MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MrCoffee7 | 2025-12-14 16:37:12+00:00
It looks like metot.org uses a vote counting type approach to evaluate how many PRO and CON arguments were made and then uses the vote count to evaluate the strength of the argument. There are a lot of problems with this approach. Vote counting fails because: Epistemic naivety: Ignores evidence quality ; Structural blindness: Misses dialectical interactions; Semantic impoverishment: No context, no warrants, no hedging; Temporal insensitivity: Static snapshots of dynamic discourse; Fallacy tolerance: No rhetorical/logical error detection

Proper system requires: Deep NLP: Discourse parsing, semantic role labeling, entailment; Structured reasoning: AAF, probabilistic argumentation, Bayesian aggregation; Domain knowledge: Evidence hierarchies, causal inference, statistical meta-analysis; Explainability: Attention visualization, counterfactual reasoning, gradient-based saliency
by trashface | 2025-12-14 16:38:05+00:00
The machines can be buggy. The one I use (Giant supermarkets) often doesn't ask for a quantity on navel oranges. It just rings up the the price for one and says put them in the bag. I don't want to bother the attendant, who's often busy debugging some problem another person is having, so I just put them in the bag. I've probably not paid for a few 10s of bucks on navel oranges this way over the past few years.

The anti-theft system is pretty paranoid though. I've tripped up its video alarm a few times just with my normal awkward motions - waffling about which item I want to scan next, while holding it, seems to mess it up. The attendant comes over and we both watch the review video from the camera above featuring a few seconds of my receding hairline, he clears it and I keep going.

But I still prefer self-checkout greatly over weird/awkward human interactions, and I can bag at my own pace too and i'm not holding up the line.
by bgwalter | 2025-12-14 16:38:23+00:00
Because you have Cloudflare (MITM 1), Openrouter (MITM 2) and finally the "AI" provider who can all read, store, analyze and resell your queries.

EDIT: Thanks for downvoting what is literally one of the most important reasons for people to use local models. Denying and censoring reality does not prevent the bubble from bursting.
by pxc | 2025-12-14 16:38:51+00:00
> If you’ve been active in the Dagger community, this news will come as no surprise. Since we released multi-language support, we have seen a steep decline in usage of our original CUE configuration syntax, and have made it clear that feature parity with newer SDKs would not be a priority.

That is, of course, a self-fulfilling prophecy (or, perhaps, a self-inflicted wound). As soon as Dagger's "multi-language support" came out (actually a bit before), the CUE SDK was rendered abandonware. Development only happened on the new backend, and CUE support was never ported over to the new one.
by realitydrift | 2025-12-14 16:38:55+00:00
This framing clicks for me, especially the idea that we crossed a threshold by building conditions rather than intentions. One way to see what emerged is not as intelligence per se, but as a new channel for compressing human meaning.

At scale, any compression system faces a tradeoff between entropy and fidelity. As these models absorb more language and feedback, meaning doesn’t just get reproduced, it slowly drifts. Concepts remain locally coherent while losing alignment with their original reference points. That’s why hallucination feels like the wrong diagnosis. The deeper issue is long run semantic stability, not one off mistakes.

The arrival moment wasn’t when the system got smarter, but when it became a dominant mediator of meaning and entropy started accumulating faster than humans could notice.
by yieldcrv | 2025-12-14 16:38:56+00:00
right guys, it’s only like 80% of that population that has the ideology we don’t like

and in the other 20%, many of them don’t get conscripted due to a religious exemption that includes being in a totally different ideology that has always disagreed with the other

odds not looking good, speaking as a betting man, not one with any actual opinion just need my prediction market bet to hit
by dap | 2025-12-14 16:39:01+00:00
> The exclusive lock is only needed during the final swap phase, and its duration can be configured.

FYI: even a very short operation that requires an exclusive lock can induce significant downtime if there’s anything else that holds a shared lock for extended periods. In [1], there was:

- a wraparound autovacuum (which holds a shared lock for potentially a long time — like hours)

- lots of data path operations wanting a shared lock

- one operation that should have been very brief that merely tried to take an exclusive lock

The result is that the presence of an operation wanting an exclusive lock blocked the data path for the duration of the autovacuum. Major outage.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20190320162510/https://www.joyen...

