MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by exabrial | 2025-12-29 22:44:30+00:00
I had a 10am international flight to the US out of Munich. I boarded the train at the central station at 7am.

At 8:15 they dropped us off several stops away from the airport, claiming this train could not continue because it was so delayed. So we hung out in the country...

I finally go to the airport at 9am, rushed to the gate, but they people manning the counter had left (it's usually the flight attendants that man the counters I guess). I called the airline to try to get someone up there, but after waiting 45min on hold the flight had boarded and it was too late.

also, whatever jackass put ellipsis "..." substitution on the Munich flight board because "H32" or whatever was too long to fit into to their div and they couldn't bear messing out their UI, needs a flogging. The UI on the flight board is completely useless, but OH does it it look pretty
by simonw | 2025-12-29 22:45:24+00:00
I think you may have misunderstood something here.

When paying for Claude Max even at $200/month there are limits - you have a limit to the number of tokens you can use per five hour period, and if you run out of that you may have to wait an hour for the reset.

You COULD instead use an API key and avoid that limit and reset, but that would end up costing you significantly more since the $200/month plan represents such a big discount on API costs.

As-of a few weeks ago there's a third option: pay for the $200/month plan but allow it to charge you extra for tokens when you reach those limits. That gives you the discount but means your work isn't interrupted.

Extra Usage for Paid Claude Plans: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/12429409-extra-usage-...
by asim | 2025-12-29 22:45:26+00:00
No thank you for that example at least because I feel like I got hit in the face with a big fish. Of course trying to sell to other carpenters is mistake! Unless it's really refined tools they need, not the stuff you built with them. I guess the framework was a tool Devs need but I could never sell it...

Now carpenters selling to regular people. Ok finally my brain clicks. Take the easy route. Sell to people who don't code and help them win. Then it's about specialisation I guess. You could build anything, maybe there's a focus area. I did build https://mu.xyz but yet to figure out that user demographic.

Thanks for the thought experiment
by __turbobrew__ | 2025-12-29 22:45:34+00:00
Discord is really where it is at these days. Discord servers with 50-100 people form the new social fabric of the internet where real community lies. In theory Reddit was supposed to be this but

1. Reddit communities tend to get too large

2. Subreddits overflow into each other too much through cross posting and brigading

3. Post history being public meant that you could get banned/brigaded for your comments on a totally different subreddit (i.e. bots autobanning you on one subreddit for posting on another subreddit).

The magic of discord is that everyone in the server I frequent I either know personally or they are known by someone I know personally. It creates a nice fabric of community and trust. Literally zero moderation over the past 10 years as everyone knows each other and behaves like normal adults and we also don’t get all up in arms when someone says something controversial.
by to11mtm | 2025-12-29 22:45:40+00:00
I'd be willing to give you access to the experiment I mentioned in a separate reply (have a github repo), as far as the output that you can get for a complex app buildout.

Will admit It's not great (probably not even good) but it definitely has throughput despite my absolute lack of caring that much [0]. Once I get past a certain stage I am thinking of doing an A-B test where I take an earlier commit and try again while paying more attention... (But I at least want to get where there is a full suite of UOW cases before I do that, for comparison's sake.)

> Those twenty engineers must not have produced much.

I've been considered a 'very fast' engineer at most shops (e.x. at multiple shops, stories assigned to me would have a <1 multiplier for points[1])

20 is a bit bloated, unless we are talking about WITCH tier. I definitely can get done in 2-3 hours what could take me a day. I say it that way because at best it's 1-2 hours but other times it's longer, some folks remember the 'best' rather than median.

[0] - It started as 'prompt only', although after a certain point I did start being more aggressive with personal edits.

[1] - IDK why they did it that way instead of capacity, OTOH that saved me when it came to being assigned Manual Testing stories...
by mywittyname | 2025-12-29 22:46:16+00:00
We use code rabbit and it's better than practically any human I've worked with at a number of code review tasks, such as finding vulnerabilities, highlighting configuration issues, bad practices, etc. It's not the greatest at "does this make sense here" type questions, but I'd be the one answering those questions anyway.

