MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by axiologist | 2025-12-19 04:11:41+00:00
Interesting perspective on the hard problem:

»Consciousness, on this view, is not a thing to be explained. It is what physical processes look like from the inside — from the perspective of the system that those processes constitute. The hard problem asks how to derive the inside view from the outside view. But you cannot derive one perspective from another any more than you can derive what a building looks like from the south by knowing only what it looks like from the north. Both views are correct. Neither is reducible to the other. And the building exists independently of either.«
by sovietmudkipz | 2025-12-19 04:12:09+00:00
If I understand correctly you're saying you manage hardware yourself (colocate in a data center? Dedicated hosting?) and that gives you an edge in pricing. That's pretty cool, and I think I can see how it could be less expensive to purchase hardware & maintain it rather than renting that compute from a third party. There is obviously the tradeoff of then being responsible for capacity planning for the workloads supported among other downsides and maintaining hardware lifecycle but I wouldn't be surprised to hear this downside is overstated compared to benefits reaped.
by marenkay | 2025-12-19 04:12:16+00:00
Fair point - Microsoft has definitely made it easier for cross-platform deployment with Entra ID, and for many orgs the F3 license math works out.

May I ask, has the fact that the data and service is under US residency and subject to US laws ever been an issue for you? That's the niche I'm trying to understand - whether it's big enough to matter or just an odd edge case.
by sltr | 2025-12-19 04:12:44+00:00
Palmer's tweet said a similar thing and added, "we gave away 11.5 billion build minutes (~$184 million) to support OSS last year".

$184M in profit or cost?

It's called a loss leader, not a gift, and it's a marketing and adoption tactic. They already bought the machines which cost about as much to run idle as at 100% utilization. Might as well put that idle capex and opex to use.

Or just collectively bill OSS the $184M and stop signaling virtue.
by atomicnumber3 | 2025-12-19 04:13:05+00:00
"We're talking about PRs where the submitter has not read the code, doesn't understand it, and can't be bothered to describe what they did and why."

IME, "AI" PRs are categorically that kind of PR. I find, and others around me in my org have agreed, that if you actually do all that you describe, the actual net time savings of AI are often (for a mid-level dev or above) either net 0 or negative.

I personally have used the phrase "baptized the AI out of it" describing my own PRs... Where I may have initially used AI to generate a bunch of the code, looked at it and went "huh neat that actually looks pretty right, this is almost done." Then I generate unit tests. Then I fix the unit tests to not be shit. Then i find bugs in the AI-generated code. Then upon pondering the code a bit, or maybe while fixing the bugs, I find the abstractions it created are clunky, so I refactor it a bit... and by the time I'm done there's not a lot of AI left in the PR, it's all me.
by dang | 2025-12-19 04:13:07+00:00
"You know perfectly well" is already edgy, but when you follow it with "I don't understand the motivation of these $dumb-comment-paraphrase" and then a "like, come on" and a "you're not impressing anyone", you've crossed well into personal attack.

You're a great HN user and commenter and your contributions are much appreciated! I don't want to come across like a bag of bricks but if you would use this feedback to fine-tune a bit, that would be appreciated.

(You may be right that other commenters were breaking the guidelines worse, but we just don't come close to seeing everything, and a lot of what we do see happens by random access.)
by somenameforme | 2025-12-19 04:14:24+00:00
Even more so as the lesson of that story is perhaps the single most important one for people to learn in modern times.

Almost everybody in that book is an awful person, especially the most 'upstanding' of types. Even the protagonist is an awful person. The one and only exception is 'N* Jim' who is the only kind-hearted and genuinely decent person in the book. It's an entire story about how the appearances of people, and the reality of those people, are two very different things.

It being banned for using foul language, as educational outcomes continue to deteriorate, is just so perfectly ironic.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-12-19 04:14:36+00:00
Interesting. Would you be ok disclosing the following:

- Are you ( edit: on a ) paid version? - If paid, which model you used? - Can you share exact prompt?

