MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by xyzzy123 | 2025-12-04 06:28:42+00:00
Totally fair. There are some situations where you can "undercut" cloud native object storage on a per TB basis (e.g. you have a big dedi at Hetzner with 50TB or 100TB of mirrored disk) but you pay a cost in operational overhead and durability vs managed object store. It's really hard to make the economics work at $20 price point, if you get up to a few $100 or more then there are some situations where it can make sense.

For backup to a dedi you don't really need to bother running the object store though.
by briantakita | 2025-12-04 06:28:56+00:00
I think you will mostly get "the west is the best" over here. And "look at those evil authoritarians over there"....Enjoy your "freedom" to participate in the culture wars digital serf...while the standard of living, personal autonomy, wealth, & health may be on the decline...of yours & your loved ones. At least we have many of each other to blame...while a few profit.

Well, the last couple sentences is me paraphrasing. But one thing that many in the West boast about is the ability to criticize the systems to improve said systems. Let's see if actions match the rhetoric.
[Free Lifetime] [Connect with Travelers in Every City]
by aacishh | 2025-12-04 06:28:58+00:00
Hey everyone,

I am the founder of Trespot, a social travel app that helps you:

Join city based group chats with verified travelers Share tips, ask questions, and discover local spots in real time See who is traveling on similar routes and find a travel partner

For the next 48 hours, anyone who signs up will get lifetime access for free. After that, Trespot will be $99.99 per year, but all early users keep lifetime access at no cost.

How it works:

Download the app Sign up and create your profile Add a trip to unlock a city chat

Platform: Android & iOS Website: https://www.trespot.com

Would love feedback, bug reports, and honest thoughts from this community.
by frktcpumu | 2025-12-04 06:29:46+00:00
As the modern AI race heats up and teams want to build agentic applications at break neck speed, one critical axis gets forgotten - Cloud Infrastructure .

Cloud Infra for all its magic, is neither free nor infinite and often requires massive budgets - which get undercut by wasteful usage.

We at Outerbounds open sourced a six step methodology that can be used to optimize your AI/ML workloads . If you are in the same boat as many platform/ML engineers who have little insight into how to optimize workloads - give it a read ..

You might end up building more while spending less...
by colesantiago | 2025-12-04 06:29:57+00:00
Yes. It is still a scam.

Just because Wall Street and Silicon Valley are still embracing blockchains, 'stablecoins' and other scammy crypto products, doesn't mean it has any legitimate usecase today or in the future.

Crypto, blockchains, stablecoins and the rest of them still cannot do better that what current system already does and is used primarily for speculative and criminal purposes.

Nothing has changed.
by 14 | 2025-12-04 06:30:45+00:00
This is an interesting question I wish I knew. Because I play war thunder and it is free to play but once a year I pay about $50 for the annual premium membership because I enjoy the game and worth it to me. But ultimately it is supposedly a Russian game. I know they have offices in other parts of the world but I have really wondered if the money is going back to Russia or if all the developed have just left and get it elsewhere in a different county.
by deaux | 2025-12-04 06:31:19+00:00
Looks less "intelligent" to me, just a lot more trained on agentic (multi-turn tool) use so it greatly outperforms the others on the benches where that helps while lagging elsewhere. They also released bigger models, where "Pro" is supposedly competitive with 4.5 Sonnet. Lite is priced the same as 2.5 Flash, Pro as GPT 5.1. We'll definitely do some comparative testing on Nova 2 Lite vs 2.5 Flash, but not expecting much.
by krackers | 2025-12-04 06:33:24+00:00
You can analyze this in various ways. At the "next token predictor" level of abstraction, LLMs learn to predict structure ("hallucinations" are just mimicking the style/structure but not the content), so at the structural level a conversation with mistake/correction/mistake/correction is likely to be followed with another mistake.

