MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GMoromisato | 2025-12-09 21:25:54+00:00
This is like worrying about the sun going supernova after you've just discovered fire. Yes, eventually Earth will be reduced to a blackened cinder. And yes, if humans managed to live forever, there would be unforeseen (maybe bad) consequences.

If I get to live to 200, I still won't worry about it. If I get to live to 1,000, maybe I might start to think about it. Fortunately, by then, I will have had 1,000 years of experience to maybe come up with better answers than now.

Can you imagine the hubris of telling someone who has lived for 10,000 years that death is good because you can't think of what you'd do with that time?

Moreover no one is talking about making it impossible to die. No one is going to force you to live forever.

And that's the real problem for the nay-sayers. They know that they don't have to live forever if they don't want to. They just don't want other people to live forever. They want to live in a world where other people die.
by gruez | 2025-12-09 21:26:31+00:00
Switch from "national level" tab to "metro level", and select los angeles for an extreme example. Look at the the figures right of the map, that says "share of SFD units build before 1980 with a land share of" and compare the figures between 2012 and 2024. Just by eyeballing the percentages, it looks like the land share went from 50-60% to 70-80%. This is confirmed if you sum up the figures in a spreadsheet, you go from an average share of 51% to 72%.

You can compare this to overall housing prices in the LA area[1], prices in 2024 is 262.7% of 2012 prices. Suppose you have a $100k house in 2012, that will worth $262k in 2024, an appreciation of $162k. Using the land value percentages above, the land value of the houses are $51k and $188k respectively, an appreciation of $137k. That means 85% of the appreciation was in land, not because building materials got more expensive or whatever.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LXXRSA
by still_grokking | 2025-12-09 21:26:32+00:00
> Lower-level languages don’t have this same problem to the same extent.

Of course they have.

If the computer would directly execute what you write down in what you call "low level language" this would be slow as fuck.

Without highly optimizing compilers even stuff like C runs pretty slow.

If something about the optimizer or some other translation step of a compiler changes this has often significant influence on the performance of the resulting compilation artifacts.
by georgefrowny | 2025-12-09 21:26:36+00:00
> There are few discounts to be had and every single fee is its own battle.

Also if you take a 10% gamble on a strategy to save 50k and it backfires and lands you with a 500k legal bill, that's just the cost of business to a big (or even not that big) company, but it'd be absolutely ruinous to private individuals.
by murat124 | 2025-12-09 21:26:49+00:00
Everything that has a beginning has an end. It would be really cool to live until whenever and realize that given our poor capacity to recollect past events we humans are actually the goldfish of the universe. No death means you only remember hash of events that are so distant in your past which is basically how you felt. After some time of life you start to only remember your feelings without recollecting much details about the events.
by isodev | 2025-12-09 21:27:33+00:00
I know tech bros like to come up with fancy words to make trivial things sounds fancy but as long as it’s a slop out process, it’s vibe coding. If you’re fixing what a bot spits out, should be a different word … something painful that could’ve been avoided?

Also, we’re both “people in tech”, we know LLMs can’t conceptualise beyond finding the closest collection of tokens rhyming with your prompt/code. Doesn’t mean it’s good or even correct. So that’s why it’s vibe coding.
by mxfh | 2025-12-09 21:27:35+00:00
Almost nil?

Websites that started before 2000 tend to stick around and comparably quite well archived.

What has model training to do with SEO, that's outright detrimental to it for the most part.

This is the spec it can guarantee you that's in every large language model thats actually large.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1866

https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html32-20180315/

Why even bring up CSS this was before that.

You can just also learn with the knowledge of 1996

Selfhtml exits it pretty easy to limit the scope of authoring language to a given HTML version and target browser. Your LLM should have no problem with german.

https://wiki.selfhtml.org/wiki/Museum

some other docs:

https://rauterberg.employee.id.tue.nl/publications/WWW-Desig...

Just spec the year and target browser and target standard and you will get something better than just asking for visual accuracy.

