MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lousken | 2025-12-01 13:50:51+00:00
Same setup here since 2017. Since then, RAM usage decreased by 60%. The admin panel is not something I'd need but it would be a nice-to-have. Started with postgres as I wouldn't go for anything else if I wanna use it for decades. It has 2.5GBs for 10users and I don't mind if it takes 10 or 20, that's something I expected. Never did a cleanup of anything, I just dumped the db and moved to OVH recently onto a new VPS with NVMe SSD, it flies.

The fact that I cannot delete attachments that users delete is certainly my biggest irritation, 50GBs of stuff I am not sure if I can or cannot delete, but considering the size, I am just gonna bite the bullet, couple terabytes should not be a problem in 25 years. But this is def something I would love to see addressed sooner rather than later. It must be a pain even for the matrix.org server team.

After moving to a better server I do not have issues with slow notification unless the phone is sleeping for longer period of time which is an android optimization (I'd assume). It is more reliable than teams at this point. One of my friends had issues but removing 15 old devices fixed the issue.

As for element-x, I did call out "the another rewrite" issue especially with android and I do think it makes things worse. I still do not know how am I supposed to fix calling and video between old and new clients. For now I don't bother with new clients and everyone is using old ones, but it starts to become an issue as classic clients are in maintenance only mode
by crazygringo | 2025-12-01 13:50:53+00:00
> But from personal experience I know damn sure that what I really really want is often not available

But that's just life. I genuinely don't understand how you can complain that not every product is exactly the product you want. Companies are designing their products to meet the needs of millions of people at the price point they can pay for it. Not for you personally.

We have more consumer choice than we've ever had in modern history, and you're still complaining it's not enough?

Even when we lived in tribes and made everything ourselves, we were extremely limited in our options to the raw materials available locally, and the extremely limited ability to transform things. We've never had more choice than we have today. I cannot fathom how you are still able to complain about it.
by gjm11 | 2025-12-01 13:51:19+00:00
As someone else said, we don't know for sure. But it's not like there aren't some at-least-kinda-plausible candidate harms. Here are a few off the top of my head.

(By way of reminder, the question here is about the harms of LLMs specifically to the people using them, so I'm going to ignore e.g. people losing their jobs because their bosses thought an LLM could replace them, possible environmental costs, having the world eaten by superintelligent AI systems that don't need humans any more, use of LLMs to autogenerate terrorist propaganda or scam emails, etc.)

People become like those they spend time with. If a lot of people are spending a lot of time with LLMs, they are going to become more like those LLMs. Maybe only in superficial ways (perhaps they increase their use of the word "delve" or the em-dash or "it's not just X, it's Y" constructions), maybe in deeper ways (perhaps they adapt their _personalities_ to be more like the ones presented by the LLMs). In an individual isolated case, this might be good or bad. When it happens to _everyone_ it makes everyone just a bit more similar to one another, which feels like probably a bad thing.

Much of the point of an LLM as opposed to, say, a search engine is that you're outsourcing not just some of your remembering but some of your thinking. Perhaps widespread use of LLMs will make people mentally lazier. People are already mostly very lazy mentally. This might be bad for society.

People tend to believe what LLMs tell them. LLMs are not perfectly reliable. Again, in isolation this isn't particularly alarming. (People aren't perfectly reliable either. I'm sure everyone reading this believes at least one untrue thing that they believe because some other person said it confidently.) But, again, when large swathes of the population are talking to the same LLMs which make the same mistakes, that could be pretty bad.

Everything in the universe tends to turn into advertising under the influence of present-day market forces. There are less-alarming ways for that to happen with LLMs (maybe they start serving ads in a sidebar or something) and more-alarming ways: maybe companies start paying OpenAI to manipulate their models' output in ways favourable to them. I believe that in many jurisdictions "subliminal advertising" in movies and television is illegal; I believe it's controversial whether it actually works. But I suspect something similar could be done with LLMs: find things associated with your company and train the LLM to mention them more often and with more positive associations. If it can be done, there's a good chance that eventually it will be. Ewww.

