MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by p0w3n3d | 2025-12-19 21:33:36+00:00
You're right, C++ generic implementation is different than Java for example. That's why it was hard for me to nail the features the generic should have in general... C++ is more like duck typing with precompiled checking i.e. If you have no traits you still get integers summed for example because the generated code from the headers is compilable. On Java it's different: all the generics have types erased and there is typecasting later, unless they are inherited by other types
by wtallis | 2025-12-19 21:33:53+00:00
There are already DDR5 CUDIMMs at and above 8000 MT/s, and 9600 MT/s has been demonstrated but none are currently in stock. By the time AMD ships Zen 6 desktop processors, the market should be ready with memory modules that will mean even the highest core count Zen 6 parts will be at worst only slightly more bandwidth-starved than their predecessors. And the lower core count Zen 6 CPUs with a single CCD should be able to provide substantially more bandwidth than their predecessors. All without requiring DDR6 yet.
by lxpz | 2025-12-19 21:34:29+00:00
I had a very rapid look at these two papers, it looks like none of them allow the implementation of compare-and-swap, which is required for if-match / if-none-match support. They have a weaker definition of a "transaction". Which is to be expected as they only implement causal consistency at best and not consensus, whereas consensus is required for compare-and-swap.
by MPSimmons | 2025-12-19 21:34:30+00:00
Yeah, this is definitely an n-dimensional modeling space. Left/Right wing are only one axis, and as far as I can tell, not even the most definitive in terms of determining if I agree with someone's perspective. I think that would be the authoritarian / anti-authoritarian. Lots of left wing people are still authoritarians, but between those two, you can get a _decent_ feeling of where someone is with regard to the national politics.
by vicentereig | 2025-12-19 21:36:46+00:00
Both model prompts as functions. BAML is a DSL - write .baml files, generate code, get validated structured outputs.

DSPy is a programming paradigm. I like to look at it like the MVC for the Web. You define Signatures[0]: typed contracts governing the relationship between your models and your app. Signatures model prompts as functions too, without leaving Ruby. Then compose them into modules (Predict, ChainOfThought, ReAct, your own). The framework can automatically optimize prompts based on your metrics.

DSPy.rb brings the DSPy paradigm's tooling (optimizers, evaluation loops) to Ruby. Comes with OpenTelemetry OOTB. It also borrows BAML's schema format for 85% token savings vs JSON Schema in complex signatures. [1]

Everyone is talking about prompt, context, and harness engineering -and I agree they are good ways to frame how to build workflows and agents- this is just programming really.

[0] https://oss.vicente.services/dspy.rb/core-concepts/signature...

[1] https://oss.vicente.services/dspy.rb/articles/baml-schema-fo...
by infecto | 2025-12-19 21:36:52+00:00
Why do you think so? Cursor has raised what north of $3bn. That’s enough money to train or tune a model for coding. With their pricing changes I suspect they are trying to get at least to breakeven as quick as possible. They have massive incentives both on the quality of the model for tool chain use and from a cost perspective to try and run their own model generation.
by ACS_Solver | 2025-12-19 21:36:58+00:00
I have minimal experience with modern Web tech, though I used to run a couple websites in the old days.

My main job currently is in game dev, writing C#. Working for a small studio with flexible roles, I sometimes also take the opportunity to use other tech, like actual web stuff. A couple years ago I wrote a simple HTTP API for some internal needs and that was the first time I did modern web.

I've worked in the embedded space and adjacent. I've done automotive (Autosar), I've done some bare metal applications and I've maintained a custom Linux system for a series of embedded products. I've also worked on tooling (native desktop applications) related to some of these embedded uses.

For fun I still play with some embedded development, and would like to do another Android app. I built a couple simple ones years ago and generally Android development seems pretty pleasant to me, but I haven't done Android side projects in a long time because I can't really think of any apps I'd actually like to have.
by djeastm | 2025-12-19 21:38:02+00:00
I don't "vibe code", but I do two main things:

1) I throw it the simpler tasks that I know only involve a few files and there are similar examples it can work from (and I tend to provide the files I'm expecting will be changed as context). Like, "Ok, I just created a new feature, go ahead and setup all test files for me with all the standard boilerplate. Then I review, make adjustments myself (or re-roll if I forgot to specify something important), then commit and move forward.

