MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lapcat | 2025-12-23 00:02:27+00:00
> Without LLMs, this would have never been feasible because of dev time and/or costs.

This implies that the ultimate payoff will be quite small, doesn't it? I would think that a "golden age" requires gold, so to speak. A lucrative software business should eventually return profits after costs in the long run.

To me, it doesn't sound like a golden age if the idea is just to break even on development.

Are we just talking about a hobby here, or about becoming a professional indie software developer? Those are two vastly different outcomes. If you can't quit your day job, I wouldn't call it a golden age.

In another comment you said, "it will be great for users / companies with these specific problems." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46360019 But this seems to be changing the subject. The article author is a software developer trying to make a living. A golden age for florists, for example, is not necessarily a golden age for indie software developers.
by __jonas | 2025-12-23 00:02:34+00:00
I agree with this, just to note for context though: This (or rather the package that was forked) is not a wrapper of any official WhatsApp API or anything like that, it poses as a WhatsApp client (WhatsApp Web), which the author reverse engineered the protocol of.

So users go through the same steps as if they were connecting another client to their WhatsApp account, and the client gets full access to all data of course.

From what I understand WhatsApp is already fairly locked down, so people had to resort to this sort of thing – if WA had actually offered this data via a proper API with granular permissions, there might have been a lower chance of this happening.

See: https://baileys.wiki/docs/intro/
by toomuchtodo | 2025-12-23 00:02:51+00:00
Yes, the cost and distribution stories are better for oral vs injectable. This pill is a peptide, which means you still have to be mindful when you take it versus food and beverage. Eli Lilly’s version is a small molecule versus a peptide, which means you can take it at any time. Long story short, for most obesity situations, this is going to be a broad system improvement.

Lilly is building a large manufacturing facility north of Indianapolis in Lebanon, and these drugs will be part of their manufacturing.
by sonuhia | 2025-12-23 00:03:12+00:00
no, in the given context and dogma, it's just 'persons' all the way down ... and up ....

I'm just annoyed the HN kind is too retarded, which might be age related or not, to throw a better narrative at the rest of us.

You see, it's all "laissez faire" only until it isn't ... and that's becoming a little too obvious to the wrong people ... who are not among the staff but among those who sense and communicate opportunity ...

the last time something similar played out, nobody--the least the left or the greens or anyone considering themselves a fucking democrat or feynman-style anarchist--noticed the fake/posing devil in the details deliberately put on stage as a show of "pwowa" ... ... by those who only held it over multiple but rather individual instances ... the narrative which mostly left them out, .... "almost" went worse ... than history
by KomoD | 2025-12-23 00:04:19+00:00
Who has so many gift cards that they need to pay $3-10/mo to keep track of them?

Also:

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

> Off topic: blog posts, sign-up pages, newsletters, lists, and other reading material. Those can't be tried out, so can't be Show HNs. Make a regular submission instead.
by the_af | 2025-12-23 00:04:30+00:00
> I take it you've not encountered such folks? It must be nice to be shielded.

What are you even trying to argue here? "Not dying and not letting your kids die is a choice"? I mean, sure, in a bizarre alien logic kind of way, but as someone once told me: "you're not helping yourself by using extreme arguments".

If that's your main point, we can stop here. I won't argue with extraterrestrials or robots.

> I don't know your background, but spend some time in various countries

Exactly, you don't know my background, so don't lecture me. Your lecturing comes across as very condescending and, well, privileged.

> The US

I'm not from the US.

> Statistically, they will choose poorly, but the fact that their behavior is predictable via statistics doesn't negate the fact that they made those choices.

Non-sequitur.
by AJ007 | 2025-12-23 00:04:40+00:00
Just had to look this one up. PG&E's first bankruptcy was April 6, 2001. Based on the stock price decline prior to that, it looks like their shareholders thought everything was ok in November of 2000 and the stock was $27 (it bottomed out at $8.97 in April of 2001.) As of today, the stock is worth $15.97.