Yeah, maybe the people I've worked with suck at code reviews, but that's pretty normal.

Not to say your answer is wrong. I think the gist is accurate. But I think tooling will get better at answering exactly the kind of questions you bring up.

Also, someone has to be responsible. I don't think the industry can continue with this BS "AI broke it." Our jobs might devolve into something more akin to a SDET role and writing the "last mile" of novel code the AI can't produce accurately.
by hopelite | 2025-12-29 22:46:24+00:00
Yes, it has morphed over time through collaboration of the "intel" community interfacing with industry. Is it safe to assume that mass surveillance and control is fine with you as long as it's private companies doing it and providing the data to the government?

I believe it is one of the bases for why one side of the political divide makes the claim that this administration is somehow uniquely fascist, even though they are categorically wrong, but are responding to he ensnaring and strapping of corporations to the service of the government.
by pwdisswordfishy | 2025-12-29 22:46:28+00:00
> I feel that a strict separation between O(N) compiler output and O(1) intermediate processing artifacts [...]

I don't follow. He has just said that although the size of the arena is finite, the input and output are unbounded, and the compiler does its work by processing "a sequence of chunks" (i.e. those things that will fit into the finitely sized arena). That's not "O(1) intermediate processing artifacts". It's still O(n).

> [...] can clarify compiler’s architecture, and I won’t be too surprised if O(1) processing in compilers would lead to simpler code

This doesn't seem like an intuitive conclusion at all. There's more recordkeeping needed now, and more machinery in need of being implemented, and one should expect that this scheme would make for things that are neither simple nor easy.

We haven't even gotten around to addressing how "statically allocating" a fixed size arena that your program necessarily subdivides into pieces (before moving onto the next chunk and doing the same) is just "dynamic allocation with extra steps". (If you want or just think that it would be neat to write/control your own allocator, then fine, but... say that.)
Show HN: Shardium – open-source "Dead Man's Switch" for crypto inheritance
by maxcomperatore | 2025-12-29 22:46:50+00:00
Hi HN, I'm Max.

I built this because I was terrified that if I die tomorrow, my family gets nothing. The existing solutions were either trusting a centralized custodian or complex hardware setups.

Shardium is a client-side tool that splits your seed phrase into 3 shards using Shamir's Secret Sharing.

Shard A: You keep.

Shard B: You give to a beneficiary (PDF).

Shard C: We hold (or you self-host).

It works as a dead man's switch: If you are inactive for 90 days (email ping), Shard C is released to your beneficiary. They combine B + C to recover the funds.

The Stack:

secrets.js-grempe for the math.

FastAPI + PostgreSQL backend.

Client-side encryption (seed never hits the network).

It is 100% Open Source and MIT Licensed. You can self-host it for free ($0), or use the managed version.

I'd love your feedback on the security model. Roast my code here: https://github.com/pyoneerC/shardium
by coldtea | 2025-12-29 22:47:00+00:00
>LLMs are merely a tool to achieve a similar end result.

Advanced tools are never "merely tools".

Tools that are pushed onto people, come to be expected to even participate in social/professional life, and take over knowledge-based tasks and creative aspects, are even less "merely tools".

We are not talking of a hammer or a pencil here. An LLM user doesn't outsource typing, they outsource thinking.
by Veedrac | 2025-12-29 22:47:31+00:00
The stock market learns from experience, because it's made of people who learn from experience.

Imagine an investor's experience with TSLA. From the beginning, they're flooded with news reports about 'fundamentals' this, 'fundamentals' that, about how Tesla would imminently collapse, how it's a scam, yada yada. Said investors _constantly_ see themselves being right and those skeptics wrong. Tesla is in fact disrupting an industry. They really are just continuing to scale. Marginal profitability keeps going up. Their cars keep getting better. FSD keeps getting better. The competition that people kept pointing at kept failing to materialize. None of this seems to change the skeptics' byline.

Tesla is actually in a materially worse position than it was a few years ago, by many metrics, but the stock price isn't set by 'fundamentals', it's set by the people setting demand for the stock. With TSLA, this is disproportionately going to be people who have learned to and gotten rich from ignoring the people loudly telling them why investing in Tesla is a bad idea.