At the "personality space" level of abstraction, via RLHF the LLM learns to play the role of an assistant. However as seen by things such as "jailbreaks", the character the LLM plays adapts to the context, and in a long enough conversation the last several turns dominate the character (this is seen in "crescendo" style jailbreaks, and also partly explains LLM sycophancy as the LLM is stuck in a feedback loop with the user). From this perspective, a conversation with mistake/correction/mistake/correction is a signal that the assistant is pretty "dumb", and it will dutifully fulfill that expectation. In a way it's the opposite of the "you are a world-class expert in coding" prompt hacks.

Yet another way to think about it is at the lowest attention-score level, all the extra junk in the context is stuff that needs to be attended to, and when most of that stuff is incorrect stuff it's likely to "poison" the context and skew the logits in a bad direction.
by monch1962 | 2025-12-04 06:33:59+00:00
Spot on in my experience.

I work in a space where I get to build and optimise AI tools for my own and my team's use pretty much daily. As such I focus mainly on AI'ing the crap out of boring & time-consuming stuff that doesn't interest any of us any more, and luckily enough there's a whole lot of low hanging fruit in that space where AI is a genuine time, cost and sanity saver.

However any activity that requires directed conscious thought and decision making where the end state isn't clearly definable up front tends to be really difficult for AI. So much of that work relies on a level of intuition and knowledge that is very hard to explain to a layman - let alone eidetic idiots like most AIs.

One example is trying to get AI to identify security IT incidents in real time and take proactive action. Skilled practitioners can fairly easily use AI to detect anomalous events in near real time, but getting AI to take the next step to work out which combinations of "anomalous" activities equate to "likely security incident" is much harder. A reasonably competent human can usually do that relatively quickly, but often can't explain how they do it.

Working out what action is appropriate once the "likely security incident" has been identified is another task that a reasonably competent human can do, but where AIs are hopeless. In most cases, a competent human is WAAAY better at identifying a reasonable way forward based on insufficient knowledge. In those cases, a good decision made quickly is preferable to a perfect decision made slowly, and humans understand this fairly intuitively.
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-12-04 06:34:15+00:00
> Why did European prices have the same increase then?

Where do Europeans get their DRAM from?

If it is the same handful of companies the US gets their DRAM from, then why would Europeans pay any less? Because the EU is not engaging in the same asinine trade war?

Sounds good in theory, but in practice those same few companies can set prices for markets outside the US to be at/near US prices. It doesn't take much effort for manufacturers to set their prices at or near those of their competitors and rely on an implicit mutually assured destruction[0] understanding.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
by __patchbit__ | 2025-12-04 06:35:19+00:00
The 2 January 2024 Japan Airlines Flight 516 Airbus A350-900 and Dash 8 turboprop runway collision would have been avoided had `AI Cybertruck' airport ground control towing services operated virtual queue to final physical queue scheduling and action. In addition to added safety margin, that AI solution reduces wasteful waiting in line fuel burn as aircraft drive themselves to the beginning of runway.
by finaard | 2025-12-04 06:35:36+00:00
> and met a complete wall trying to explain why LLMs aren't useful for programming - at least not yet. I argue the code is often of low quality, very unmaintainable, and usually not useful outside quick experimentation.

There are quite a few things they can do reasonably well - but they mostly are useful for experienced programmers/architecs as a time safer. Working with a LLM for that often reminds me of when I had many young, inexperienced Indians to work with - the LLM comes up with the same nonsense, lies and excuses, but unlike the inexperienced humans I can insult it guilt free, which also sometimes gets it back on track.

> They refuse to believe it, even though they do hit a wall with their vibe-coded project after a few months when claude stops generating miracles any more - they lack the experience with code to understand they are hitting maintainability issues.

For having a LLM operate on a complete code base there currently seems to be a hard limit of something like 10k-15k LOC, even with the models with the largest context windows - after that, if you want to continue using a LLM, you'll have to make it work only on a specific subsection of the project, and manually provide the required context.