I am genuinely asking for myself. I have never received an answer this direct, but I accept there is a level of variability.
by ssl-3 | 2025-12-19 04:15:14+00:00
It's great at some things, and it's awful at other things. And this varies tremendously based on context.

This is very similar to how humans behave. Most people are great a small number of things, and there's always a larger set of things that we may individually be pretty terrible at.

The bots the same way, except: Instead of billions of people who each have their own skillsets and personalities, we've got a small handful of distinct bots from different companies.

And of course: Lies.

When we ask Bob or Lisa help with a thing that they don't understand very well, they usually will try to set reasonable expectations . ("Sorry, ssl-3, I don't really understand ZFS very well. I can try to get the SLOG -- whatever that is -- to work better with this workload, but I can't promise anything.")

Bob or Lisa may figure it out. They'll gather up some background and work on it, bring in outside help if that's useful, and probably tread lightly. This will take time. But they probably won't deliberately lie [much] about what they expect from themselves.

But when the bot is asked to do a thing that it doesn't understand very well, it's chipper as fuck about it. ("Oh yeah! Why sure I can do that! I'm well-versed in -everything-! [Just hold my beer and watch this!]")

The bot will then set forth to do the thing. It might fuck it all up with wild abandon, but it doesn't care: It doesn't feel. It doesn't understand expectations. Or cost. Or art. Or unintended consequences.

Or, it might get it right. Sometimes, amazingly-right.

But it's impossible to tell going in whether it's going to be good, or bad: Unlike Bob or Lisa, the bot always heads into a problem as an overly-ambitious pack of lies.

(But the bot is very inexpensive to employ compared to Bob or Lisa, so we use the bot sometimes.)
by eudamoniac | 2025-12-19 04:16:14+00:00
Even if Trump were quite literally a Nazi, he is the elected President. Democracy is important. I don't know how one can simultaneously believe in democracy and believe that everyone who voted for the winning candidate is objectively incorrect. If most voters want to gas the Jews, that is just the will of the people, and that's terrible, but you need to pick in that scenario between a democracy and some other form of government that surpresses the will of the people.

I am of the opinion that Trump is nowhere near bad enough to choose the latter option; we should preserve democracy I think and allow that the majority of voters are not wrong or "too far" right. Yet a whole lot of people seem to be of the opposite opinion.
by grog454 | 2025-12-19 04:16:22+00:00
> Neither was slavery. Was that OK too? And to clarify (though it’s worrying this point needs to be made), I mean morally.

It may well have been morally OK to most people (see: moral relativism), and since you're implying it wouldn't have been OK to you, it's worth pointing out that you probably wouldn't have done anything about it in the relevant time periods.

If you're an American you don't even need to try that hard to make moral relativism visceral: was the displacement (and far worse) of Native American tribes "OK"? I'd say no, but it isn't morally urgent enough to me or the 99%+ of Americans who are unwilling to pack their bags and return the entirety of two continents to the native descendants.
by culi | 2025-12-19 04:16:38+00:00
> If your solution is actually good, it will get adopted eventually...

I used to believe this when I first started in tech. The truth is even something as seemingly innocent as javascript runtimes now have an incredible amount of money behind them. And sometimes even marketing budgets. Deno released a high-production trailer for their 2.0 release last year

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swXWUfufu2w

I've also seen some really cool and well-thought out technologies simply not gain any traction.

The truth is you ultimately do need some big company behind you or major personality writing blog posts to ultimately make it.

Techies don't like to admit it but we're just as reliant on influencers as anyone else.
by nebula8804 | 2025-12-19 04:19:56+00:00
I often wonder what is it that's driving the Chinese to work themselves to death to get this stuff done? Surely there must be some limit. I guess we can see it in the low birth rates, the youth unemployment, and I guess the desire to just survive because there's just so many people there. But still, I just don't get how Chinese just keep going and going. What is their end goal on a person to person level? Are they just going to keep killing themselves for the rest of their lives? What happened to the lie flat movement?
by canyon289 | 2025-12-19 04:20:18+00:00
It depends on a couple of things. If you expect reasoning or frontier level chat abilities then larger Gemma models or Gemini is better.