A market will correct eventually, but corrections either require people to change their minds or run out of capital. Neither has happened yet, so the market can't correct.
by howmayiannoyyou | 2025-12-29 22:47:40+00:00
Manus was pretty damn good at delivering impressive results well before other providers. I stopped using it because I was concerned about data privacy and and whatever extent one particular foreign country might (or might not) have hooks into Manus. Now that Meta has purchased them I know I'm safe ((sarcasm)).

I have many questions:

- Will Meta fuck this up as they seem (in my opinion) to do with most of the acquisitions? Oculus? Drop.io?

- Did they grossly overpay?

- Will innovation slow to a crawl (eg. Instagram, Whatsapp)?

- Will Manus' top talent bail?

- How is it conceivable Meta couldn't build this themselves. It can't possibly have been Manus' user base they were after, can it?

- How much trouble am I in for telling my wife to sell her Meta stock two weeks ago?

The acquisition is confusing to me.
by xorcist | 2025-12-29 22:47:47+00:00
Just to clarify: Most AI companies don't own their hardware, with a select few exceptions. That's why a handful of hyperscaler stock has rallied recently on letters of intent on large orders from AI companies. Which technically is a handful of shell companies under complete control of their parent companies, which can then take on credit without it being visible on the parent company balance sheet.

But addressing the specific question: It is still a valid. If the product sold is a 10x developer force multiplier, you'd expect to see the company fully utilizing it. Productivity would be expected to increase, rapidly, as the product matures, and independently of any acquisitions made at the same time.
by bartilg | 2025-12-29 22:48:00+00:00
Most of the issues you described, such as carrier registration issues, are just as likely with eSim as they were with physical SIM cards. The difference is that you can't swap out the eSim physically, which was a pretty reliable way of getting around misconfiguration. This isn't really an indictment of eSim as a technology, but the reality is that Telco's are incredibly slow and inefficient, and by removing a workaround for their incompetence, it can make the problem worse.
by dylan604 | 2025-12-29 22:48:19+00:00
Again, your "right there" is just your assumptions you know the inner workings of the USPS. Maybe there was no Saturday pickup at that location until the outside boxes made it possible. This means no increase in that location's budget for paying people to do this. Now, it is part of the regional location (or similar) while at the same time now being able to offer a convenient Saturday pickup for those that use this location.

Not every location offers the same services. It's part of life. The complaining here is coming across as very privileged whining. Do you wish to speak to a manager?
by to11mtm | 2025-12-29 22:48:38+00:00
> The C# standard lib (often called the base class library or BCL) has seen a ton of Span<T>/Memory<T>/stackalloc internal usage adoption in .NET 6+, with each release adding more of them. Things like File IO and serialization/deserialization particularly see a lot of notable performance improvements just from upgrading each .NET version. .NET10 is faster than .NET9 with a lot of the same code, and so forth.

I worded my reply poorly, mostly in that I meant 'If Oberon has it's own stdlib, is it doing the modern performant practice' ?
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-12-29 22:48:51+00:00
> Famous (in Germany) example: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frommer_Legal (use auto-translate, it's German)

For a lot of Germans who are knowledgable in this topic, being associated with such a company is nearly like openly admitting to have raped children. The hate for these companies and their employees is extreme.
by baq | 2025-12-29 22:48:52+00:00
> "LLM as abstraction" might be a possible future, but it assumes LLMs are significantly more capable than a junior dev at managing a growing mess of complex code.

Ignoring for a second they actually already are indeed, it doesn’t matter because the cost of rewriting the mess drops by an order of magnitude with each frontier model release. You won’t need good code because you’ll be throwing everything away all the time.
by austin-cheney | 2025-12-29 22:49:17+00:00
I have watched this comment bounce up and down in votes all day from 0 earlier in the day up to a max of 4 up votes and now back to 0. I really think this controversy goes to the extreme Dunning-Kruger of software. There are so many developers that are just unqualified button pressers who cannot see what they don't know, but for people who have enough experience to write original software there is common knowledge that most lesser developers cannot accept.
by CGMthrowaway | 2025-12-29 22:49:54+00:00
By admitting that the postmark date is a reflection of processing capability rather than voter action, the USPS has undermined the legal standard used in Pennsylvania and other states to determine the validity of late-arriving ballots. This reinforces the argument that mass mail-in voting relies on a logistical system that the USPS itself admits is not "perfectly reliable" for dating time-sensitive documents.

