MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by salawat | 2025-12-09 15:06:52+00:00
Yepper. Trail of Tears, German/Japanese internment are all primary education topics. Now interestingly, I don't think Bush has made it into the history books yet, but I don't have kids, so can't verify current day education materials.

What I find interesting is the bits we leave out. Like we touch on the Banana Republics, but the annex of Hawaii and how that was skulduggerously done is completely skimmed over.
by kakacik | 2025-12-09 15:07:02+00:00
There are tons of devs in same bracket, just not the most vocal ones. I could be described as one of them. In most corporations big enough, this is the only way to keep doing development instead of management, unless they have the grow-or-get-fired mentality.

As soon as I would step up one more level, I would be often responsible for team deliveries. Another step and team may not get bigger but various political pressures grow immensely, its much easier to get fired there, dealing with various types of sociopaths is semi-constant. While compensation not that much. And most work time would be spent on meetings and working in MS Office products, not that much development, hardly any creative work.

At the end its just an empty label that is up to you to consider for its worth, to join the rat race or not. Even with my lower position I've managed (rather successfully) teams when needed. I get cca same compensation as 2 levels above with less tenure at the company, way more than any peers and in highest paid region in Europe. I get 10 weeks of paid leave by company due to working on 90% contract. So what is there to strive for - much higher daily stress? Having after-work or weekend calls? Unpaid overtime/weekend work that come with higher positions, although required rarely? Work moving into boring endless calls and discussions, 0 creativity unless you consider churning out excel spreadsheet or powerpoints a creative endeavor? Hardly achievements, rather destructive failures.

No thank you, if I can make the choice. Quality of life, happiness and all that.
by jszymborski | 2025-12-09 15:07:07+00:00
It's also already used for language modelling:

MLM is masked language modelling, another phrase for training models on the cloze task. It's the most common way to train encoder-only models.

CLM (causal language modelling) is the other common task where you autoregressively predict the next token given the previous ones. It's the most common way to train decoder-only models.
by hansmayer | 2025-12-09 15:07:14+00:00
> There's lots of psychological and anthropological studies behind the fact that most experts in various fields excel due to pattern recognition not reasoning.

Pattern recognition in experts comes from combination of theoretical understanding and a lot of practical problem solving experience (which translates into patterns forming in way of neural paths) - not the other way around. If you dont understand the problem you are solving, then yes maybe you'll be able to throw a pattern at it and with a bit of luck solve it (kinda like how LLMs operate), but this will not lead to understanding. Memorising patterns isolated from theoretical backgrounds is not something that will create an expert in a field.
by jack_tripper | 2025-12-09 15:07:26+00:00
When you put all the points on a graph and they form a line, what more "evidence" do you need?

Your request for evidence reminds me when the 3 telco operators in my country raised their prices simultaneously on the same day, and the nation's anti cartel watchdog said they found no evidence of price fixing lol

Just because the system is corrupt, incompetent or ineffective at finding evidence, doesn't mean there isn't collusion going on.
by netdevphoenix | 2025-12-09 15:07:50+00:00
Maybe not 90% but everyone can see the signs in the horizon.

The tale goes like this: one day visual arts got commoditised to the point any given visual artwork could be obtained for virtually free digitally. This has been the case for centuries. The aural arts (see records of spoken poetry, podcasts, music) have been commoditised for a long time. Full commodisation might never been happen (ie you can still work in the field) but it is undeniable that it has had a massive impact in their respective fields. Getting a Picasso-like painting might not be quite possible but we are getting quite there, same with music.

The same is coming for devs.

Devving is still far away but it doesn't really take that much to produce a significant impact in the field. The percentage of devs who can be able to get late 10s salaries will be gradually diminishing over time. This is what early stage commodisation looks like.
by RHSeeger | 2025-12-09 15:08:12+00:00
> If you agree on that, now imagine that you added another project to the fixtures. Has the testing power of the tests changed just because fixtures have been changed?

No, _but_ (and this is a big _but_) you're not testing the contract of the method, which (presumably) is to return all and only active projects.