Another hard constraint is context limit, Gemma 270m is at 32k so if the search results returned are massive then this not a great model. The larger 4b+ Gemma models have 128k, and Gemini token window is in the millions
by rramadass | 2025-12-19 04:20:30+00:00
It sounds like a retake/elaboration on the "Commonality and Variability Analysis" used in Domain Engineering and employed in "Family-Oriented Abstraction, Specification and Translation" (FAST) software engineering methodology.

Commonality and Variability in Software Engineering by James Coplien et al. pdf at - https://www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~schmidt/PDF/Commonality_Vari...
by cookiengineer | 2025-12-19 04:20:59+00:00
Remember the 90s when viagra pills and drug recommendations were all over the place?

Yeah, I use that as a safeguard :D The URLs that I don't want to be indexed have hundreds of those keywords that are leading to URLs being deindexed directly. There is also some law in the US that forbids to show that as a result, so Google and Bing are both having a hard time scraping those pages/articles.

Note that this is the latest defense measurement before eBPF blocks. The first one uses zip bombs and the second one uses chunked encoding to blow up proxies so their clients get blocked.

You can only win this game if you make it more expensive to scrape than to host it.
by Jtsummers | 2025-12-19 04:22:27+00:00
It wasn't flagged, they're shadowbanned. [dead] without [flagged] is not the same as [flagged][dead]. [dead] alone is shadowbanned or maybe mod killed, [flagged][dead] means that it was flagged to death by users.

They (or someone) needs to message the mods about it, it looks like they've been shadowbanned since their first comment 6 months ago.
by foxglacier | 2025-12-19 04:22:31+00:00
It goes even further. Einstein also simplified the writing of tensor equations involving sums (big sigma sum) with Einstein notation by basically dropping the sigma because it's redundant so undefined indices automatically get summed over all their applicable values. It works with nested sums too to make them deceptively simple looking. Add to that the comma subscript for differentiation and you get formulas with just a couple of terms but huge piles of subscripts. I've seen equations in text books that have both subscripts and superscripts on both the left and right of a variable.
by D-Machine | 2025-12-19 04:23:47+00:00
> Typesetting is a big item

I'm calling bullshit. Look at how annoying the template requirements are for authors: https://www.acm.org/publications/authors/submissions, and note the stuff around Word files. Other journals can be much worse.

If any serious typesetting were being done by these journals, simple plaintext, Markdown (or RMarkdown) or minimal basic LaTeX, with, admittedly, figures generated to spec, would be more than enough for typesetters to manage. In fact, if you were doing serious typesetting, you wouldn't want your users doing a bunch of formatting and layout themselves, and would demand more minimal representations of the content only. Instead you have these ridiculous templates. I am not convinced AT ALL.

Do authors submitting to literary agents have to follow such absurd rules? I think not. Can modern blogging tools create beautiful sites with simple Markdown and images? Yes. So why do academic publishers demand so much from authors? IMO because they are barely doing anything at all re: typesetting and formatting and the like.
by Aloisius | 2025-12-19 04:23:57+00:00
Sadly, JustHTML doesn't appear to be truly passing those tests.

It looks like the code doesn't always check whether expected errors in the testsuite match the returned errors - which is rather important to ensure one isn't just incidentally getting the expected output.

So while JustHTML looks sort of right, it'll actually do things like emit errors on perfectly valid html.

Plus, the test suite isn't actually comprehensive, so if one only writes code to pass the tests, it can fail in the real world where other parsers that actually wrote against the spec wouldn't have trouble.

For instance, the html5lib-tests only tests a small number of meta charsets and as a result, JustHTML can't handle a whole slew of valid HTML5 character encodings like windows-1250 or koi8-r - which parsers like html5lib will happily handle. There's even a unit test added by the AI that ensures koi8-r doesn't work, for some reason.
by alemanek | 2025-12-19 04:24:51+00:00
Can’t edit so self reply. Nope this was intentional and it looks like I am about 5-6days late on this one. I didn’t see another post on this here though so hopefully this helps someone.