If we go back 30 years to 1995 -- and you invested $10,000 in PG&E and $10,000 in the S&P500, and reinvested the dividends -- today the PG&E investment would be worth $11,708. The S&P investment would be worth $201,420.

To put it in simpler terms, the PG&E investors look like gullible fools.
by ToucanLoucan | 2025-12-23 00:07:34+00:00
Fucking AI summaries. Correct you are, 12-per-day is the combo shot of all gun deaths in children in totality, which includes much more banal things like unsecured firearms in the home.

That being said, my point remains: the #1 threat to children in this country is guns, wielded by classmates, road-ragers, gang members, or stored improperly. We still have no meaningful gun regulation in huge areas, and no public will to see it done. And this kind of insipid bullshit is what we're doing instead.
by gethly | 2025-12-23 00:08:14+00:00
Oauth's PKCE verifies the continuity of the flow as it is essentially a saga(multi-step process). For example you can initiate oauth access grant request multiple times with the same data, but PKCE ensures that each of those initiations can be individually identified. Do not confuse PKCE with state field, which is for XSS and has no obfuscation.

Just to be clear, the PKCE secret can be the same for each initiation, but in the end its goal is to ensure that the first request matches with the last one. And yes, there is "plain" PKCE method but that is just for testing. SHA256 is the default one used to obfuscate the secret.
by happyopossum | 2025-12-23 00:08:24+00:00
> slop. If you have a LinkedIn account you must fill it with a constant stream of something

This is 100% baloney. Almost none of the people I work with are heavy LinkedIn posters, and I’ve never met a hiring manager who cared what your LinkedIn feed looked like. This has held true across startups, FAANGs, and mid cap tech companies.
by aurohacker | 2025-12-23 00:08:27+00:00
Great answers here, in that, for MoE, there's compute saving but no memory savings even tho the network is super-sparse. Turns out, there is a paper on the topic of predicting in advance the experts to be used in the next few layers, "Accelerating Mixture-of-Experts language model inference via plug-and-play lookahead gate on a single GPU".
As to its efficacy, I'd love to know...
by klempner | 2025-12-23 00:08:31+00:00
The actual algorithm (which is pretty sensible in the absence of delayed ack) is fundamentally a feature of the TCP stack, which in most cases lives in the kernel. To implement the direct equivalent in userspace against the sockets API would require an API to find out about unacked data and would be clumsy at best.

With that said, I'm pretty sure it is a feature of the TCP stack only because the TCP stack is the layer they were trying to solve this problem at, and it isn't clear at all that "unacked data" is particularly better than a timer -- and of course if you actually do want to implement application layer Nagle directly, delayed acks mean that application level acking is a lot less likely to require an extra packet.
by x2rj | 2025-12-23 00:08:52+00:00
I've always thought a problem with Nagel's algorithm is, that the socket API does not (really) have a function to flush the buffers and send everything out instantly, so you can use that after messages that require a timely answer.

For stuff where no answer is required, Nagel's algorithm works very well for me, but many TCP channels are mixed use these days. They send messages that expect a fast answer and other that are more asynchronous (from a users point of view, not a programmers).

Wouldn't it be nice if all operating systems, (home-)routers, firewalls and programming languages would have high quality implementations of something like SCTP...
by gosub100 | 2025-12-23 00:09:57+00:00
Not everyone is a tribalist.i don't have to agree with everything Trump does. Do you not know that? Or does the world feel safer when you split people into simple categories?

Academia in particular loves to push one-track thought and cancel culture. Hard to believe it used to be a place for diverse thought and DIScourse. Now if you disagree with the groupthink you are a racist. It's a very 2001 George Bush "you are either with us or against us" culture that absolutely deserves to have its funding cut.
by libraryofbabel | 2025-12-23 00:10:34+00:00
The essence of it is that after the "read the whole internet and predict the next token" pre-training step (and the chat fine-tuning), SotA LLMs now have a training step where they solve huge numbers of tasks that have verifiable answers (especially programming and math). The model therefore gets the very broad general knowledge and natural language abilities from pre-training and gets good at solving actual problems (problems that can't be bullshitted or hallucinated through because they have some verifiable right answer) from the RL step. In ways that still aren't really understood, it develops internal models of mathematics and coding that allow it to generalize to solve things it hasn't seen before. That is why LLMs got so much better at coding in 2025; the success of tools like Claude Code (to pick just one example) is built upon it. Of course, the LLMs still have a lot of limitations (the internal models are not perfect and aren't like how humans think at all), but RL has taken us pretty far.