2) I use the frontier thinking models for planning help. Like when I'm sketching out a feature and I think I know what will need to be changed, but giving, say, an Opus 4.5 agent a chance to take in the changes I want, perform searches, and then write up its own plan has been helpful in making sure I'm not missing things. Then I work from those tasks.

I agree that Copilot's Cloud agents aren't useful (they don't use smart models, presumably because it's $$$) and also I'm not a great multitasker so having background agents on worktrees would confuse the heck out of me.
by mannanj | 2025-12-19 21:38:19+00:00
Is a suitable solution to require visitors to fill out intent for why they came, and align that with your approved lists of supported intents, AND quiz them on some personal insider knowledge that only reasonable past visitors or new visitors who heard of you would have?

Like the credibility social proof of an introduction of a person into a social group. "Here's John, he likes Cats. I know him from School."

The filtering algorithm asks "Who who are you?" -> "What is your intent?" -> "How did you hear about me?" and stops visitors from proceeding until answered. The additional validation steps might kick away visitors but it also might protect you from spammers if you throw a minimally frictional challenge. Use cookies to not require this on every visit. Most LLMs would have the knowledge required to pass & for scrapers it's more costly to acquire this for a site than pay 128mb of ram to pass the Anubis approach.
by maniacwhat | 2025-12-19 21:38:19+00:00
I agree with that. But isn't the net money that goes from the VC to the fusion company included in the 3% that the article mentions which is adding value by servicing individuals and companies when they need money?

While the argument is that the other 97% of transactions in the finance world add no value. And that 97 >> 3.

That said I don't agree that they add "no value", market efficiency is provided which seems to be a valuable thing in some sense. But i find it quite interesting to think about, especially when you look at them in purely monetary terms as being zero sum.
by consumer451 | 2025-12-19 21:40:04+00:00
I know this is reductionist, and I believe that you are likely correct in your concerns, but this type of thing has been happening for thousands of years. Writing itself was controversial!

> They go on to discuss what is good or bad in writing. Socrates tells a brief legend, critically commenting on the gift of writing from the Egyptian god Theuth to King Thamus, who was to disperse Theuth's gifts to the people of Egypt. After Theuth remarks on his discovery of writing as a remedy for the memory, Thamus responds that its true effects are likely to be the opposite; it is a remedy for reminding, not remembering, he says, with the appearance but not the reality of wisdom. Future generations will hear much without being properly taught, and will appear wise but not be so, making them difficult to get along with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)
by nervousvarun | 2025-12-19 21:40:14+00:00
How could they possibly have solved it faster than this? There's no magic to this and it takes time like anything else. Yes there's digital footage but someone has to go through it. The murder in Massachusetts isn't immediately obviously related.

Of course the family wants it solved right away but there's a reality to this that seems to be overlooked here but is also not unique here. A lot of murders are never solved. Luck is a factor all the time.
by strongpigeon | 2025-12-19 21:40:52+00:00
Hey so I looked at your website and you say you're KidSafe COPPA certified, yet on their website it only mentions you as KidSafe listed? Any reason for the discrepancy?

https://www.kidsafeseal.com/certifiedproducts/stickerbox_dev...

Also, do you guys have CPSC CPC certificate? I couldn't find anything to that effect.
by Aurornis | 2025-12-19 21:41:06+00:00
> If these ai companies had 100x dev output,

I hate the unrealistic AI claims about 100X output as much as anyone, but to be fair Cursor hasn't been pushing these claims. It's mostly me-too players and LinkedIn superstars pushing the crazy claims because they know triggering people is an easy ticket to more engagement.

The claims I've seen out of the Cursor team have been more subtle and backed by actual research, like their analysis of PR count and acceptance rate: https://cursor.com/blog/productivity

So I don't think Cursor would have ever claimed they could duplicate a SaaS company like Graphite with their tools. I can think of a few other companies who would make that claim while their CEO was on their latest podcast tour, though.
by andsoitis | 2025-12-19 21:41:19+00:00
> Apple was famous for its anti-authoritarian "1984" ad

Perhaps, but Apple’s corporate culture is (and has always been?) pretty command-and-control.