Edit: this was a while ago with v9.2, but I don’t know if any of this behavior has changed.
by vanviegen | 2025-12-14 16:39:05+00:00
> cost a bit more

It's not (only) a matter of cost, but availability. People need fuel to heat their houses. In order to fully replace Russian gas, other facilities (like LNG container terminals) need to be built. That has been done and is being done, but is complex and not instant.

Should it have been done before February 2022? Yeah, probably.
by danaris | 2025-12-14 16:39:06+00:00
God, yes.

I see so many people quote that damnable Heinlein quote about specialization being for insects as if it's some deep insight worth making the cornerstone of your philosophy, when in fact a) it's the opinion of a character in the book, and b) it is hopelessly wrong about how human beings actually became as advanced as we are.

We're much better off taking the Unix philosophy (many small groups of people each getting really really good at doing very niche things, all working together) to build a society. It's probably still flawed, but at least it's aimed in the right direction.
by brazukadev | 2025-12-14 16:39:28+00:00
> I think you can vibe code the basis of something really quickly, but the AI starts to get confused and trip over it's own shitty code

Or you can get back to vibecoding after fixing things and establishing a good base. then it helps you go faster until you feel like understanding and refactoring things because it got some things wrong. It is a continuous process.
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-12-14 16:39:37+00:00
The only thing that seems hopeful is that people are finally talking about it at mass scale.

I promise you as an anarchist agitator that is unbelievably new just even in the last couple years and precisely what usually happens prior to actual direct action.

My fellow anarchists hate the fact that Donald Trump did more for anarchist-socialist praxis than every other socialist writer in history.
by senordevnyc | 2025-12-14 16:40:26+00:00
AI makes starting easier but finishing harder. You get to 80% fast, then spend longer on the last 20% than you would have building from scratch - because now you're debugging code you don't fully understand.

I run a SaaS solo, and that hasn't really been my experience, but I'm not vibe coding. I fully understand all the code that my AI writes when it writes it, and I focus on sound engineering practices, clean interfaces, good test coverage, etc.

Also, I'm probably a better debugger than AI given an infinite amount of time and an advantage in available tools, but if you give us each the same debugging tools and see who can find and fix the bug fastest, it'll run circles around me, even for code that I wrote myself by hand!

That said, as time has gone on, the codebase has grown beyond my ability to keep it all in my head. That made me nervous at first, but I've come to view it just like pretty much any job with a large codebase, where I won't be familiar with large parts of the codebase when I first jump into them, because someone else wrote it. In this respect, AI has also been really helpful to help me get back up to speed on a part of the codebase I wrote a year ago that I need to now refactor or whatever.
by sublinear | 2025-12-14 16:40:32+00:00
There is no way around needing a developer (and a lot of testing) to "just fix a typo".

First the typo is discovered and it changes the length of the text. If it's more than a few words this becomes a layout problem. You will have to nudge things around a bit, but now this also fails accessibility testing because the alt text or aria labels were overlooked or font size or line height were changed. Then the marketing team reviews it and change their minds yet again and people are stuck in a hellish loop of tiny updates that start breaking other things through runaway inconsistency. Of course it's worth noting that the typos almost always originate from that same marketing team.

This is the nature of coding websites by committee. A CMS just makes this worse by getting in the way of proper versioning, and as a bonus launders all the blame onto developers.

It's far from naive to just use git and set up a CI pipeline to copy your static build onto a web server. This is done all the time by anyone with common sense and familiarity with web dev. It "just works" so well that it remains under the radar to anyone new to this and looking for solutions. The CMS grift continues as their sales team insists their product is the best solution.
by vmitro | 2025-12-14 16:40:55+00:00
Don't laugh, but I think in the (near) future, more and more accent will be put on HITL concept as private or selfhosted AI workflows gain on interest; it's hard not to (hope for?) an emergence of movement similar to GNU in the space of software itself, where freely available tooling allows for collaborative, federated HITL powered finetuning of ML models.