Unfortunately the really interesting details of this are mostly secret sauce stuff locked up inside the big AI labs. But there are still people who know far more than I do who do post about it, e.g. Andrej Karpathy discusses RL a bit in his 2025 LLMs Year in Review: https://karpathy.bearblog.dev/year-in-review-2025/
by ryanto | 2025-12-23 00:10:40+00:00
I run incus os, which is an operating system that is made for spinning up containers and VMs. Whenever I have to work on a JS project I launch a new container for development and then ssh into it from my laptop. You can also run incus on your computer without installing it as an operating system.

Containers still have some risk since they share the host kernel, but they're a pretty good choice for protection against the types of attacks we see in the JS ecosystem. I'll switch to VM's when we start seeing container escape exploits being published as npm packages :)

When I first started doing development this way it felt like I was being a bit too paranoid, but honestly it's so fast and easy it's not at all noticeable. I often have to work on projects that use outdated package managers and have hundreds of top-level dependencies, so it's worth the setup in my opinion.
by Slow_Hand | 2025-12-23 00:11:09+00:00
I had no idea! And I'm learning Javascript, so that's a nice coincidence.

I was deep into Max/MSP around 2010 and made a personal vow to leave it alone. The potential to reinvent the wheel and build tools instead of completing records was too much.

Now I'm in a more mature place, so I could see myself diving back into it eventually.
by coryrc | 2025-12-23 00:11:28+00:00
> As for the second bankruptcy, the main result of that was that their customers ended up paying the bill for other customers whose houses were destroyed.

There's half of the major problems. If I walked around covered in gasoline every day and eventually walked past someone smoking, not a lot of people would blame the smoker for me getting engulfed in flames.

Yet build a wood house in a forest maintained for thousands of years by American Indians with fire, require universal electricity supply, and suddenly it's not the homeowner's fault at all. Everyone else should bail them out over and over again.
by tekacs | 2025-12-23 00:12:47+00:00
I could certainly see the value in this in principle but sadly the labyrinthine mess that is the Apple permission system (in which they learned none of the lessons of early UAC) illustrates the kind of result that seems to arise from this.

A great microcosm illustration of this is automation permission on macOS right now: there's a separate allow dialog for every single app. If you try to use a general purpose automation app it needs to request permission for every single app on your computer individually the first time you use it. Having experienced that in practice it... absolutely sucks.

At this point it makes me feel like we need something like an async audit API. Maybe the OS just tracks and logs all of your apps' activity and then:

1) You can view it of course.

2) The OS monitors for deviations from expected patterns for that app globally (kinda like Microsoft's SmartScreen?)

3) Your own apps can get permission to read this audit log if you want to analyze it your own way and/or be more secure. If you're more paranoid maybe you could use a variant that kills an app in a hurry if it's misbehaving.

Sadly you can't even implement this as a third party thing on macOS at this point because the security model prohibits you from monitoring other apps. You can't even do it with the user's permission because tracing apps requires you to turn SIP off.
by hathawsh | 2025-12-23 00:12:48+00:00
Ha ha, well that's a relief. I thought the article was going to say that enabling TCP_NODELAY is causing problems in distributed systems. I am one of those people who just turn on TCP_NODELAY and never look back because it solves problems instantly and the downsides seem minimal. Fortunately, the article is on my side. Just enable TCP_NODELAY if you think it's a good idea. It apparently doesn't break anything in general.
by nixosbestos | 2025-12-23 00:13:25+00:00
Can we summon the Trumphole licking HN users that spent their reputation insisting that us "libtards" were freaking out, and get them in here to explain how this fits in the MAGA 4D Chess?