> A few decades ago, tech, science and liberalism were bedfellows in the Bay Area.

Digital Technology is a powerful tool to create uniformity (scale), force authority (control, predictability, sentiment shaping). Of course it can be used to fight against these, but digital tech leans very much in the direction of centralization and control if you ask me.
by lmeyerov | 2025-12-19 21:41:22+00:00
Now that I can do a lot with 3-6 AI agents running usefully 2-5min at a time to crank through my plans, the IDE is mostly just taking valuable space

For backend/application code, I find it's instead about focusing on the planning experience, managing multiple agents, and reviewing generated artifacts+PRs. File browsers, source viewers, REPLs, etc don't matter here (verbose, too zoomed-in, not reflecting agent activity, etc), or at best, I'll look at occasionally while the agents do their thing.
by tstrimple | 2025-12-19 21:42:33+00:00
So instead of "Come pitch us your varied and unique ideas and convince us how our investment will 1000x the returns" it's more like "we need this capability in this industry. Here is a pool of money for you to start figuring it out. We'll focus on the more successful companies over time until they can stand on their own and compete internationally."

I can't imagine why China is so dominant in so many areas when they explicitly plan and invest in capabilities they want to have instead of just relying on the market to "naturally" provide these capabilities or constantly relying on the same handful of inept and corrupt companies to deliver on national needs.
by kodablah | 2025-12-19 21:42:50+00:00
> The thing is, if you want people to understand durability but you also hide it from them, it will actually be much more complicated to understand and work with a framework.

> The real golden ticket I think is to make readable intuitive abstractions around durability, not hide it behind normal-looking code.

It's a tradeoff. People tend to want to use languages they are familiar with, even at the cost of being constrained within them. A naive DSL would not be expressive enough for the turing completeness one needs, so effectively you'd need a new language/runtime. It's far easier to constrain an existing language than write a new one of course.

Some languages/runtimes are easier to apply durable/deterministic constraints too (e.g. WASM which is deterministic by design and JS which has a tiny stdlib that just needs a few things like time and rand replaced), but they still don't take the ideal step you mention - put the durable primitives and their benefits/constraints in front of the dev clearly.
by Someone | 2025-12-19 21:42:59+00:00
Reading https://github.com/niklas-heer/speed-comparison/blob/master/..., I think the only overflow checks could be in

for i in 2...rounds+2

and I would hope/expect the compiler to be smart enough to know that it only has to check “rounds+2” once there. Swift isn’t exactly new anymore, and it’s supported by a large company.

What do I overlook?
by numlocked | 2025-12-19 21:43:01+00:00
(I work at OpenRouter) If you send a PDF to our API we will:

1. Use native PDF parsing if the model supports it

2. Use this Mistral OCR model (we updated to this version yesterday)

3. UNLESS you override the "engine" param to use an alternate. We support a JS-based (non-LLM) parser as well [0]

So yes, in practice a lot of OCR jobs go to Mistral, but not all of them.

Would love to hear requests for other parsers if folks have them!

[0] https://openrouter.ai/docs/guides/overview/multimodal/pdfs#p...
by stack_framer | 2025-12-19 21:43:43+00:00
I have worked exclusively on web apps for my entire career (~17 years), but something is pulling me toward C development. I have no idea how to really get started though. I'm doing a little hobby project, but I'm not sure where to channel my study/effort to become good enough for a career change. I picked up the second edition of The C Programming Language by Kernighan/Ritchie, but I assume it's outdated by now. Any advice?
by vasco | 2025-12-19 21:44:37+00:00
Gave it a birth registry from a Portuguese locality from 1755 which my dad and I often decipher to figure out geneology and it did a terrible job.

Regular Gemini Thinking can actually get 70-80% of the documents correct except lots of mistakes on given names. Chatgpt maybe understands like 50-60%.

This Mistral model butchered the whole text, literally not a word was usable. To the point I think I'm doing something wrong.