Testing that it returns _some_ of the active methods is useful, but there are cases where it won't point out an issue. For example, image

- Over time, more tests are added "elsewhere" that use the same fixtures

- More active projects are added to the fixture to support those tests

- The implementation in the method is changed to be faster, and an off-by-one error is introduced; so the last project in the list isn't returned

In that ^ case, testing that _some_ of the active projects are returned will still return true; the bug won't be noticed.

Not directly related to the above, but I'll note that I would also split 2/3 into different tests.

- Make sure all projects returned are active

- Make sure projects returned includes all active projects

I think that's more of a style thing, but I _try_ to stick to each test testing one and only one thing. I don't always do that, but it's a rule of thumb for me.
by giraffe_lady | 2025-12-09 15:08:16+00:00
The space isn't discarded except in monospaced fonts. All the main computer layout engines (web browser, word processor) will add additional spacing there. It's also where line-width and inter-word padding are corrected first so often ends up being at least as big a space as you'd get double-spacing anyway.

Monospace fonts aren't considered generally more readable by people who make or work with fonts. Their particular strength is in reducing character ambiguity and preserving vertical alignment. But "readability" is subjective and depends on particulars of the specific font and of course personal expectation and preference. I find them almost always less readable than a good proportional serif font, except for code.
by fzeroracer | 2025-12-09 15:09:11+00:00
I think this is a great example of how even in a 'free market' the notion of price transparency is easily cheated and results in behavior that is clearly anti-consumer. Much like how the push for algorithmic pricing has resulted in cartel-like behavior for apartments, we should view this the same way.

It's all so very tiresome, especially because you have to use whatever shitty app grocery stores foist upon you and/or give up your personal data in order to get the real prices on products. There were multiple times I noticed where I was being shared 1.5x to 2x for the same goods simply because I refused to give up my personal data, and eventually I relented because I needed to save the money.
by matty22 | 2025-12-09 15:09:13+00:00
Call me crazy, but those icons are not different enough to be quickly readable. If the open and close icons on the elevator were distinct from one another words wouldn't be necessary, but the exact same icons rotated 180 degrees are indeciperable at a glance.

It takes noticeable processing time to know which is which. Especially with a button that you need to hit as quickly as possible to hold the door for someone, those icons should be widely different from one another. I can't count the number of times I've meant to hit the open button to hold the elevator for someone only to accidentally hit the close button just in time to make eye contact with the person we've left behind.
by nottorp | 2025-12-09 15:09:19+00:00
Hmm speaking of that, what happened to google's Chromecast?

I couldn't care less about the "casting" functionality but I use the (3rd gen?) version with a remote as a netflix/hbo/prime terminal. I know it's google, but it works much better than any random android box.

Problem is, what do I do when it dies? I heard they discontinued it and they put out a more expensive box out instead. Or did they, being google, cancel it?
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-12-09 15:09:19+00:00
> If there was one that i would put that could go head to head and possibly pull it off would be Corel[1], their suite is pretty comprehensive

Or SoftMaker ([1], [2]) with their product SoftMaker Office ([3], [4]).

[1] https://www.softmaker.com/en/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoftMaker

[3] https://www.softmaker.com/en/products/softmaker-office

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoftMaker_Office
by yakattak | 2025-12-09 15:09:35+00:00
> The agentic coding tools have got extremely good at converting business logic specifications into pretty well written APIs and services.

I haven’t experienced this at all. They can do okay with greenfield services (as the author mentioned). However it’s often not “extremely good”. It’s usually “passable” at best. It doesn’t save me any time either. I have to read and audit every line and change it anyway.
by toyg | 2025-12-09 15:09:51+00:00
> I don't understand how that kind of clause can be legal.

Arguably they promote a chilling effect around acquisitions, which does help competition: "don't try to buy something unless you're prepared to deal with a possible fallout" should result in fewer attempts at consolidating dominant positions.