As I do also work on a similar concept, where HITL is the first class citizen, can you tell us a bit more about the underlying technology stack, if it's possible for users to host their own models for inference and fine tuning, how are pipelines defined and such?
by alephnerd | 2025-12-14 16:40:59+00:00
The US also pivoted to de facto allying with China by the 1970s.

In the eyes of contemporary NatSec leadership like Kissinger (Nixon, Ford) and Brzezinski (LBJ, Carter), leveraging the Sino-Soviet split to box in the Soviets was the ideal option.

As such, from 1972-1992 the US posted soldiers in Xinjiang monitoring the USSR [0], sponsored govenrnent led tech transfers and scientific collaboration [1], provided support for Chinese military modernization [2][3], and expanded economic cooperation [4].

This also played a role as to why US intel in the 2000s assumed Xi Jinping would be pro-American [5], as he started his career working on the US supported modernization of the PLA as a junior secretary to Geng Biao [6] - who was the primary reason the Maoist regime was overthrown in the 1970s.

By the 1970s, the primary NatSec goal was blocking the USSR, and as a result realism became the primary foreign policy strategy used by the US. As such, you ended up seeing policies like ditching India and Taiwan in favor of Pakistan and China, supporting communist Somalia over not-really-communist Dergist Ethiopia during the Ogaden War, and swaying then Soviet-aligned Egypt in favor of the US by cultivating Anwar Sadat and culminating in the Camp David Accords.

[0] - https://www.nytimes.com/1981/06/18/world/us-and-peking-join-...

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93China_Agreement_o...

[2] - https://www.nytimes.com/1981/06/17/world/us-decides-to-sell-...

[3] - https://www.nytimes.com/1979/10/04/archives/study-urges-us-a...

[4] - https://www.nytimes.com/1983/05/26/business/us-china-investm...

[5] - https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09BEIJING3128_a.html

[6] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geng_Biao
by dahart | 2025-12-14 16:41:44+00:00
Quick google search… from Popular Science:

“Among the 14 studies reviewed, five supported the idea, eight contradicted it, and one ended with mixed results.”

They talk about a few studies with positive results, but then share this:

“not every study shows positive effects. One 2023 study of 1,000 people found that listening to binaural beats at home while taking a test reduced their performance, while silence or listening to other sounds had no impact.”

(Here’s the study referred to: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372220600_Reverse_e...)

https://www.popsci.com/science/do-binaural-beats-work-focus/

WebMD has no clear results either, summarizing:

“Some early research suggests they may affect your brainwaves in ways that may help with attention, anxiety, sleep, and more. But other studies found unclear and mixed results. There aren't scientifically proven guidelines for how best to use binaural beats, or whether they can improve your mental health and thinking.”

It also mentions “they didn’t stop attention from declining over time.”

https://www.webmd.com/balance/what-are-binaural-beats

When asked if binaural beats work, Google’s AI answer confidently starts with the word “Yes”, but fails to back it up with scientific references. And I found some commercial sales listicles (e.g., Ohm Store) and YouTube videos that strongly claim binaural beats are amazing, but also have little to back it up.

My personal experience listening to binaural beats is it helps with focus on coding about the same amount as listening to color noise or rain & thunder or other non-musical audio tracks. Listening to anything masks office chatter and distracting noises.
by Nasrudith | 2025-12-14 16:41:46+00:00
Given how loosely zionism is defined that is pretty much a tautology. There is no definition of zionist in use here, it is just vibes based 'reasoning'. Zionist is rhetorically used to maintain their political bubble.

They cannot say if for instance a moderate and nuanced opinion ("October 7th was legitimate causus beli -but blocking aid is a hard crossing of the lines.") is Zionist or not. Let alone statements like "Israel has a right to exist." qualify.