Or is it against HN decorum to point out just how much of that shit-headery fart-huffing was allowed and transpired here, on HN?
by ekjhgkejhgk | 2025-12-23 00:13:43+00:00
OT but still about linkedin. I wonder if somebody could help me figure this out

I have a new email account on my own domain. For the sake of this discussion lets pretend my domain is MYDOMAIN.com, but keep in mind my actual domain isn't some words put together that a human could conceivably guess.

Just now I got two confirmation emails from linkedin. They read as usual:

FIRSTNAME, your pin is XXXXXX. Please confirm your email address.

("FIRSTNAME" is not my first name, it's some other person's, presumably.)

I received these confirmation emails on NEVERUSED@MYDOMAIN.com where NEVERUSED is some string that I've never used before anywhere.

What is going on here?
by ksaj | 2025-12-23 00:15:37+00:00
"The digital world gave him something new control."

Why do people not bother checking their AI voice overs and correct mistakes like this. It ruins the experience because it is so distracting. Humans don't make verbal mistakes like that, so it really stands out in the most obnoxious way.

If you hired someone to do the voice over, you'd never put up with such shoddy output. So why put up with it just because it's AI? It would require only the additional time needed to an occasional period or dash. Carelessly leaving such obvious mistakes in content is why people hate "slop" so much.

Take time to understand the difference between convenience and outright laziness.
by KomoD | 2025-12-23 00:15:46+00:00
> Patreon for memberships, Ko-fi for tips, Discord for community, Gumroad for selling stuff, and the list goes on. We thought there had to be a better way.

Yeah, the better way is ditch Ko-fi or Patreon and Gumroad because using 3 platforms when 1 of them can do it all isn't sane. You're basically like "instead of having to buy 3 cars - one for groceries, one for errands, one for work. Buy our car, it can do it all!" when 1 of other cars can also do all that just fine.

Patreon has memberships, chatting and a shop (which you can also use for tips)

Ko-fi also has memberships, chatting, tips and a shop.

And both also have the option of connecting Discord.

Like, cool that you're making a competitor but that's a weird way to market it.
by aw1621107 | 2025-12-23 00:16:09+00:00
The way I understood the bit you quoted was not as a claim that more complex type system = higher abstraction level, but as a claim that a more complex type system = more options for defining/encoding interface contracts using that language. I took their comment as suggesting an alternative to the typical higher/lower-level comparison, not as an elaboration.

As a more concrete example, the way I interpreted GP's comment is that a language that is unable to natively express/encode a tagged union/sum type/etc. in its type system would fall on the "less complex/less power to define abstractions" side of the proposed spectrum, whereas a language that is capable of such a thing would fall on the other side.

> which includes not only the contract of the interface expressed in the type system, but also informally in the documentation

I also feel like including informal documentation here kind of defeats the purpose of the axis GP proposes? If the desire is to compare languages based on what they can express, then allowing informal documentation to be included in the comparison renders all languages equally expressive since anything that can't be expressed in the language proper can simply be outsourced to prose.
by BeetleB | 2025-12-23 00:16:20+00:00
> Exactly, you don't know my background, so don't lecture me. Your lecturing comes across as very condescending and, well, privileged.

1. I definitely am privileged.

2. Have you looked in a mirror?

3. You don't need to, as you yourself said: "And that's OK, clearly TFA is aimed at privileged people like us, not most people."

The only thing I have left to say is: Try not to confuse obligations with choices.
by shawnz | 2025-12-23 00:16:28+00:00
Follow the citation: https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/how-utc...

> ... in English the abbreviation for coordinated universal time would be CUT, while in French the abbreviation for "temps universel coordonné" would be TUC. To avoid appearing to favor any particular language, the abbreviation UTC was selected.
by wvenable | 2025-12-23 00:17:03+00:00
> It seems there are many solutions for social media these days, but only one LinkedIn.