I'd almost be tempted to posit that such a clause should become mandatory for deals over a certain threshold (e.g. $1bn), with amounts determined according to certain parameters.
by debugnik | 2025-12-09 15:09:55+00:00
That's very different from what I thought you were arguing for in your top comment, though: a computer-use agent proving the app is usable through a screen reader alone (and hopefully caching a replayable trace to not prompt it on every run).

Guidepup already exists, if people cared they'd use it for tests with or without LLMs. Thanks for showing me this tool BTW! I agree testing against real readers is better than using a third-party's heuristics.
by domano | 2025-12-09 15:10:00+00:00
Last week i cancelled my Jetbrains sub after a decade of daily driving it. I just cant take the performance issues anymore. Across 5 different machines all kinds of actions would just take ages and it got worse every year.

Moving to Apple Silicon made it bearable for a few months but somehow Jetbrains manages to get slow even on a M3 Max with 36GB RAM.

Ive been fiddling with configs for years, i tried everything since i was a Jetbrains diehard.

Instead of trying to catch up to other AI editor they should get back to their core and make it possible to use Jetbrains on medium sized Monorepos with multiple languages.

I was hyped when i heard they would release a standalone git product, but then they scrapped it!

In the end i was only dependent on it for debugging and my usual git workflow.

I now switched to zed and gitkraken, i will figure out a new debugging workflow, ill never wait 5 minutes for a simple search action again
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-12-09 15:10:02+00:00
Oh, I agree. What I found funny is the gut reaction of many other readers that downvoted the message (it's greyed out for me at time of writing this comment). Especially given that the user clearly mentioned that it was LLM generated, while also being cheeky with the "transformer" pun, on a ... transformer topic.
by oersted | 2025-12-09 15:11:14+00:00
Things happen, some things happen before other things. We count time by using clocks, they tick at regular rates with respect to other things happening.

If a clock is in a frame of faster time, it will tick faster, its ticks will happen before, than an identical clock in a frame of slower time.

That’s how I see time, it is the ordering of physical events, which we can trivially observe.

You keep trying to explain time as if it was a thing of its own, like a water flow, but it is no more than an abstraction to indicate how some things happen before others, and they definitely do, at least in the same frame.

This analogy is insufficient as well of course. For instance, if we have two clocks, we move one onto a faster time frame for a while and then bring it back, it is as if the clock was an ordered stack of physical events, the ordering between the events in either stack is tricky to determine, but you could clearly observe that one stack was more filled than the other.

I am not trying to get into a fight, this is simply a welcome exercise that forces me to crystallize my own understanding, hope it is for you too.
by Covenant0028 | 2025-12-09 15:11:33+00:00
To reinforce that point: we've got the world's most prominent AI promoting company (MSFT), that has finally realized that Windows Explorer is too slow to start.

And this company, with all the formidable powers of AI behind them, can find no way to optimize that other than pre loading the app in memory. And that's for a app that's basically a GUI for `ls`
by dada216 | 2025-12-09 15:11:38+00:00
The question about what sort of "cognition" is going on in the simulated neural network of the current LLMs is an open one.

Saying "it's not intelligence" it's the wrong framing.

also, there are fully open LLM, including the training data.

He was right on a number of things, very important ones, but he's loosing it with old age, as we all will.
by lkey | 2025-12-09 15:11:40+00:00
Ridiculous counterfactual. The LLM started failing 100% of the time 60! orders of magnitude sooner than the point at which we have checked literally every number.

This is not even to mention the fact that asking a GPU to think about the problem will always be less efficient than just asking that GPU to directly compute the result for closed algorithms like this.
by levmiseri | 2025-12-09 15:12:06+00:00
Fully agree on the importance of taking notes and writing in general [1], but I absolutely do not want to train a model on my texts or attempt a personal style imitation. I can't fully put my finger on why exactly other than that it feels icky and that it would hinder my long-term writing quality rather than help it.

[1] I made an app to be my lifelong companion for this: https://kraa.io/about – No AI integration.
by bena | 2025-12-09 15:12:12+00:00
Oh, that's not really related to turnover.