There is plenty of motte and bailey to go around and the truth has already been buried in an unmarked grave.
by thefounder | 2025-12-14 16:42:09+00:00
Over HDMI I’ve got a no-signal error. I think I’ve tried display port or something else and got very bad ghosting and a kind of very bad contrast issue. You couldn’t really read text(unlike what I’ve seen on YouTube videos). Tried different kinds of settings still couldn’t get it into a working state. Like it needs a special driver or something like that.
by realitydrift | 2025-12-14 16:42:17+00:00
This paper helped clarify something I’ve been struggling to articulate. Misinformation isn’t a pathology layered on top of communication systems, it’s an inevitable consequence of finite bandwidth, lossy encoding, and imperfect decoding. Once you frame misinformation as negative information gain, a lot of modern discourse failures stop looking moral or adversarial and start looking thermodynamic.

What we’re seeing at scale feels less like people believing false things and more like fidelity collapse under entropy. Loss of context, message mutation, and collective distortion compounding faster than belief updating mechanisms can correct. In that sense, drift is the default trajectory of any dense social information network unless energy is continuously spent maintaining alignment with reality.

The uncomfortable implication is that better fact-checking alone won’t fix this. You’d need systems that actively preserve semantic fidelity across transmission, not just truth at the source, which biology seems to manage only intermittently and at real cost
by rtp4me | 2025-12-14 16:42:25+00:00
If the cost of the raw materials and worker were less than the price tag at the store, sure, I would probably opt to make my own clothes. They would fit me perfectly, and I can get the right shade of blue instead of bluish.

In the case of AI, Claude costs $100 or $200/mo for really good coding tasks. This is much less expensive than hiring someone to do the same thing for me.
by TheAceOfHearts | 2025-12-14 16:42:31+00:00
This is a bad example because it's solving a problem over a much more constrained domain.

A UX revolution in teeth-cleaning technology would probably look like some kind of bio-organism or colony that eats plaque and kills plaque-producing bacteria. In an ideal world you wouldn't have to brush your teeth at all, aside from an occasionally floss or scrub.
by efaref | 2025-12-14 16:43:14+00:00
I don't know about mainland Europe, but in the UK it really was exclusively about CO2 emissions per distance travelled, to the extent that Vehicle Excise Duty (the annual tax you pay on a car) was defined in terms of g/km of CO2 emitted. This happened in 2001 and wasn't changed until the wake of the emissions cheating scandals [1].

[1] https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables/rates-for-cars-re...
by poppafuze | 2025-12-14 16:43:51+00:00
I would want to know if Sanity had permission from their former customer to tell the public they were a customer, along with the personal name of the customer. If not, they could be perceived to be somewhere on the dartboard of venn diagram slices that include "vendor trash-talking a former customer" to "violating customer trust by revealing the relationship" to "purposefully revealing customer PII in (insert jurisdiction here) by posting a personal X account". Potential and current customers (hint) would want to know. There are industries where corporate clients can be very secretive about who they buy things from, it's a competitive advantage, getting called out like that is extremely sensitizing, and so getting doxxed and dragged by a vendor like that is instant death, even when the customer publicly dragged the vendor first. Especially to markets of marketing people with the exact release date secrecy need that was described in the article (ironic).

The only source of this relatoinship reveal was Sanity, they did it in the tweet thread as well, and it was the first line of their blog post. They didn't say "well it emerged on X that we were the vendor for this", it appears to done without permission. If that's the case, it is beyond unclassy. They could have simply reciprocated the disconnection, not mentioned there was a relationship, and said in their own posts "some recent blogging and tweeting have started an interesting discussion about replacing CMS, and here's our take...".

Clients will be interested enough about these things to read every post when the reveal happens from the vendor side. I read every post on that thread, saw lots of people asking who it was. Leerob never revealed who it was or even hinted. But I never saw a tweet from either party that said "We talked about it among ourselves and decided it would be interesting for both of us and our communities to reveal that Sanity was the vendor of the CMS, and they have a take about how this has impacted them, which you can read at (url)".

None of that matters now. Only the doxx matters now. Lawyers salivate over these moments.