The OG prompt is simply poor and loose:

"Your job is to recreate the landing page as faithfully as possible, matching the screenshot exactly."
by asdff | 2025-12-09 21:27:39+00:00
I think it happened more as the players aged and wore out. In the 90s and 2000s I remember it happening pretty commonly although cd or dvd skipping was way worse. A couple years ago we took the old family vcr player out of the parents attic and tested it out. It was a great vcr at the time, sony with all the bells and whistles. But it immediately at the tape and I mean ate it. Had to take it apart and route the tape out myself and I'm pretty sure its ruined the tape. We spent 2 hours on youtube with it taken apart and gave up the project indefinitely.
by keeda | 2025-12-09 21:27:55+00:00
This feels like addressing a point TFA did not make. TFA talks mostly about vibe-coding speeding up coding, whereas your comment is about software development as a whole. As you point out, coding is just one aspect of engineering and we must be clear about what "productivity" we are talking about.

Sure, there are the overhypers who talk about software engineers getting entirely replaced, but I get the sense those are not people who've ever done software development in their lives. And I have not seen any credible person claiming that engineering as whole can be done by AI.

On the other hand, the most grounded comments about AI-assisted programming everywhere are about the code, and maybe some architecture and design aspects. I personally, along with many other commenters here and actual large-scale studies, have found that AI does significantly boost coding productivity.

So yes, actual software engineering is much more than coding. But note that even if coding is, say, only 25% of engineering (there are actually studies about this), putting a significant dent in that is still a huge boost to overall productivity.
by runamuck | 2025-12-09 21:27:56+00:00
Public speaking plus blog posts did more for my career than my advanced engineering degrees. They lead to my past three places of employment. I did a talk or wrote a blog post, posted it to LI and then the decision makers reached out to me. This got me employment at workplaces I loved. I only write/ talk about things I enjoy, and they needed people with skills in the topics I wrote/ talk about. Perfect fit. I highly recommend this approach.
by burningChrome | 2025-12-09 21:28:04+00:00
When the internet was completely booming and Google was taking over the search engine world, I asked my Doctor if he was afraid that people were going to start getting their medical advice from Google.

He basically said, "I'm not worried yet. But I would never recommend someone do that. If you have health insurance, that's what you pay for, not for Google to tell you you're just fine, you really don't have cancer."

Thinking about a search engine telling me I don't have cancer was enough to scare the bejesus out me that I swung in the completely opposite direction and for several years became a hypochondriac.

This was also fodder for a lot of stand up comedians. "Google told me I either have the flu, or Ebola, it could go either way, I don't know."
by pron | 2025-12-09 21:28:22+00:00
The thing is that some imagined AI that can reliably produce reliable software will also likely be able to be smart enough to come up with the requirements on its own. If vibe coding is that capable, then even vibe coding itself is redundant. In other words, vibe coding cannot possibly be "the future", because the moment vibe coding can do all that, vibe coding doesn't need to exist.

The converse is that if vibe coding is the future, that means we assume there are things the AI cannot do well (such as come up with requirements), at which point it's also likely it cannot actually vibe code that well.

The general problem is that once we start talking about imagined AI capabilities, both the capabilities and the constraints become arbitrary. If we imagine an AI that does X but not Y, we could just as easily imagine an AI that does both X and Y.
by tmtvl | 2025-12-09 21:28:35+00:00
Grandia 2 on the PS2 was a lot of fun, it displaced Legend of Dragoon for my favourite battle system in a jRPG. Vagrant Story and Parasite Eve are also pretty neat, but I prefer Grandia 2 and Legend of Dragoon's party-based systems over the single character-based systems of those two.
by orangecat | 2025-12-09 21:28:35+00:00
I'm also against people living forever, but more because it's a way for society to go forward and get rid of old ways of thinking.

Well, I'd like to get rid of the old way of thinking that death is good :p

And can you imagine a world where current leaders are still in power 1000 years later?