In states that require a postmark by Election Day to count a ballot received later, the operational reality of postmarking creates a chaotic environment where timely votes could be disqualified, or conversely, creates ambiguity about when a ballot actually entered the system.

It is unreasonable to expect every mail-in voter to stand in line at a post office to get a manual stamp to prove they voted on time. If the standard automated system cannot guarantee an accurate date, as this rule admits, then using that system for critical constitutional functions like voting is inherently flawed.
by hinkley | 2025-12-29 22:50:28+00:00
I’ve known a lot of neurodivergent and LGBT people, and I was in my late teens when The Internet happened and a young adult when the Web happened.

If you’re not within a couple standard deviations of boring, local living is isolating. Al Gore gave a mea culpa speech at one point because he thought, as a Senator, that legislating to give everyone the Internet would halt the rural brain drain but it had the opposite effect. People learned that they weren’t alone, they were just surrounded by (my words, not his) idiots and so they moved to where their people were. They voted with their feet in droves.

Ultimately, the Internet is good for support. It lets you find people who have the same obscure cancer your child has. Who are dealing with the same sort of neuroses your mom has. Who are being defrauded by a corporation in the same way. Who have the same feelings that the people around you ridicule you for even the hint of having. It lets these people find the patterns, see other people are feeling the same things they do, stop being gaslit.

Everything else has become about dopamine and money. And for those parts we should definitely unplug. But without forums or chat threads that same feeling of being The Other comes back.
by d_silin | 2025-12-29 22:50:39+00:00
I understand the frustration, but factually it is not true.

Engines are reliable to about 1 anomaly per million flight hours or so, current flight software is more reliable, on order of 1 fault per billion hours. In-flight engine shutdowns are fairly common, while major software anomalies are much rarer.

I used LLMs for coding and troubleshooting, and while they can definitely "hit" and "miss", they don't only "miss".
by a456463 | 2025-12-29 22:51:02+00:00
What are you even talking about? eSIM for travel requires to be connected to internet and in the country when provisioning. With a SIM you just pop it in. It is however nice to be able to buy an eSIM without having to wait in line at the airport, but you get what you pay for. The airport SIM is better than the eSIM from generic provider, depending on your use case, like making calls in some countries
by quantified | 2025-12-29 22:51:02+00:00
There is no credible model for UBI anywhere from AI. It's not going to be paid for by anyone, anywhere. Petrostates including Alaska can pay one, sort of, but they are not replacing people with automation, and their largesse won't last forever.

The model of capitalism is to pay for labor and avoid taxes and fees at almost all costs. AI-enabled businesses will not seek to contribute any more to UBI than they seek to contribute to any other non-employee. People who don't labor won't get money.
by tucnak | 2025-12-29 22:51:07+00:00
Honestly, I feel like Julia might as well beat Mojo or sommat to the punch, sooner or later. It has some facilities and supporting infrastructure for a lot of scientific and data-handling tasks surrounding ML, if not for compiling and dispatching kernels (where XLA reins supreme to anything in the CUDA ecosystem!) For example, Bayesian programming like Turing.jl is virtually unmatched in Python. It's been a while since I looked at Lux.jl for XLA integration, but I reckon it could be incredibly useful. As long as LLM's and RLVR training thereof should continue to improve, we may be able to translate loads of exiting Pytorch code eventually.
by doug_durham | 2025-12-29 22:51:16+00:00
You should look at other engineering disciplines. How many highway over passes have unique “chef quality” designs? Very few. Most engineering is commodity replications of existing designs. The exact same thing applies to software engineering. Most of us engineers are replicating designs that came earlier. LLMs are good at generating the rote designs that make up the bulk of software by volume. Who benefit from an artisanal REST interface? The best practices were codified over a decade ago.
by NickC25 | 2025-12-29 22:51:27+00:00
I currently run a PC based Ableton setup albeit one that is exclusively ITB and uses no external gear outside of a sound card and an Ableton Push gen 1.