All the most capable LLMs run in the cloud. Perhaps people will grow dependent on them, and then the companies providing them -- which are, after all, mostly highly unprofitable right now -- decide to raise their prices massively, to a point at which no one would have chosen to use them so much at the outset. (But at which, having grown dependent on the LLMs, they continue using them.)
by coolThingsFirst | 2025-12-01 13:51:20+00:00
It's all marketing, I can sell this to you and convert you.

Thing is it may have some interesting challenges, I too, wouldn't want to solve some insane string parsing problem with no interesting idea behind it. For today's problem, I did the naive version and it worked. The modular version created some issues with some corner cases.

There should be more events like AoC. Self-contained problems are very educational.
by nosianu | 2025-12-01 13:51:34+00:00
Without any of the spatial and physical object perception you train from right after birth, see toddlers playing, or the underlying wired infrastructure we are born with to understand the physical world (there was an HN submission about that not long ago). Edit, found it: https://news.ucsc.edu/2025/11/sharf-preconfigured-brain/

They are not a physical model like humans. Ours is based on deep interactions with the space and the objects (reason why touching things is important for babies), plus mentioned preexisting wiring for this purpose.
by theshrike79 | 2025-12-01 13:51:48+00:00
1. Create a tool that can check if a query hits a prexisting index

In step 2 either force Claude to use it (hooks) or suggest it (CLAUDE.md)

3. Profit!

As for "where stuff is", for anything more complex I have a tree-style graph in CLAUDE.md that shows the rough categories of where stuff is. Like the handler for letterboxd is in cmd/handlerletterboxd/ and internal modules are in internal/

Now it doesn't need to go in blind but can narrow down searches when I tell it to "add director and writer to the letterboxd handler output".
by ryanjshaw | 2025-12-01 13:52:03+00:00
I tried this but I have an MBP M4, which is evidently still in the toddler stage of VM support. I can run a macOS guest VM, but I can’t run docker on the VM because it seems nested virtualization isn’t fully supported yet.

I also tried running Linux in a VM but the graphics performance and key mapping was driving me nuts. Maybe I need to be more patient in addressing that.

For now I run a dev account as a standard user with fast user switching, and I don’t connect the dev account to anything important (eg icloud).

Coming from Windows/Linux, I was shocked by how irritating it is to get basic stuff working e.g. homebrew in this setup. It seems everybody just YOLOs dev as an admin on their Macs.
by tomhow | 2025-12-01 13:52:20+00:00
Where dang lives, it was about 4am when your comment was posted and about 11pm where I am. None of your comments had been seen by any moderators till now. They have been flagged by many community members, because they clearly breach the guidelines and the guidelines apply equally no matter the topic or side. Dang has gone to great efforts to allow the Israel/Palestine issue to be given exposure and extensive discussion here, on multiple notable occasions. Please stop posting inflammatory comments. It's been easily observable over the past 2+ years that we have no problem with this topic being discussed on HN, but the guidelines still apply to everyone. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by nonamesleft | 2025-12-01 13:52:31+00:00
Ran synapse for a few months, figured out all the tui clients are either abandonware or broken (originally thought i could use bitlbee, and did the install before realizing it was unusable).

Looked at current tui offerings now some years later, situation seems to be unchanged, the only client that ran back then was gomuks, and that has received a rewrite that hasn't reached feature parity yet.

I am probably the type of person referred to in the last part of xkcd 1782.
by integralid | 2025-12-01 13:52:33+00:00
The market can remain irrational longer than any of us can remain solvent. But I admit, recently I've been worrying about one big-tech company in my portfolio that skyrocketed recently. Predicting future is a fools hasn't, but if a crash is to happen, I hope it waits till the next year, because for tax reasons I don't want to take profits this year...
by lotsofpulp | 2025-12-01 13:53:09+00:00
> If I am bonused on earnings per share, and I have a button to increase earnings per share mechanically (without needing to increase revenue or decrease costs), why wouldn't I push that button?