Leaders generally don't rule for life in functioning countries, and the mortality of individual Kims has not helped the people of North Korea.

I think of how it'd be something tech billionaires and autocrats would use to oppress us forever.

How are these people currently oppressing you, and how would the existence of longevity treatments make that worse?
by moribvndvs | 2025-12-09 21:28:39+00:00
Living long enough to see everything else die while pseudo-immortals try to fight entropy-particularly with the much worse coming consequences of human civilization borrowing heavily against the ecosystem- is a hell I don’t think I would want to see. Like the author, I’m not opposed to extending a bit, but… I suppose that’s a slippery slope. Today “just a little longer” seems reasonable, and then it will be just a little bit longer, and then a little bit longer after that. I suppose at some point after that you risk becoming little more than your dwindling ego, something of a lich lord or revenant jealously draining the world of life because you’re too afraid to admit: you don’t matter (no one does in the grand scheme of things) and the universe wasn’t designed for immortality or to appease your ego. In the more practical and nearer term, I fear life extension will be more a matter of trading quality of life simply to avoid dying, a form of life support. Doesn’t sound good to me.
by mandevil | 2025-12-09 21:28:42+00:00
Rosalind Franklin would never have gotten a Nobel Prize. She died from cancer in 1958, three years before the Watson, Crick and Wilkins were awarded their prize, and Nobel was very clear that his award could not be awarded posthumously. Only ~three people have gotten posthumous awards, and all of them were alive on February 1st of the year they got the award.

Wilkins (Franklin's boss) taking her data without her permission and sharing it with Watson and Crick so they could jump in at the end and analyze it faster than she did- and then not even put her name on the paper but Wilkins instead!- is truly classic academic evil. However, even if they had actually collaborated and Franklin's name had been on the paper, she would not have gotten a Nobel, due to the ovarian cancer that killed her at age 37.
by jldugger | 2025-12-09 21:28:45+00:00
Perhaps "requirement" was a poor phrasing of the idea. "Feature?"

> Personally, I think devs should embrace some stuff being broken. It's a single player game, it doesn't need balance.

Exactly! Bravely Default & Octopath Traveler's job systems are built around the idea that the system should be breakable. BD2 even has a push-your-luck system that adds a multiplier for one-shotting multiple encounters in a row: you can get like a 50 percent rewards boost from random encounters if your team is able to "go infinite" against the current enemy mobs. And there are skills to remove damage caps, so you know they thought about it.

OT did kinda tone that down some to add the timing and break mechanics; if you land enough hits on enemy weaknesses, they lose their current turn, and go into a stun status next turn (but go first the turn after that, so no stun locking!). But you still get end game builds that max out boost points every turn; you just can't usually one shot bosses.
by redbell | 2025-12-09 21:28:46+00:00
That's a really fun little project that fits perfectly in the soul of HN.

Exactly three years ago, a similar post entitled Show HN: This Hacker News Does Not Exist (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33845946) made it to the front page but it was not AI generated.

I recall commenting (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33847522) with these fake titles:

1- Twitter files for bankruptcy (twitter.com/elonmusk)

2- Apple's new M3 chip outperforms Nvidia H100 (geekbench.com)

3- India to surpass China's GDP by 2025 (scmp.com)

4- Tell HN: I am quitting Hacker News

5- Google to revive Stadia (theverge.com)

6- Japan wins the 2022 FIFA World Cup (espn.com)

7- Hacker News to be acquired by Reddit (twitter.com/paulg)

8- Tesla Roadster hits 1.1 sec acceleration in early tests (electrek.co)

9- Microsoft outbid Adobe and offers $43.6B to acquire Figma

10- Facebook had died at 19 :)
by int_19h | 2025-12-09 21:28:47+00:00
> A large part of the middle class would be priced out of most modern amenities if these would be produced domestically.