So just a crappy move from them then. Going to look hard at other options for all future purchases. Hopefully we get a reversal on this customer hostile stuff.
by nebula8804 | 2025-12-19 04:25:09+00:00
A lot of things require sacrifice beyond reasonable means. I see these books on how Apple, Nvidia, or Tesla developed their innovations, its groups of people that are extremely talented and became that talented due to sacrifices from their families/communities that go and sacrifice everything themselves to achieve amazing goals. Some of that resultant wealth goes to them but most goes to the shareholders/tech bros.

Eventually less and less people want to go down this route so we get "people just not having the attitude of getting things done".

The real question is will Chinese people go down that same road or will the fact that there is so much cutthroat competition there keep people in line?
by ajross | 2025-12-19 04:25:56+00:00
I'd say Roblox is absolutely filling that market need. And as mentioned elsewhere, the "animations and games" demographic has moved on in the intervening decades to social media, and tools like CapCut make creating online content easier than it ever has been.

Honestly I think a lot of the Flash mania is just middle aged nerds fondly remembering their youth. The actual tool was a flash in the pan, and part of a much more complicated history of online content production. And the world is doing just fine without it.
by cyphar | 2025-12-19 04:27:17+00:00
SmartOS constructed a container-like environment using LX-branded zones, they didn't create an in-kernel equivalent to Linux's namespaces which it then nested in a zone. You're probably thinking of the KVM port to Solaris/illumos, which does run in a zone internally to provide additional protection.

While LX-branded zones were a really cool tech demo, maintaining compatibility with Linux long-term would be incredibly painful and you're bound to find all sorts of horrific bugs in production. I believe that Oxide uses KVM to run their Linux guests.

Linux has always supported nested namespaces and you can run Docker containers inside LXC (or Incus) fairly easily. Note that while it does add some additional protection (in particular, it transparently adds user namespaces which is a critical security feature most people still do not enable in Docker) it is still the same technology as containers and so kernel bugs still pose a similar risk.
by adamzwasserman | 2025-12-19 04:28:53+00:00
You are conflating all state into a big undifferentiated soup.

I reason about state differently, Here are my axioms:

1. There is no such thing as "state".` There is user/ui state, there is cache state, there is db cursor state, etc. trying to manage all of that as big undifferentiated ball is not proper separation of concerns.

2. what I call User State is the user's exceptions that they will find things "as they left them". If as a user, I do a pager refresh, I expect that my user preferences for colors and fonts will still be there. that the sorting on the table I was looking at will still still be there, that the filters I had applied to the table are still there. That is I was editing a record but had not saved, I will still be editing that record without data loss on screen but still not saved to the db (unless the app is explicitly autosave). In a word: the user state is what the user can see.

3. Ideally my User State has a single source of truth, the user can always confirm it by looking at it, and is therefore IN the front end.

4. Most, if not all, other state is stored on the server. things like the user's auth state is a -backend- concern, and should NOT be stored in the frontend.

5. class-oriented programming is extremely difficult to manage: as I like to say, every class is a petri dish for state corruption. I prefer pure functions on the backend for the reason I outline ion the dataos.software blog articles.

Pure functions are mostly deterministic (especially if you avoid floats). So you can not only count on getting the same results for the same query, you can cache them too. And you can test them trivially. Integration test? What's that?

When you capture the User State from the DOM (using a manifest so that you do not need to capture the whole DOM) and send it to the pure function on the back end, you have a perfect event source pattern. Not only can I tell you exactly who and what triggered a particular piece of html being sent o the screen, I can rewind and reply like a tape recorder.

BTW, I have no hate for React. There are some things I think it does better than any other option. I was a core member of the React Studio team (expired cert on the site but safe to visit for archeological purposes).
by SuperNinKenDo | 2025-12-19 04:28:58+00:00
It's just the standard. So it self ratifies. It is quite possibly one of the worst options though given how many important language features are lost in it.