Examining fantastical scenarios is a waste of time. No one has that button, there is a whole board of directors that votes on these things, and again, compensation is staggered over various performance targets staggered over a number of years. The proxy reports detailing these are easily accessible with an online search.

> Can you share some evidence around your statement? i.e. "There is no evidence to indicate buybacks reduce long term incentives for executives compared to dividends."

Reality. The businesses that have the best long term performance over the previous decades are the ones that have done the most buybacks, hence buybacks do not cause short term-ism. It’s just as easy as a business cutting expenses now to juice dividends in the near term, we’ve seen it time and time again with businesses that sacrifice quality and innovation in the short term which eventually cede ground to new businesses.
by crazygringo | 2025-12-01 13:53:11+00:00
It absolutely is.

When I buy a book, I don't want the government deciding in advance which paragraphs should be included, and which paragraphs people "shouldn't have to listen to". So I don't want it doing that with software either. It's the same thing.

You don't have to buy that book in the first place. The same way you don't have to use a piece of software.
by rufo | 2025-12-01 13:53:30+00:00
I suspect GitHub - and, to some extent, Microsoft at large - is going through something of a trust thermocline[1] event right now. There's been frustration brewing with GitHub as an open source platform for a while, but not enough for any one project to leave by itself; but over time enough has built up that various projects decided they had the last straw, and it's getting to be a bit viral via the HN front page.

I think it remains to be seen how large this moment actually is, but it's something I've been thinking about re: GitHub for a while now. Also, I suspect the unrest around Windows' AI/adware enshittification and the forced deprecation of Windows 10 are casting a shadow on everything Microsoft-ish at the moment, too.

[1] The original Twitter thread that brought this up as a concept is https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1588115310124539904.html. This is in the context of digital media outlets, but I think it's easy to see how it can apply more broadly. There are some other articles out there for the searching if you're interested.
by Ray20 | 2025-12-01 13:53:37+00:00
An ally's reliability is relative. And relatively speaking, the United States is a very reliable ally.

I mean to what are we comparing America's reliability? To the reliability of the European Union? Which calls Ukraine not just an ally but also its shield, and then pays Putin more money than it provides aid to Ukraine. And this after we've been paying 50 cents per kwh for decades, while talking about how we're moving away from oil dependence and toward green energy.
by embedding-shape | 2025-12-01 13:53:41+00:00
"Winter" in AI (or cryptocurrency, or any at all) ecosystems denote a period of low activity, and a focus on fundamentals instead of driven by hype.

What we're seeing now is something more like the peak of summer. If it ends up being a bubble, and it burtst, some months after that will be "AI Winter" as investors won't want to continue chucking money at problems anymore, and it'll go back to "in the background research" again, as it was before.
by unknownhad | 2025-12-01 13:54:31+00:00
While looking for a way to stream the India vs Pakistan cricket match on 14th September 2025, I stumbled across a suspicious search result on a europa.eu dev subdomain. It was being abused for blackhat SEO and redirecting users to scam streaming sites. I traced similar behavior across other high-profile domains, reported the issue to CERT-EU via email (after some Twitter help) and the problem was later confirmed as fixed on 6th November 2025. This post walks through how I found it, how I reported it and what we can learn from it.
by locknitpicker | 2025-12-01 13:54:53+00:00
> I think you are confusing what I am saying. I am saying the rest of the semantics are the same, other than the body.

This is fundamentally wrong. The semantics are not the same, regardless of whether there's even a request body or not. The semantics are completely different. One is safe and idempotent, whereas the other is neither safe nor idempotent. The presence of a body doesn't even register as a factor.