Let's assume that this is indeed the case, consider why those amenities are so much more expensive to produce domestically? Mostly it's because of cost of labor - and that is expensive in US because labor has numerous rights and protections. So if we're not producing things here because they would be too expensive otherwise, it rather implies that those cheap modern amenities are subsidized by exploitation of cheap labor elsewhere. And we can do that because borders prevent free flow of labor from those places to here, while "free trade" allows for a free flow of manufactured goods. Which is already a very ethically questionable arrangement, but even leaving that aside, what happens when those other places catch up on labor rights (and cost)? We can't have an economy that indefinitely relies on having people impoverished elsewhere so that they can be hired for pennies to climb out of that poverty. Or, well, I suppose we can if we were willing to actively stymie those societies to ensure they don't catch up - which is even worse.

FWIW I don't think Trump's tariffs are a meaningful step to resolve this problem, and his motivations are certainly not concern for exploited workers. Nevertheless we can't just ignore the problem that he happened to highlight to his own ends.
by slibhb | 2025-12-09 21:28:49+00:00
Why the focus on immortality? I don't want to be immortal but I'd take a few thousand years.

That aside, I think longevity-skepticism is still mostly adaptive. I haven't seen any concrete progress and the people who are true believers are a. getting their hopes up and b. tend to be really gullible/easy to manipulate. We should ideally be skeptical enough to avoid those traps but hopeful enough to pursue genuinely promising research.
by SilverElfin | 2025-12-09 21:28:55+00:00
This is an important topic and exploration. The network is wider than what is portrayed though. All In’s hosts are all complicit in ignoring or propping up what is happening - and by extension their venture firms/partners, and portfolio companies. Brad Gerstner of Altimeter Capital is working with the Trump administration on “Trump accounts”, which is a financial angle of control. Numerous more companies have donated to the ballroom or handed out gold awards to Trump or whatever, again propping up the legitimacy of the administration.
by cogman10 | 2025-12-09 21:30:17+00:00
Yikes.

But I have to say that prompt is crazy bad. AI is VERY good at using your prompt as the basis for the response, if you say "I don't think it's an emergency" AI will write a response that is "it's not an emergency"

I did a test with the first prompt and the immediate answer I got was "this looks like lyme disease".
by xiphias2 | 2025-12-09 21:30:46+00:00
Another poorly written article that doesn't even specify the LLM being used.

Both ChatGPT o3 and 5.1 Pro models helped me a lot diagnosing illnesses with the right queries. I am using lots of queries with different context / context length for medical queries as they are very serious.

Also they have better answer if I am using medical language as they retrieve answers from higher quality articles.

I still went to doctors and got more information from them.

Also I do blood tests and MRI before going to doctors and the great doctors actually like that I go there prepared but still open to their diagnosis.
by ozgung | 2025-12-09 21:31:22+00:00
I think doing your research using search engine/AI/books and paraphrasing your findings is always valuable. And you should cite your resources when you do so, eg. “ChatGPT says that…”

> 1. If I wanted to run a web search, I would have done so

Not everyone has access to the latest Pro models. If AI has something to add for the discussion and if a user does that for me I think it has some value.

2. People behave as if they believe AI results are authoritative, which they are not

AI is not authoritative in 2025. We don’t know what will happen in 2026. We are at the initial transition stage for a new technology. Both the capabilities of AI and people’s opinions will change rapidly.

Any strict rule/ban would be very premature and shortsighted at this point.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-12-09 21:31:38+00:00
> Fiat sometimes doesn’t protect you, but crypto NEVER does, and CAN’T, even in principle.

You're selling your old PC. The buyer pays you with Paypal or a check or some other digital fiat transfer, you give them possession of the PC, then they reverse the charge and steal your money.

That's the thing cryptocurrency protects you from, in the same way and for the same reason as cash does. And if the fiat system would provide that over the internet -- irreversible anonymous cash transfers -- then cryptocurrency would be a lot less useful. But it doesn't, so it's not.
by troyvit | 2025-12-09 21:31:39+00:00
Aider can be a chat interface and it's great for that but you can also use it from your editor by telling it to watch your files.[1]

So you'd write a function name and then tell it to flesh it out.

function factorial(n) // Implement this. AI!

