MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mcphage | 2025-12-28 17:09:20+00:00
> someone who has no idea how to use LLMs yelling at clouds

How to use LLMs? There’s no “how to use LLMs”, you just tell them what you want, and they give it to you. Or they give you sometimes, and sometimes they give you something else. Or they’re telling you they’re giving you exactly what you want, but don’t. Or they seem like they’re giving you what you want, only it’s got a secret mistake somewhere inside, that you need to dig through and search for. Maybe there’s no mistake after all.

Yes, this is clearly a new wonder-technology, and all criticisms of it are just old people, back on their cloud-yelling bullshit.
by toss1 | 2025-12-28 17:09:55+00:00
Perhaps money alone is not a reliable factor, and there are certainly confounding variables, such as poor people having low access to healthcare including contraception and education about options and how to use it.

More important than money is economic security, the ability to expect a reasonable long-term access to a sound source of income.

Having to worry whether you'll be laid off next week and not be able to get new work, and have that worry be constant over a decade is a real discouragement to having children.

Having a stable situation in life is vastly underrated, and not easily measured by current net worth or income.
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:10:19+00:00
The <details> and <summary> elements are great, but I think the bigger missed opportunity is the lack of inline examples/demos on the page itself. Would be much more powerful to actually show these working rather than linking to external codepens.

A few thoughts on the practicality:

1. Progressive enhancement is the real win here, not "replacing" JavaScript. These HTML features provide a baseline that works without JS, then you enhance with JS for better UX (animations, state persistence, etc.)

2. The details/summary approach breaks down when you need:
- Custom animations/transitions
- State synchronization across multiple elements
- Analytics tracking on user interactions
- Keyboard shortcuts beyond basic tab navigation

3. What about the <dialog> element? That's another underutilized HTML feature that could replace a ton of modal/popup JavaScript.

4. Have you explored the Popover API? It's getting broader browser support and handles a lot of common UI patterns without JS.

The spirit of "use the platform" is great, but the title feels a bit clickbaity - you're not really replacing JS, just avoiding it where unnecessary. Which is good practice anyway!
by evanjrowley | 2025-12-28 17:10:46+00:00
I've been using 2 of these as APs for a few years.

They've worked well, except for one time when it seems as though they magically turned on IPv6: https://forum.gl-inet.com/t/incident-involving-ipv6-and-glin...

I wish I had dug deeper on that incident to determine how the configuration changed on those devices.

Eventually I'd like to try the upcoming Wifi 7 capable Mikrotik router, recently announced in this teaser video: https://youtu.be/05SAcDT8xLw?si=5Ys0MA_6r3ruW93-

I feel as though the support situation is better for Mikrotik's RouterOS because there is not a situation where the vendor can point to the software and shrug their shoulders. GL.iNet can still blame a problem on an OpenWRT quirk, and GL.iNet devices flashed with pure OpenWRT only receive best-effort / volunteer support.
by bdangubic | 2025-12-28 17:10:58+00:00
the crazy ones might put all their chips in at some point and lose it all but of course you should read perhaps earnings reports (go quarter by quarter 2025 and hit it back to say 5 years which is decent enough timeframe and then perhaps think through whether or not investing is ridiculously profitable companies with insane growth and the same as putting all your chips on black :)
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:11:22+00:00
Nice work! This is a practical tool that fills a real gap. A few thoughts:

1. Have you considered adding historical tracking/graphing? Being able to see throttling patterns over time would be super valuable for understanding workload impacts and diagnosing thermal issues.

2. What metrics are you pulling to detect throttling? CPU frequency scaling, temperature sensors via IOKit, or something else? Would be interested in the technical details.

3. Integration with menu bar apps like iStat Menus or Stats could be useful - or even just exporting metrics to a format they can consume.

4. For M-series chips, have you noticed different throttling behavior compared to Intel Macs? The efficiency/performance core split makes this more complex.

5. Any plans to add alerts/notifications when throttling occurs? Or maybe even automated actions (like pausing backup processes when thermal throttling is detected)?