> If we are creating a new HTTP spec

Also wrong. It's all about specifying another HTTP verb. HTTP is already specified to support other verbs.

> we could give GET and QUERY be the same because they serve the same semantic purpose.

QUERY is a GET that is designed to pass query parameters in request bodies, which GET explicitly does not support. They are separate operations which just so happen to be both safe and idempotent.
by magicalist | 2025-12-01 13:54:59+00:00
> The amount of goal post shifting is so amusing to see

Can you be specific about the goal posts being shifted? Like the specific comments you're referring to here. Maybe I'm just falling for the bait, but non specific claims like this seem designed just to annoy while having nothing specific to converse about.

I got to the end of your comment and counting all the claims you discounted, the only goal post I see left is that people aren't using a sufficiently excited tone while sifting fact from hype? A lot of us follow this work pretty closely and don't feel the need to start every post with "there is no need for excitement to abate, still exciting! but...".

> I am not saying any of this means we get AGI or something or even if we continue to see improvements. We can still appreciate things. It doesn't need to be a binary.

You'll note, however, that the hype guys happily include statements like "Vibe proving is here" in their posts with no nuance, all binary. Why not call them out?
by crote | 2025-12-01 13:55:10+00:00
And the other way around: RISC-V doesn't have a move instruction so that's done as "dst = src + 0", and it doesn't have a nop instruction so that's done as "x0 = x0 + 0". There's like a dozen of them.

It's quite interesting what neat tricks roll out once you've got a guaranteed zero register - it greatly reduces the number of distinct instructions you need for what is basically the same operation.
by georgemcbay | 2025-12-01 13:55:34+00:00
> AI is just a tool, like most other technologies, it can be used for good and bad.

The same could be said of social media for which I think the aggregate bad has been far greater than the aggregate good (though there has certainly been some good sprinkled in there).

I think the same is likely to be true of "AI" in terms of the negative impact it will have on the humanistic side of people and society over the next decade or so.

However like social media before it I don't know how useful it will be to try to avoid it. We'll all be drastically impacted by it through network effects whether we individually choose to participate or not and practically speaking those of us who still need to participate in society and commerce are going to have to deal with it, though that doesn't mean we have to be happy about it.
Show HN: Aipatch – a CLI for multi-project AI code editing
by benday | 2025-12-01 13:55:45+00:00
I built aipatch after running into repeated problems with AI coding tools that would eventually fail to apply patches correctly or ignore parts of the instructions. They often kept doing things I didn’t ask for, especially when the context got even slightly unusual.

I wanted something simpler and more explicit: a tool where I control exactly what goes into the LLM prompt, and the model responds with deterministic SEARCH/REPLACE blocks that can be applied automatically.

The main idea behind aipatch is: - You choose the context manually (from one or multiple projects). - You send it to any LLM you prefer. - The model outputs structured patch blocks. - aipatch applies them to the codebase and logs everything.

The part that turned out most useful for me is multi-project prompting. I often need to update backend + frontend + documentation together, or compare two git commits, or port a feature from a small prototype into a larger repo. Existing tools don’t handle this well, so aipatch lets you give each project its own ID and merge them into a single prompt.

I also found that the best “prompt” is often just another working project that already behaves the way you want your project to behave. Including a small prototype or reference repo in the context gives the LLM a clear example and produces much more accurate patches than trying to describe everything in plain text.

A short demo video ("I improved aipatch using aipatch") is here: https://youtu.be/xho0pMKPu14

GitHub: https://github.com/bendaydots/aipatch

It’s a CLI tool written in Python, works with any LLM, and doesn’t require an editor integration or an account. I’d appreciate feedback from anyone who works with LLM-assisted development or multi-repo workflows.
by Lio | 2025-12-01 13:56:15+00:00
Meh, there's no evidence given that Ruby is not a "serious" language, whatever that means.

His major arguments seem to be that he doesn't like ruby's name.