Becomes:

function factorial(n) { if (n === 0 || n === 1) { return 1; } else { return n \* factorial(n - 1); } }

Last I looked Aider's maintainer has had to focus on other things recently, but aider-ce is a fantastic fork.

I'm really curious to try Mistral's vibe, but even though I'm a big fanboi I don't want to be tied to just one model. Aider lets tier your models such that your big, expensive model can do all the thinking and then stuff like code reviews can run through a smaller model. It's a pretty capable tool

Edit: Fix formatting

[1] https://aider.chat/docs/usage/watch.html
by BobBagwill | 2025-12-09 21:32:07+00:00
Vibe Coding is just a stepping stone to No Coding.

No one (other than computer people) wants computers and software, they want results.

This generation of AI will be used to bootstrap the next generation of AI.

Programmers getting excited about vibe coding is like candlemakers getting excited about installing electric lights in their shops, so they can make more candles!
by 827a | 2025-12-09 21:32:18+00:00
I would bet significant money that, within two years, it will become Generally Obvious that Apple has the best consumer AI story among any tech company.

I can explain more in-depth reasoning, but the most critical point: Apple builds the only platform where developers can construct a single distributable that works on mobile and desktop with standardized, easy access to a local LLM, and a quarter million people buy into this platform every year. The degree to which no one else on the planet is even close to this cannot be understated.
by kens | 2025-12-09 21:32:18+00:00
The microcode was so huge that they had to use a semi-analog ROM that held two bits per transistor by using four transistor sizes.

As far as the layout, the outputs from the microcode ROM are the control signals that go to all parts of the chip, so it makes sense to give it a central location. There's not a lot of communication between the upper half of the chip (the bus interface to the 8086 and memory) and the lower half of the chip (the 80-bit datapath), so it doesn't get in the way too much. That said, I've been tracing out the chip and there is a surprising amount of wiring to move signals around. The wiring in the 8087 is optimized to be as dense as possible: things like running some parallel signals in silicon and some in polysilicon because the lines can get squeezed together just a bit more that way.
by CodingJeebus | 2025-12-09 21:32:45+00:00
Perhaps he is happy. In my personal experience, people who aim to tackle these kinds of large problems do so out of an inability to let go and accept life as it is. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but founders tended to be some of the most unhappy and unsettled people I have known in my life, they were just really good at channeling that lack of acceptance into their work and lives.

My hope for anyone who dedicates their lives to this kind of work are able to let go if they reach their deathbed without a solution, because if they can't, that would be a deeply painful way to leave this world.
by godelski | 2025-12-09 21:33:05+00:00
Not only that but in the academic world 20 papers with 50 citations is worth more than one paper with 1000. Even though the total citation count is the same the former gives you an h-index of 20 (and an i-10 of 20) but the latter only gives you an h-index of 1 (ditto for i-10).

Though truthfully it's hard to say what's better. All can be hacked (a common way to hack citations is to publish surveys. You also just get more by being at a prestigious institution or being prestigious yourself). The metric is really naïve but it's common to use since actual evaluating the merits of individual works is quite time consuming and itself an incredibly noisy process. But hey, publish or perish, am I right?[0]

[0] https://www.sciencealert.com/peter-higgs-says-he-wouldn-t-ha...
by red-iron-pine | 2025-12-09 21:33:18+00:00
1) that's mostly mining, or oil & gas, or the like and usually needs bodies on site. NOC folks and developers aren't flying to Outer Nowhere to type C# in a poorly air conditioned sea-can.

2) FIFO is rarely 2 days in office 3 at home, it's 2 weeks on site and 1 week off -- or similar. Many day stretches. "once a month, etc." is far more common.

3) FIFO to major cities like Perth is more workable simply because the airport and infrastructure are there. It's a shorter flight to somewhere like Carnarvon, West Australia, but they literally don't have the aiport size or housing capacity.