Now the "getting to 10k LOC" _can_ be sped up significantly by using a LLM. Ideally refactor stupid along the way already - which can be made a bit easier by building in sensible steps (which again requires experience). From my experiments once you've finished that initial step you'll then spend roughly 4-5 times the amount of time you just spent with the LLM to make the code base actually maintainable. For my test projects, I roughly spent one day building it up, rest of the week getting it maintainable. Fully manual would've taken me 2-3 weeks, so it saved time - but only because I do have experience with what I'm doing.
by maxbond | 2025-12-04 06:36:03+00:00
I'm not sure which technique they use but this person makes jewelry from snowflakes. They have videos showing their process, where they catch them on a tray and transfer them using a paintbrush to slide covers that are holding some chemical which capture their shape. Eyeballing it I think they're using the Formvar method.

https://www.preservedsnowflake.com/

https://youtube.com/@preservedsnowflakeco
by throwaway290 | 2025-12-04 06:37:31+00:00
you are offtopic, but I will entertain your comment because I'm so confused/amused by what you say and what means "idiot" in your world.

- are you saying people forced to sign up for the war by force or rapists who do it to get out of jail in Russia are idiots?

- are you saying being pro putin/pro war is like being an idiot in Russia?

- are you saying russians in tech are saints and all like one are "not idiots" against the war? maybe you need a reminder about unit 26165 and APT28

- are you saying "everyone in russia/china/israel/iran/north korea/republican party is an idiot"? then allow me to congratulate you on such nuanced understanding of the world, enough said!
by ipnon | 2025-12-04 06:37:47+00:00
And it's had scapegoats for just as long! Everything is going according to plan really. It's not the tax scheme, or the zoning, or the construction costs, or the concentration of labor opportunities in London. Don't be daft!

Britain seems interested in actively undoing technological progress for some reason. A deindustrial revolution you might call it!
by bayindirh | 2025-12-04 06:39:14+00:00
I believe it's more nuanced than that.

The immoral thing about gen-AI is how it's trained. Regardless of source code, images or audio; the disregard of licenses and considering everything fair-use and ingesting them is the most immoral part.

Then there comes the environmental cost, and how it's downplayed to be able to pump the hype.

I'm not worried about the change AI will bring, but the process of going there is highly immoral, esp. when things are licensed to prohibit that kind of use.

When AI industry says "we'll be dead if we obey the copyright and licenses", you know something is wrong. Maybe the whole industry shouldn't build a business model of grabbing whatever they can and running with it.

Because of these zealots, I'm not sharing my photos anymore and considering not sharing the code I write either. Because I share these for the users, with appropriate licenses. Not for other developers or AI companies to fork, close and do whatever do like with them.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-12-04 06:39:54+00:00
> theres plenty of essentially free park and ride stations.

Which is a huge pain, because now you need to have a car, and already be in it to drive to the park and ride. A drive on which there could be traffic. Which means you could miss your train unless you leave early, but then you're standing around the train station doing nothing (and not getting paid) even when there isn't traffic, instead of spending that time either at home or at work. Whereas if you lived near the train stop you wouldn't have to leave early to not miss your train.

Meanwhile if you already need to have a car, and you're already in it and driving it, most people aren't going to drive northeast to the park and ride and then take a train southeast to their destination instead of saving time by just driving directly east all the way to the destination. So the thing that gets them on the train is not having to drive to get to it.

> theres commuter rail access in basically a 1 hour drive radius of the city.

There's commuter rail lines that go an hour from the center of the city. That's not at all the same thing as there being a stop within walking distance of every suburban home.

> they think they are going to get stabbed on the subway.

The people who think they're going to get stabbed on the subway are not going to use the subway. We're talking about the people who might actually use it.

> if the subway was faster, safer, cleaner, but more expensive, more people would use it.

The way you make it faster is to get more people to use it so you can justify more frequent service, which eliminating fares facilitates. The way to make it safer and cleaner is to get more people to use it, so there are more people who care if it's safer and cleaner because they're using it. Which is again facilitated by eliminating fares.

