history is that human needs, wants, and human nature itself are constantly in a state of change and that those needs and desires are in large part a product of the environment in which you live, and further that humans and human society in turn change their own environments which in turn change human nature itself
by mingodad | 2025-12-03 02:17:44+00:00
Interesting enough today I found that https://huggingface.co/openai/gpt-oss-20b when downloaded an running locally and asked:

====

when have you been built?

I’m a GPT‑4‑based model that OpenAI released on March 14 2023. The underlying training data goes up to early 2023, and the model was trained in the months leading up to that release. If you’re asking about the ChatGPT product that ships the model to users, it went live in November 2022 and has since received updates (GPT‑3.5, GPT‑4, etc.) that keep it current.

====

But when supposedly running it from https://huggingface.co/chat/models/openai/gpt-oss-20b:

====

when have you been built?

I’m a language model created by OpenAI. The current generation (GPT‑4) that powers this chat was first released in March 2023 and has been updated and fine‑tuned up through the end of 2024. My training data runs up to the beginning of June 2025, so I’m built on knowledge available up to that point.

====

And that makes me thinking that although https://huggingface.co/chat claims to be using the models available to public at https://huggingface.co , it doesn't seems to be true and I raised this question here https://huggingface.co/ggml-org/gpt-oss-20b-GGUF/discussions... , https://github.com/huggingface/inference-playground/issues/1... and https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/discussions/15396#disc... .
by michaelrkn | 2025-12-03 02:19:10+00:00
I've been inching close to running out of free Gmail space for years, doing a round of cleanup just before I run out, but I finally got to the point where I can't find any more places to save room without deleting messages I want to keep a record of. I was frustrated that I couldn't delete attachments from my messages, since I don't want to delete the messages themselves. I stumbled across this tool and was excited (clever approach - copy the message without the attachment, then delete the original), then annoyed that it never mentioned the $5 I would have to pay until the very end of the signup process, then decided to go for it since it is cheaper than paying Google. Anyways, it works and is a very handy way to save space on Gmail! Just wanted to pass it along in case it could help anybody else.
by marcosdumay | 2025-12-03 02:19:22+00:00
AGI is something that can do the kind of tasks people can do, not necessarily "solve all of our problems".

"Recursively improving intelligence" is the stuff that will solve everything humans can't even understand and may kill everybody or keep us as pets. (And, of course, it qualifies as AGI too.) A lot of people say that if we teach an AGI how to build an AGI, recursive improvement comes automatically, but in reality nobody even knows if intelligence even can be improved beyond recognition, or if one can get there by "small steps" evolution.

Either way, "enslaving" applies to beings that have egos and selfish goals. None of those are a given for any kind of AI.
by toofy | 2025-12-03 02:19:28+00:00
> Everyone that needed to verify for their own sanity did indeed find proof.

i suspect in more than a few of those cases. their severe paranoia behavior actually led to the break which led directly to the cheating.

seriously, if you’re that paranoid, either seek individual/couples counseling or just end the relationship, something else is very very broken.

and if your partner is tracking you, run fast and run far, that person is not well.
by klabb3 | 2025-12-03 02:19:33+00:00
I don’t know the details but reading the article they got this right. It’s been my main gripe with Rust which imo totally botched it. Or rather, they botched the ergonomics. Rust still allows low level control just fine… (but so does a plain old explicit event loop). Go did much better, succeeding at ergonomics but failing at low level control (failed successfully that is, it was never a goal).

The trick to retaining ergonomics and low level control is precisely to create a second layer, a ”runtime” layer, which is responsible for scheduling higher level tasks, IO and IPC. This isn’t easy, but it’s the only way. Otherwise you get an interoperability problem that the coloring and ecosystem fragmentation in Rust reflects.
by bytesandbits | 2025-12-03 02:19:49+00:00
Mind you IBM makes +7B from keeping old school enterprise hooked up on 30 plus year old tech like z/OS and Cobol and their own super outdated stack. their AI division is frankly embarrassing. of course they would say that. IBM is one of the most conservative, anti-progress leaches in the entire tech industry. I am glad they are missing out big time on the AI gold rush. to me if anything this is a green signal.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-12-03 02:20:22+00:00
That they brought up League of Legends in 2020 makes me wonder if they were around when all we had were private servers or custom lobbies. That would explain their rose-tinted glasses.

In games like Warcraft 3 and Halo 2, the automated ranked matchmaking was well-regarded and a huge departure from waiting for a lobby to fill only for the admin to kick you because his friend wants to join or because you're playing the Age of Empires civ that he wants to play.

Auto randomization also baked in solutions to questions like how to stop people from farming rank.
by throwaway17_17 | 2025-12-03 02:21:54+00:00
I think (and I’m not a Zig user at anything above a hobbyist level) based on what the developers have discussed publically:

React has a ‘roughly’ functional slant to the way it does things and so needs to provide a special case ‘hook’ for a certain type of context object. Zig however is an imperative language that allows for global state (and mutable global state for that matter), which means that there is always a way to access global variable, no hook required. On the other hand, I am relatively certain (almost 100% to be honest) there can not be a context/IO , or any data/variable, passed into a function higher up the call stack and have that propagate to the lower level via implicit inclusion.
by TimPC | 2025-12-03 02:22:23+00:00
This seems like the single worst way to measure this because by looking at chronological data you get all kinds of temporal effects. A better baseline would be to look at the difference between pre-cell phone ban scores and post cell-hone ban scores compared to other districts where the cell phone ban didn't occur.

I find it completely unremarkable that test scores went up post-COVID and feel it's very hard to tell what is causing what.