BTW this isn't the tenth time that moving to a mental model of "something as code" has completely and upsettingly (for some) disrupted a market, even before AI.
by alephnerd | 2025-12-14 16:44:02+00:00
It was mutual.

The US shifted to becoming de facto allied with China in the early 1970s as a bulwark against the Soviet Union, and Pakistan helped with the initial backdoor diplomacy [0][1] that lead to US-Chinese normalization in the 1970s.

India, having fought a war against both Pakistan and China in the 1960s, pivoted to the Soviet Union as a result, who were also miffed at China because of the Sino-Soviet split and were looking for a bulwark.

> Historians of this time period usually describe India as having a more frigid relationship with America by the mid 1960’s with India moving closer to the Soviet Union and the United States moving closer to Pakistan

A major reason was Brzezinski - LBJ and later Carter's foreign policy czar.

He was a "realist" whose primary goal was boxing in the USSR (he spent his early childhood in Moscow during the Stalinist purge and Poland before the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact). As such, he pivoted the US away from India in favor of Pakistan and China.

The is why the US went from building IITs and allowing it's tech companies like Burroughs and IBM building joint ventures in 1960s India to de facto sanctions in the 1970s.

Kissinger followed a similar policy as Brzezinski, and IMO a major reason was that both grew up in pre-War Europe and their past experiences colored their views as a result.

[0] - https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2015/10/pakistan-and-ch...

[1] - https://www.isas.nus.edu.sg/papers/pakistan-china-relations-...
by mancerayder | 2025-12-14 16:44:17+00:00
Monkey Island 1 and 2 have deep memories for me. I'll never forget playing Monkey Island 2 during a cold Christmas when I was a kid. The PC speaker music was great (King's Quest V was my other present and I still remember the opening music). One day I got the Sound Blaster on my 486 SX and it blew my mind.

The Monkey Island that came out a few years ago sadly felt like a puzzle-free story for children and their parents to sit together to play. Elaine lacked humor and cynicism, there was a child's voice in some of the narration, the graphics were strangely cubic and stylistic instead of warm, and the characters seemed caricatures of themselves (like season 5 of a comedy series where the writing devolves into self-referential insider jokes about the past seasons).

I feel terrible saying that.

Will Adventure games come back, or are we lost on the new ADHD world of interruptible short content?
by startupsfail | 2025-12-14 16:44:32+00:00
The same argument was there about needing to be an expert programmer in assembly language to use C, and then same for C and Python, and then Python and CUDA, and then Theano/Tensorflow/Pytorch.

And yet here we are, able to talk to a computer, that writes Pytorch code that orchestrates the complexity below it. And even talks back coherently sometimes.
by tarasyarema | 2025-12-14 16:45:04+00:00
Well the timing is one thing that it outputs, but it also analyzes the content for things like:

1. Relevance to HN (e.g. OSS, relevant tech articles, etc.) 2. Similar posts matching (e.g. if it's repeated, or low-impact ones) 3. Provides recommendations on title, description

To be fair, it's pretty "dumb" now, as it does a mix of deterministic queries to the database + LLM analysis to build the report.

You can see the plan for the idea tester here https://github.com/desplega-ai/ai-toolbox/blob/main/willitfr...
by nataliste | 2025-12-14 16:45:33+00:00
>You live in Greece. You are a physician. It’s a free country. Yet you have chosen to blame a “Jewish company.”

From August, 2025: https://businessofcannabis.com/as-canada-floods-europe-with-...

>Currently, only three medical cannabis flower strains are available to Greek patients, all produced by Tikun Olam Europe.

From: https://tikuneurope.com/en/

>The pioneer for his time, Tzahi Cohen, decides to start growing cannabis, with the aim of offering its therapeutic properties non-profit to specific groups of patients: cancer patients, people addicted to opiate drugs and war veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder syndrome (PTSD)

>Israel’s Ministry of Health has granted the world’s first government license to Tikun Olam to produce medical cannabis products

>Founded in Israel, its verticalized production units have expanded across the world: USA, Canada, Asia and Europe (based in Greece)

So, uh, how is this a conspiracy and not a factual statement?