The only thing fares get you is an amount of money that represents less than 1% of the state budget, and then you lose a significant proportion of that to the cost of collecting the fares. It's taking a privacy-invasive deadweight loss to create a deterrent to something you're trying to encourage people to do.
by torginus | 2025-12-04 06:40:14+00:00
Which I think points out the biggest issue with current AI - knowledge workers in any profession at any skill level tend to get the impression that AI is very impressive, but is prone to fail at real world tasks unpredictably, thus the mental model of 'junior engineer' or any human that does its simple tasks by itself reliably, is wrong.

AI operating at all levels needs to be constantly supervised.

Which would still make AI a worthwhile technology, as a tool, as many have remarked before me.

The problem is, companies are pushing for agentic AI instead of one that can do repetitve, short horizon tasks in a fast and reliable manner.
by pixelfarmer | 2025-12-04 06:40:32+00:00
> Even Samsung is running into this issue now [...]

These large corpos are so greedy to the point they harm themselves. I remember something similar with Amazon, where the Amazon shop had to redo the whole architecture from some microservice setup back to a monolithic approach because they used AWS and paid these weirdly structured prices like everyone else. Which made running a monolithic architecture under such constraints inherently cheaper. Not sure what the resulting compounded business cost for this "endeavor" was, but more often that not such things are never accounted for, so they don't show up as an issue.
by fcatalan | 2025-12-04 06:41:29+00:00
I think the cars reflect pretty well the intended ethos and "vibes" of both competitions. Indycar still feels a bit like "dudes racing cars" while F1 has become a corporate hi-tech extravaganza.

Both have their appeal, but I feel Indy produces better actual racing for the spectator despite being slower and less refined technically. I do watch both.
by pabs3 | 2025-12-04 06:42:27+00:00
You would be incorrect, LWN tracks statistics about contributor employers for every Linux kernel release and their latest post about that says that "(None)" (ie unpaid contributions) beat a number of large companies, including RedHat by the lines changed metric, or SUSE by the changesets metric.

https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1046966/f957408bbdd4d388/
by petterroea | 2025-12-04 06:42:58+00:00
I think there's a lot of reason to what you are saying. The 4-5 amount of time to make the codebase readable resonates.

If i really wanted to go 100% LLM as a challenge I think I'd compartmentalize a lot and maybe rely on OpenAPI and other API description languages to reduce the complexity of what the LLM has to deal with when working on its current "compartment" (i.e the frontend or backend). Claude.md also helps a lot.

I do believe in some time saving, but at the same time, almost every line of code I write usually requires some deliberate thought, and if the LLM makes that thought, I often have to correct it. If i use English to explain exactly what I want it is some times ok, but then that is basically the same effort. At least that's my empirical experience.
by jmfldn | 2025-12-04 06:43:27+00:00
If it moves and connects with you then it's real music.

It's fine to have a preference for live musicianship, but the 'real music' argument has been leveled against every new musical technology (remember the furore around Dylan going electric?). It dismisses contemporary creativity based on a traditionalist bias that elevates one form of execution above all others. There's also a huge amount of skill in producing good electronic music. It's always hard to make good music no matter the means.
by satvikpendem | 2025-12-04 06:44:32+00:00
I find copyright itself immoral. Intellectual "property" is a made up fiction that shouldn't exist and only entrenches existing players, see Disney lobbying continuously to get higher and higher copyright durations all to keep Mickey under their control, until very recently; patents too are not filed by individual inventors anymore, it's massive corporations and patent trolls that serve no useful purpose. There is a reason many programmers like open source and especially copyleft, the latter of which is an explicit battling of the copyright system through its own means. Information should be free to be used, it should not be hoarded by so-called copyright holders.
by koakuma-chan | 2025-12-04 06:45:32+00:00
That's great. The point is that you shouldn't disregard the probability of someone seeming "nice" while having issues in private. I don't think that is uncommon.