Bread/snack cakes (Little Debbie, the bakery also does bread), chips, soda, and liquor/beer are typically handled by vendors. Coca-Cola has a guy come out and stock the Coca-Cola products. Frito-Lay has a guy handle the Frito-Lay products. Etc. They don't work for the store in any capacity.

Vendors typically come during the normal operating hours of the store. Bread guys like to be early in the morning. Chip and soda guys have routes and they'll get to you depending on how the rest of their route goes.

As for other stock, for the grocery side, the distribution center usually palletize stock based on aisle. And the pallets come shrinkwrapped on a truck that arrives at the store between 8 and 10. Someone from the store unloads the pallets from the truck into the warehouse. Once the truck is unloaded, they head back to the distribution center. At the store, the pallets are then staged near their respective aisles and workers restock the shelves overnight.

On the general goods side, the stock is loose in the truck, and a team of people unload the truck and palletize it based on department. Then those pallets are staged in the department for stocking by the overnight crew.

Source: my first job was with WalMart. I worked day stock in a few departments on both the grocery and general goods sides. I worked unloading the trucks on the general goods side. I also worked overnight on the general goods side. I've been involved with a good portion of the store side of the restocking. So all of this information is at least 20 years old, some things may have changed. But I've seen the vendors still while I'm shopping, so the broad strokes likelys till apply.
by Kamilbenkirane | 2025-12-09 15:12:19+00:00
Hi HN, author here.

I built this because I was sick of rewriting my code every time a new model came out.

Right now, if you want to switch from OpenAI to Anthropic, you have to rip out client.chat.completions.create and replace it with client.messages.create, change how you handle the response, and update your error handling. It’s a mess.

Celeste fixes this by standardizing the I/O layer. It gives you one strictly-typed Pydantic interface for everything—Text, Image, Video, Audio, you name it.

It’s not a framework (no agents, no chains, no magic). It’s just a unified HTTP client for 14+ providers so you can actually swap models by changing a config string.

Would love to hear what you think of the API structure.

Docs: https://docs.withceleste.ai
by jacquesm | 2025-12-09 15:12:31+00:00
I think a key insight from your comment is that in order to be able to verify whether the stuff we allow into our brains gets permanent billing we test it against our world model and if it does not fit we reject it. LLMs accept anything in the training set so curation of the training set is a big factor in the quality of the LLMs output. That's an incremental improvement, not a massive leap forward but it definitely will help to reduce the percentage of bullshit created.
by subscribed | 2025-12-09 15:12:52+00:00
It was made available in the end of OCTOBER in the special security preview channel.

GoS has already deployed patches to some of the vulnerabilities you'll read about in January.

All the partnering vendors have access to the same bulletins.

Multi-billion companies like Samsung or Google had access to that since AT LEAST October. They chose to release these patches late. Some will release these patches months form now. Some, perhaps never.

So, the tiny team wins.
by rsynnott | 2025-12-09 15:13:30+00:00
> That makes me wonder how much force these robots can exert, and if they can accidentally hurt people.

Definitely. This thing weighs 60kg. You don't want it to fall on you.

(This is actually one of a number of things that makes me suspect that this isn't a real product or even intended to be a real product. It's too heavy and hard; it would simply not be safe for humans to be around. There are a couple of companies who seem to be gearing up to actually have some sort of limited public release of humanoid robots (generally on a "actually remote operated when doing stuff" basis); they're generally a good bit lighter and with soft coverings (though they still have disclaimers not to let them near kids).)
by sorcercode | 2025-12-09 15:13:38+00:00
this is bittersweet news.

but sigh. Jetbrains really just has no focus.

Fleet came at a time when intellij felt extremely bloated. iirc they had painted themselves into a corner where it was easier to rip the band aid and start anew.

Fleet was supposed to be that promised editor which was snappy and had the power of intellisense + all things we liked about Intellij editors ... but without the terrible glacial bloat. but in a stroke of bad luck and typical lack of focus from Jetbrains, Fleet just didn't get good enough quickly.