The test document: https://files.fm/u/3hduyg65a5
by eli | 2025-12-19 21:45:25+00:00
"We examine whether firms have an informational advantage in selecting arbitrators in consumer arbitration [...] We first document that some arbitrators are systematically industry friendly while others are consumer friendly. Firms appear to utilize this information in the arbitrator selection process. Despite a randomly generated list of potential arbitrators, industry-friendly arbitrators are forty percent more likely to be selected than their consumer friendly counterparts. Better informed firms and consumers choose more favorable arbitrators. [...] Competition between arbitrators exacerbates the informational advantage of firms in equilibrium resulting in all arbitrators slanting towards being industry friendly. Evidence suggests that limiting the respondent’s and claimant’s inputs over the arbitrator selection process could significantly improve outcomes for consumers."

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers...
by verelo | 2025-12-19 21:46:08+00:00
This is fascinating. I really appreciate the length reply.

How do you handle versioning/updates when datasets change? Do the MCPs break or do you have some abstraction layer?

What's your hit rate on researchers actually converting LLM explorations into permanent artifacts vs just using it as a one-off?

Makes sense for research workflows. Do you think this pattern (LLM exploration > traditional tools) generalizes outside domains with high uncertainty? Or is it specifically valuable where 'deciding what to do' is the hard part?

Someone else mentioned using Chrome dev tools + Cursor, I'm going to try that one out as a way to convince myself here. I want to make this work but I just feel like I'm missing something. The problem is clearly me, so I guess i need to put in some time here.
by Pannoniae | 2025-12-19 21:46:08+00:00
Compilers massively outperform humans if the human has to write the entire program in assembly. Even if a human could write a sizable program in assembly, it would be subpar compared to what a compiler would write. This is true.

However, that doesn't mean that looking at the generated asm / even writing some is useless! Just because you can't globally outperform the compiler, doesn't mean you can't do it locally! If you know where the bottleneck is, and make those few functions great, that's a force multiplier for you and your program.
by eddybenchek | 2025-12-19 21:47:03+00:00
Thanks for pointing that out! I realize I may have framed it as a list, but CopilotHub is actually an interactive search engine.

You can: - Search prompts in real-time (try "React" or "testing") - Filter by category with live results - Browse dynamically - Submit prompts (optional)

No signup needed to try the search and filtering. It's a working web app, not reading material. I'll reframe the post to emphasize the interactive features.
by bobnarizes | 2025-12-19 21:47:31+00:00
Not Apple Foundation Models — unfortunately they’re not capable enough (yet) for understanding content and matching it to folders.

I’m using SBERT-style embedding models for the semantic matching, which works very well in practice.

For non-text content, the app also analyzes images (OCR + object recognition) using Apple’s Vision framework. That part is surprisingly powerful, especially on Apple Silicon.

> I need to do something for images that are already classified/tagged via FastVLM

What’s the concrete use case you’re targeting with this?
by tjr | 2025-12-19 21:48:07+00:00
It's probably not unrealistic that a programmer who learns Vim well could be, say, 2x more productive in Vim than in, say, Nano.

Yet programmers who have used Nano were not (at least not significantly) scoffed at or ridiculed. It was their choice of tool, and they were getting work done.

It seems unclear how much more productive AI coding tools can make a programmer; some people claim 10x, some claim it actually makes you slower. But let us suppose it is on average the same 2x productivity increase as Vim.

Why then was using Vim not heralded from every rooftop the same as using AI?
by Haeuserschlucht | 2025-12-19 21:48:30+00:00
Your question about testability is justified. However, the considerations are not an empirical hypothesis in the scientific sense, but rather a philosophical argument. He is not claiming that the simulation hypothesis can be experimentally confirmed or refuted. His point is rather that even if one accepts the simulation hypothesis — even recursively — it does not result in a privileged beginning, a final observer, or ontological salvation. Change, emergence, and decay persist at every level. The question is therefore less whether we live in a simulation than what this assumption actually explains or changes.
Show HN: I Built an Image Captioning Tool Using Llama.cpp
by paradox460 | 2025-12-19 21:49:12+00:00
Frustrated with the apparent lack of tools for tagging and describing images locally, I built a quick and dirty little tool. You start it up, start up llama-server, and point it at a directory of photos. It scans through them, captioning them one at a time, and provides the captions and tags in an editable interface for you. When you're happy with them, you can save them, which writes them to the exif metadata of the image, and moves onto the next one
by skipants | 2025-12-19 21:49:15+00:00
I often employ this pattern in Ruby using `.tap` or a `begin` block.