Also, I don't like how everybody assumes that being "nice" is a good thing. I prefer reasonable and logical people, because when talking to them, I can see that they understand what I am saying, whereas when talking to "nice" people, they have that dreamy aura about them, all nods and smiles, but no signs of comprehension. Like ChatGPT.
by kragen | 2025-12-04 06:46:09+00:00
No, you can predeclare the size; this compiles with no warnings:

#include <string.h> #include <unistd.h> void foo(size_t n; const char s[static n], size_t n) { write(1, s, n); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { foo("hello, ", 7); if (argc > 1) foo(argv[1], strlen(argv[1])); foo("\n", 1); return 0; }

However, it still compiles with no warnings if you change 7 to 10!

Clang does not support this syntax.
by finaard | 2025-12-04 06:46:11+00:00
I started getting cassette players working again when I had kids - I had lots of old cassettes with stories still, and after looking into a lot of stuff determined that it is one of the best physical storage formats for that kind of content for kids we currently have. Its major advantage is that it automatically saves state, and the state saving is player-independent. Add to that that players typically have large clunky buttons ideal for kids hands, and you have something even all the dedicated digital kids media players can't compete with.
by defrost | 2025-12-04 06:47:29+00:00
An example, not current, is that the US Government censored all access to wikileaks in 2010 - enforced for all Federal workers, military personal, etc.

You can certainly argue that this was ineffective censorship that could be evaded, but it was, in fact, censorship by the US Government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_State...

It's the same across the world, countries that routinely censor material still have their citizens evading censorship.

Also:

Analysts from Reporters Without Borders ranked the United States 57th in the world out of 180 countries in their 2025 Press Freedom Index and they gave the country a "problematic" designation. Certain forms of speech, such as obscenity and defamation, are restricted in communications media by the government or by the industry on its own.

~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_State...

~ https://rsf.org/en/index?year=2024
by nikkwong | 2025-12-04 06:48:37+00:00
I mean, some are good at adaptability, while others get completely left in the dust. Look at the rust belt: jobs have left, and everyone there is desperate for a handout. Trump is busy trying to engineer a recession in the US—when recessions happen, companies at the margin go belly-up and the fat is trimmed from the workforce. With the inroads that AI is making into the workforce, it could be the first restructuring where we see massive losses in jobs.
by culebron21 | 2025-12-04 06:50:03+00:00
Law enforcement in Russia works differently than in the US, especially in politically charged fields. An exapmel: in the US, one man was charged of breaking construction codes because he was doing chemical experiments in the basement of his single-family house, in a block zoned accordingly.

I understand this is extreme, but a good illustration. He was doing something on his own, and was charged. Such enforcement is extremely unlikely in Russia even in todays situation. For instance, a recent law explicitly banned _searching_ for extremists materials, e.g. Navalny's party website (they're labelled as extremists ex-court by the Interior or the Justice ministry, I don't remember). But there's been just 1 court case since then. You can search whatever you want as long as you're not public about it. As soon as you get enough publicity, you do get on the radar.

Same kinds of examples: in the 1950's USSR some musicians were shadow-banned (there was no legal ban on them), and not published. A man made a lathe and carved disks with their music on used x-ray films. He was arrested when he got enough publicity and sold good deal of copies. He was charged not for copying them -- there was no ban on this -- but for illicit enterpreneurship, or speculation as it was called back then. Had he been doing this alone, he'd probably have not got under arrest.

I actually, think it's roughly the same as dealing with Torrent and trackers in the Western world nowadays.
by franga2000 | 2025-12-04 06:50:38+00:00
I get the first point, but having shareholders doesn't solve that in any way. Shareholders would just give themselves payouts instead of letting the execs take everything as bonuses. And unlike the execs, whose bonuses could be limited by charter and who could be chosen on the basis of trust, shareholders are "whoever has the most money to throw around", so there's no mechanism to align them with company values.

So it's not perfect, but it sure as hell beats having shareholders.