I'm not sure that's actually true. We have a lot of different social media applications but they all mostly serve different purposes or different demographics. Where is the direct competition for Facebook? For Instagram? For Reddit? Maybe only Twitter has what could be considered real direct competition in purpose and demographic.
by randerson | 2025-12-23 00:17:06+00:00
I think this understates just how fast modern performance cars have gotten and how unsuitable they are for public roads.

A Ferrari 296GTB sprints from 0-100mph in 4.7s. The 1983 Lamborghini Countach I had a wall poster of as a kid, took 12.1s (and a relatively leisurely 5.4s to get to 60mph). The Ferrari is pulling well over 1G longitudinally during this time, enough to induce tunnel vision in some people and warp your perception of speed and distance.

Compare someone accelerating at full throttle through that tunnel in the Countach versus the 296. The 296 would reach 2-3x the speed the Lambo did by the time they reach the curve where he crashed. Human brains can't process and react to surprises 3x as fast as they could in 1983. Even if they could, at 2x the speed your braking distance increases 4x. No amount of traction control or electronic nannies can make up for this. Nor can the electronics bypass the laws of physics - I think for many they provide a false sense of security.

And while there have been huge improvements in passive safety too, they are tested at speeds like 40mph, not the 90mph+ it is estimated Vince's car was going. This is why Teslas have the highest crash safety ratings there is, while also have the highest rate of fatal accidents.

Not to take away from the tragedy that is Vince's death. I enjoyed many hours playing MoH and CoD as a youth and this is extremely sad news. But as a car enthusiast, I am using this as a sober reminder of how quickly things can go wrong at speed.
by intern108383 | 2025-12-23 00:17:20+00:00
The real question is not 'Why is Bluesky so left-coded,' the real question is 'Why can't the right exist in a social media environment without algorithmic assistance, where people can ignore them'"

The idea that right-wing views only exist because of algorithmic assistance is incorrect. Any online space without explicit censorship will inevitably over time become (at least in part) right wing.
X became right wing, not because Elon tuned the algorithms, but because he unbanned a ton of right-wing people whose views people (including myself) find worth listening to.

Generally, the article's idea that there is a single force from Washington to Beijing through Moscow, involving Big Tech, etc. to conspire against Western European, left-wing liberalism, is simply a way of not acknowledging the reality that this viewpoint is indeed largely a minority view, including increasingly in Western Europe...
by aclimatt | 2025-12-23 00:17:48+00:00
What are we "putting up with" and what problem are you trying to solve? LinkedIn works because it provides value. Competition doesn't just appear for fun; it appears because there is differentiated value to be captured.

So once LinkedIn stops providing the value that gives it its dominance, and/or someone finds a way to deliver more value, you'll see your competition. That's your answer. Seemingly nobody has found a good enough angle or opportunity,

And FWIW, sure the network effect is hard to replace, but not even close to impossible. Just ask the dozens of other social networks that have fallen from greatness. It just means a competitor has to deliver outsize value to overcome the inherent network effect that they're competing with.
by gsf_emergency_6 | 2025-12-23 00:18:25+00:00
Thanks. I felt the tears welling up...

There's a take that revolutions only happen right after things get slightly better, like spring for the suicidal.

(Have been trying to link "individual uber alles" to the macro-nihilistic core of liberalism but nothing has been clicking, including https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46346958 [0])

At the risk of overgeneralizing, women tend to make a healthier (more functional=better moral-injury-compensated) tradeoff between value or values. For men, the "trades" come close to women's Goldilocks zone, but "trading" (finance) will always be the devil. A man will rather be seen in the company of high-class "Trading" than be married to "the Trades".

(Within the technocratic elite, VCs try to make a better tradeoff than Jane Street/RenTech etc, but the national ideology is such that followers of Warren Buffet can still accuse them of leaving value on the table. PG used to talk of "rapacious" finbros but he & Jessica doubling down on Altman is your "supply-side socialism")

[0]top comment: high risk high formal value politics ("war") beat high _informal_ risk high _informal_ value building, family, community ("love"). like how Taleb only gets love (sycophancy, but not really?) from low-bros of the global South-- too much testosterone to make a healthy tradeoff.