My theory is if the author was in anyway correct in his assertions he wouldn't bother to write hit peices like this. He'd just move on.

The fact that people get stuff done in Ruby and that Ruby is constantly improving acts as a strong counter argument.
by embedding-shape | 2025-12-01 13:56:30+00:00
Based on the latest report from Dice/EA/BF6, seems indeed like they're detecting hardware-based cheating as well: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2807960/view/4972134...

Although who knows, they might be outright lying about that just to scare cheaters, but I tend to default to assuming what they're saying is more or less true.
by exsomet | 2025-12-01 13:56:34+00:00
The update thing struck me as slightly out of touch; if I were to make a list of my top 10 most used consumer products that can be updated, probably 8-9 of them have abused updates to make things worse.

We spend so much time training people that if you hit update, it’s going to suck: you’re going to suddenly get ads in your favorite app, or some new feature is going to get paywalled, or the UI is going to completely change with no warning. It seems counterproductive to accept that our industry does this stuff and then publish an open letter finger-wagging people for not updating.
by bluGill | 2025-12-01 13:56:36+00:00
I know a lot of people who retired early and are not bored. I know other people who went back to work (not always the same job) just because they needed something to do. People are different. If you need a boss to keep you busy doing something then you shouldn't retire. If you can find plenty of things to do in life (hobbies, travel...) then you can retire. Without knowing you I can't say what is right.

Of course your job/boss matters. Some are worse than others.
by nicoco | 2025-12-01 13:56:44+00:00
Sure.

In practice, in federated networks bad actors end up being blacklisted. It does not provide any "formal" guarantee, but… it tends to work fine enough. For this specific "deletion request" feature, of course it should always be seen as a convenience thing, and absolutely not about security.

As with many engineering things, it's tradeoffs all the way down. For instant messaging, a federated approach, using open protocols, offers what I value most: decentralisation, hackability, autonomy, open source. My options in this space are Matrix or XMPP. I have not attempted to self-host a matrix server, but have been very happy with my [prosody](https://prosody.im/) instance for almost a decade now.
by Glemkloksdjf | 2025-12-01 13:56:46+00:00
I find this very generic what you are saying and they.

What stance against AI? Image generation is not the same as code generation.

There are so many open source projects out there, its a huge difference than taking all the images.

AI is also just ML so should i not use image bounding box algorithm? Am i not allowed to take training data online or are only big companies not allowed to?
by stavros | 2025-12-01 13:56:50+00:00
I don't agree with most of these points, I think the points about atrophy, trust, etc will have a brief period of adjustment, and then we'll manage. For atrophy, specifically, the world didn't end when our math skills atrophied with calculators, it won't end with LLMs, and maybe we'll learn things much more easily now.

I do agree about ads, it will be extremely worrying if ads bias the LLM. I don't agree about the monopoly part, we already have ways of dealing with monopolies.

In general, I think the "AI is the worst thing ever" concerns are overblown. There are some valid reasons to worry, but overall I think LLMs are a massively beneficial technology.
by tete | 2025-12-01 13:57:01+00:00
Yes and no. I agree the only thing that can be reliable is server side.

However that means that anything based on reaction times and such is impossible to protect against (under reasonable conditions). At the end of the day you can always have a robot sitting at your desk. But there is steps to that. You can have something that highlights enemies, etc., you can have something that controls keyboard and mouse (maybe inside a VM, so you don't need hardware) and so on. You can reverse engineer packet encryption in a debugger (in most situations) and have something on the network messing with stuff and so on.

So in that regard, yes you can prevent everything you can prevent on the server, but you cannot prevent every sort of cheating on the server.

Everything that has rounds basically can be prevented (other than again a bot playing).

Everything that is complex to automate is better, but might just make cheating more "worthwhile".

The other thing you can do on the server is "dumb cheat" detection. Eg. the odds of someone being consistently as good at a game and such. Statistics like that is widespread and doesn't need any change on the client.