I've got no issues with it.

deadmau5 is famously a PC guy as well, he seems to have no issues with Windows (that I know of or that are not extremely specific to a setup that involves millions of dollars' worth of hardware and multiple computers). His setup is like an amusement park for nerds.
by AsyncVibes | 2025-12-29 22:51:28+00:00
I've been working on GENREG (Genetic Regulatory Networks), an evolutionary learning system that trains neural networks without gradients or backpropagation. Instead of calculating loss derivatives, genomes accumulate "trust" based on task performance and reproduce through trust-based selection. Training uses GPU but inference runs on low-end CPUs.
Today I hit 81.47% accuracy on the official MNIST test set using pure evolutionary pressure.
The Setup
Architecture: Simple MLP (784 → 64 → 10)
Population: 200 competing genomes
Selection: Trust-based (high performers reproduce)
Mutation: Gaussian noise on offspring weights
Training time: ~600 generations, ~40 minutes
Results
MNIST (64 neurons, 50K params): 81.47% test accuracy
Best digits: 0 (94%), 1 (97%), 6 (85%)
Hardest: 5 (61%), 8 (74%), 3 (75%)
The 32-neuron version (25K params) achieved 72.52% - competitive performance with half the parameters.
UMAP embeddings reveal the learning strategy:
32-neuron model: Can't separate all 10 digits. Masters 0 and 1 (>90%) but confusable digits like 5/3/8 collapse into overlapping clusters.
64-neuron model: Clean 10-cluster topology with distinct regions. Errors at decision boundaries between similar digits.
Key Discoveries

Fitness signal stability is critical: Training plateaued at 65% with 1 random image per digit. Variance was too high. Switching to 20 images per digit fixed this immediately.
Child mutation drives exploration: Mutation during reproduction matters far more than mutating existing population. Disabling it completely flatlined learning.
Capacity forces trade-offs: The 32-neuron model initially masters easy digits (0, 1) then evolutionary pressure forces it to sacrifice some accuracy there to improve hard digits. Different optimization dynamic than gradient descent.

Most MNIST baselines reach 97-98% using 200K+ parameters. GENREG achieves 81% with 50K params and 72% with 25K params, showing strong parameter efficiency despite lower absolute ceiling.
Other Results
Alphabet recognition (A-Z): 100% mastery in ~1800 generations
Currently testing generalization across 30 font variations
Limitations
Speed: ~40 minutes to 81% vs ~5-10 minutes for gradient descent
Accuracy ceiling: Haven't beaten gradient baselines yet
Scalability: Unclear how this scales to larger problems
Current Experiments
Architecture sweep (16/32/64/128/256 neurons)
Mutation rate ablation studies
Curriculum learning emergence
Can we hit 90%+ on MNIST?
Minimum viable capacity for digit recognition?
by whstl | 2025-12-29 22:51:40+00:00
> Respectfully, I disagree. You're correct on the facts, but

I'm fine with the disagreement if you say I'm correct. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> any "new techniques, materials and tools" need to be communicated to the brick layers

Same for software.

> That takes time and effort i.e. it all needs to be actively managed. The brick layers have to be able to work with those new techniques and materials.

Same for software.

> I don't want some of them using method #1 over here, and method #2 over there, unless I'm wholly conversant with the methods, and fully confident that it'll all mesh eventually. The system i.e. the whole shebang has to work coherently to serve its purpose.

Same for software.

Virtually every profession has a body of knowledge that's constantly getting updated. Only software engineers seem to have this faulty assumption that they must apply it all immediately.
by cjonas | 2025-12-29 22:51:41+00:00
Same query solved in duckdb instead (generated by claude). I wasn't able to run on the full dataset due to an encoding issue I didn't feel like solving... but with everything up until 2001, it returns seconds on my M4 MBP.

https://gist.github.com/ChuckJonas/4ffb0743de0c20a61394a6b95...