Cantonese used to be the preferred, and probably is to some, but even that is far from ideal and was chosen because while it preserves more important distinctions, it also happens to be/have been a very prominent Chinese language, with a moderate level of standardisation. It wasn't chosen purely on its linguistuc merits over others.

I can't remember who it was but there's someone out there who uses a fusion of Cantonese and Hokkien, where they pronounce the initial from one and then the coda from the other or something, though I can't remember which way around they did it.

Really depends on your priorities I guess.
by ianstormtaylor | 2025-12-19 04:29:13+00:00
So, just to make it clear… you define good art by “whether the artist is any good at art”.

Illuminating…

——

For anyone who’s interested in a slightly more nuanced take on how people in the Middle Ages perceived of “art” — and how different that notion was to how we perceive it today — Forgery, Replica, Fiction by Christopher Wood [1] is a really interesting read.

Here’s the last sentence of the Goodreads summary, which describes the major transition in thinking:

“… Ultimately, as forged replicas lost their value as historical evidence, they found a new identity as the intentionally fictional image-making we have come to understand as art.”

[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3921524-forgery-replica-...
by navaed01 | 2025-12-19 04:30:48+00:00
Fundamentally how is this any different from what Google or Meta or Comcast or AT&T do? Comcast knows everything that goes to the TV and sells that data. At&T sells your browsing data… Those are services you pay for monthly.

Sure the method is different but it’s the same goal. Company x learns your interests so It can monetize you by selling to advertisers
by true_religion | 2025-12-19 04:31:45+00:00
So, I work for a company that has RTA adult websites. AI bots absolutely do scrape our pages needless of what raunchy material they will find. Maybe they discard it up after ingest, but I can’t tell. There are 1000s of AI bots on the web now from companies big and small so a solution like this will only divert a few scrapers.
by makeitdouble | 2025-12-19 04:32:13+00:00
They have high security, and obfuscating the premises is part of it, but is it really secret in any way ? I mean, we're knowing exactly what they're aiming for and could compare notes at the end of it.

Is it war ? in a "everything is a war" political sense, perhaps, but not in any other sense.

We're left with "massive project" for the analogy, that's kinda weak really.
by hyunhum | 2025-12-19 04:32:46+00:00
Bitcoin Script is non-turing-complete in nature(so no gas issue!), so does Bithoven. Bithoven doesn't extend Bitcoin Script Opcodes(which requires consensus upgrade on the protocol), but inherit and abstract for the expressiveness. Moreover, it supports static analysis to cache some known security bugs.

Even if limited nature, there are many applications of smart contract like hashed-time lock contract, inheritance and multisig contract! You can see examples: https://github.com/ChrisCho-H/bithoven/tree/main/example

I would be glad to anyone who would add example bithoven code!
by jpgvm | 2025-12-19 04:32:57+00:00
Yeah I think it's likely they get an EUV machine working but with less efficiency than ASML just because of how long it takes to tune these beasts and work out all the kinks.

The big brain move is to try leap-frog the whole thing with XFEL. Smaller wavelength, way brighter source, no vaporized tin particulate, etc. It's a much bigger lift, new optics, new resists, etc. So a completely brand new supply-chain from scatch but with no competitors on that tech yet and low will for Western companies to try compete on it because they need to get money out of existing EUV tech first.

This is very similar IMO to Chinese auto manufacturing. Their ICE cars never really did meet the same standards as European or Japanese manufacturers despite JVs etc.

However EVs and green-tech are analagous to the XFEL path, they built from scratch and leapt over the competition that was happy to sit on it's existing profitable tech instead.
by eric-p7 | 2025-12-19 04:34:08+00:00
This needs more attention than it's getting. Perhaps if you made some changes to the landing pages could help?

"outperforms the fastest JSON libraries (that make use of SIMD) by up to 120x depending on the benchmark. It also outperforms schema-only formats, such as Google Flatbuffers (242x). Lite³ is possibly the fastest schemaless data format in the world."

^ This should be a bar graph at the top of the page that shows both serializing sizes and speeds.

It would also be nice to see a json representation on the left and a color coded string of bytes on the right that shows how the data is packed.

Then the explanation follows.