I say lack of focus because (like their multiple attempts at AI) Jetbrains also had a lite mode in the start but that didn't work great. then came Fleet. But it was not getting better quickly enough and they changed course to make Fleet their main cross platform editor ... but even that didn't take.

I really am worried for Jetbrains and intellij. In a world where even VScode is having its lunch eaten by Cursor, Jetbrains is quickly getting pushed out of the list of contenders. they've squandered away a lead they once had in a certain niche for code editors.

I personally only pull up Intellij these days when there's some platform specific tool that's built in (like the emulator in Android Studio) or certain Android specific profiling tools, or the debugger.

Otherwise I rarely find myself using Intellij. My usage has dropped precipitously.
What's Next? Clippy Copilot?
by johnnyballgame | 2025-12-09 15:13:49+00:00
I'm sure there's more, but Copilot gave up.

- Microsoft Copilot

- Microsoft Copilot Pro

- Microsoft 365 Copilot

- Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat

- Microsoft Security Copilot

- Microsoft Copilot in Intune

- Microsoft Copilot Studio

- Microsoft Copilot in Edge

- Microsoft Copilot in Windows

- Microsoft Copilot in WhatsApp

- Microsoft Copilot in GroupMe

- GitHub Copilot
by K0balt | 2025-12-09 15:13:54+00:00
I think this used a spinning head, similar to video? The trick would be to use a static head and still record 4 or More digital tracks on a 4mm tape, with enough headroom for robust ECC. I’m pretty sure it could be done at ~kbps with contemporary recording head litho at 8 tracks per mm. That makes 16 tracks per side, 32 for the full 4mm (both sides). It would even be possible to convert existing tapes to digital in one play/pass using a 2 head system, or a read-store-record setup.
by KallDrexx | 2025-12-09 15:14:21+00:00
EVERY DX survey that comes out (surveying over 20k developers) says the exact same thing.

Staff engineers get the most time savings out of AI tools, and their weekly time savings is 4.4 hours for heavy AI users. That's a little more than 10% productivity, so not anywhere close to 10x.

What's more telling about the survey results is they are also consistent in their findings between heavy and light users of AI. Staff engineers who are heavy users of AI save 4.4 hours a week while staff engineers who are light users of AI save 3.3 hours a week. To put another way, the DX survey is pretty clear that the time savings between heavy and light AI users is minimal.

Yes surveys are all flawed in different ways but an N of 20k is nothing to sneeze at. Any study with data points shows that code generation is not a significant time savings and zero studies show significant time savings. All the productivity gains DX reports come from debugging and investigation/code base spelunking help.
by MLgulabio | 2025-12-09 15:14:49+00:00
I have learned a little bit of photoshop and 10 years ago maya too.

But i'm a software engineere by trade and I do not struggle with telling you that this thing has to move left for reason xy, i would struggle with random tools capable of doing that particular thing for me.

And it does not matter here how i did it if the result is the same result.

In Software Engineering this is just not always the case. Because often enough you would need to verify that what you get is the thing you expect (did the report actually take the right numbers) or Security. Security is the biggest risk to all ai coding out there. Security is already so hard because people don't see it, they ignore it because they don't know.

You have so many non functional requirements in software which just don't exist in art. If i need that image, thats it. Most complex thing here? Perhaps color calibration and color profiles. Resolution.

If we talk about 3D it gets again a little bit more complicated because now we talk the right 3d model, right way to rig, etc.

Also if someone says "i need a picture for x" and is happy about it, the risk is less customers. But if someone needs a new feature and tomorrow all your customer data are exposed or the companies product stops working because of a basic bug, the company might be gone a week later.
by tuyiown | 2025-12-09 15:15:00+00:00
> I may have developed some kind of paranoia reading HN recently

My comments being downvoted, pretty rare lately, were about never discussed but legitimate points about AI that I validated IRL. I have no resonance about the way AI is discussed on HN and IRL, to the point that I can't rule out more or less subtle manipulation on the discussions.