It barely adds any functionality but it's useful for readability because of the same reasons in the OP.

It helps because I've been bitten by code that did this:

setup_a = some_stuff setup_b = some_more_stuff i_think_this_is_setup = even_more_stuff the_thing = run_setup(setup_a, setup_b, i_think_this_is_setup)

That's all fine until later on, probably in some obscure loop, `i_think_this_is_setup` is used without you noticing.

Instead doing something like this tells the reader that it will be used again:

i_think_this_is_setup = even_more_stuff the_thing = begin setup_a = some_stuff setup_b = some_more_stuff run_setup(setup_a, setup_b, i_think_this_is_setup) end

I now don't mentally have to keep track of what `setup_a` or `setup_b` are anymore and, since the writer made a conscious effort not to put it in the block, you will take an extra look for it in the outer scope.
by femto | 2025-12-19 21:49:21+00:00
Electrical engineering and science qualifications. Work on signal processing (FPGA/DSP/CPU), Radio hardware and firmware for WiFi/LMR/LTE. IC design. Radar systems. Counter-drone systems.

The work can be interesting, but intense when in the thick of building a system. There is less competition for jobs compared to pure web/programming, but also less jobs in total. The option is always there to take a web/programming gig if the specialised work is hard to get. Potentially pay is lower than some of the big US web companies, but that's probably as much from me not chasing dollars to the exclusion of all else. Some people/companies don't see this work as deserving of the same/better compensation as web/programming, as it is not as easy to understand and they won't pay for what they don't understand. Find the right employer/client and it can be lucrative.
by gus_massa | 2025-12-19 21:49:38+00:00
It would be nice to have a different color for languages that give the exact IEEE 754 result. Other languages can be using some kind of fast math. Sorted by accuracy:

# Language Accuracy 14 Swift (SIMD) 8.69 9 Fortran 90 9.44 2 C# (SIMD) 9.49 . [All the others] 9.50
by srcreigh | 2025-12-19 21:49:44+00:00
Did you try WITHOUT ROWID? Your sqlite implementation[1] uses a BLOB primary key. In SQLite, this means each operation requires 2 b-tree traversals: The BLOB->rowid tree and the rowid->data tree.

If you use WITHOUT ROWID, you traverse only the BLOB->data tree.

Looking up lexicographically similar keys gets a huge performance boost since sqlite can scan a B-Tree node and the data is contiguous. Your current implementation is chasing pointers to random locations in a different b-tree.

I'm not sure exactly whether on disk size would get smaller or larger. It probably depends on the key size and value size compared to the 64 bit rowids. This is probably a well studied question you could find the answer to.

[1]: https://git.deuxfleurs.fr/Deuxfleurs/garage/src/commit/4efc8...
by Haeuserschlucht | 2025-12-19 21:50:17+00:00
I understand why you consider his question relevant. At the same time, it is worth making a clear distinction: OP does not formulate an alternative empirical explanation of physical reality, but rather a philosophical reflection on the consequences of the simulation assumption itself. In this context, the question of experimental testability is generally meaningful, but it misses the point here because it presupposes a scientific hypothesis that OP does not even propose. His objection would be justified if OP were to claim truth in the scientific sense — but he does not.
by topspin | 2025-12-19 21:50:19+00:00
Great, and thank you.

I really, really appreciate that Garage accommodates running as a single node without work-arounds and special configuration to yield some kind of degraded state. Despite the single minded focus on distributed operation you no doubt hear endlessly (as seen among some comments here,) there are, in fact, traditional use cases where someone will be attracted to Garage only for the API compatibility, and where they will achieve availability in production sufficient to their needs by means other than clustering.