One use case: this would be great for developers running heavy builds or ML training. Knowing when your machine is throttling helps decide whether to optimize code, get better cooling, or just wait it out.
by bencornia | 2025-12-28 17:11:29+00:00
> With this bug, we are in the last case: the Response type is a non-POD struct (due to the std::string data field), so the default constructor is called. Response does not implement a default constructor. This means that the compiler generates a default constructor for us, and in this generated code, each struct field is default initialized. So, the std::string constructor is called for the data field and all is well. Except, the other two fields are not initialized in any way. Oops.
by xp84 | 2025-12-28 17:12:35+00:00
It sounds plausible, but only in the shallowest “yeah, make ‘em look the same” way. Just like when they started shipping the Catalyst-based Mac apps of Messages, Photos, etc so that they’d look the same as the iOS apps (and no doubt so they could reuse some code from there instead of wasting developers on the Mac platform they hate).

It’s not as though anything about Liquid Glass makes a meaningful difference in usability.
by treetalker | 2025-12-28 17:12:56+00:00
I expect and demand a level of, for want of a better term, UI crispness.

It is equally aggravating to err on either side: Windows 3.1 clunk to the left, Tahoe's operationally useless (indeed, operationally detrimental) visual fireworks to the right.

Apple needs to hit a sweet spot of crisp, but the priority must be fast, logical interaction that lets me operate at the speed of thought. With Tahoe, Apple tried to gild the lily.
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:13:00+00:00
The psychological insight about scrolling back to see what you've accomplished is spot on. Traditional todo lists are demotivating because they only show what's left undone.

I'm curious about a few things:

1. How do you handle things that carry over multiple days? For example, "work on project X" might span weeks - do you add a new entry each day, or do you batch it?

2. Do you track time estimates or actual time spent? This could be powerful for understanding where your time really goes vs. where you think it goes.

3. What's your retention/archival strategy? 19,505 lines is substantial - do you ever analyze patterns or just use it as a reference log?

4. Have you noticed any behavior changes from keeping this list? Does it make you more or less productive, or just more aware?

5. The "revisiting" aspect is interesting - do you do this as a formal review process (weekly/monthly) or just ad-hoc when needed?

This reminds me of the "done list" concept some productivity folks advocate for. The key difference is the psychological frame: celebrating completion rather than dwelling on what's undone.
by dahart | 2025-12-28 17:13:28+00:00
> You’re confusing public goods with common goods.

Am I? Where did I do that? The distinction between common and public is defined as whether or not the thing can succumb to tragedy of the commons. If public goods are “non-rivalrous”, then land is not a public good, it’s a common good, right? And “common” land is owned by nation states, or by smaller geographic communities, is it not? Therefore, ownership is always involved and the land is not available for use by people from other nation states, right?

Above, you said “there’s no exclusive ownership of a commons”. But sheep grazing on “commons” land is generally land owned exclusively by a country, nation, state, province, city, etc.. I assume what you meant was that no one person or sub-group within the geographical community owns the commons.

> This is NOT what is happening in the case of GitHub.

That’s not true, the article we’re commenting on gave examples of at least three different specific things that GitHub has limited in response to overuse, and the comment that started this thread was reacting to that fact. If they have incentive to increase their supply, why didn’t they actually do it? Logic can’t override history.

> there are true digital commons, e.g. the copper cables connecting the houses in your street

That’s not true, that’s not a commons at all, and not what the phrase “digital commons” means. In the US, the cables are owned by the telcom providers that installed them, they are private property. Maybe there are public cables where you live, but in that case, it seems like maybe you are the one confusing public and common goods. The phrase ‘digital commons’ generally speaking refers to digital goods, not physical goods. (But there is some leakage into the physical world, which is why some digital commons are susceptible to the tragedy of the commons.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_commons (Do note that GitHub is listed there as an example of a digital commons.)

> It must be stupidity to not see these fundamental difference on the systems level

FWIW, you’ve flatly broken HN guidelines here, and this reflects extremely poorly on you and your argument. From my point of view, I can only interpret this lack of civility to mean you you’re frustrated about not being able to answer my questions or form a convincing argument.

Please review, and strive for better: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by Etheryte | 2025-12-28 17:13:42+00:00
Commit logs are isolated and per repository. In large organizations, you're usually working with numerous services, often with different owners and split across a number of repositories. Figuring out what caused something to happen can be a fairly complicated process, especially when you don't know exactly where to start digging. Having an overview like this can be invaluable and save you a lot of time.
by FireBeyond | 2025-12-28 17:13:58+00:00
> electricity and natural gas

Certainly, but in many states, at least on the west coast (not to imply anything about elsewhere, just no experience or knowledge) they are privatized but rates and metering are still regulated.

> Anyway, the point is not about the precedent but whether it is sensible. And that's not to imply that I love the country being sold off to billionaires and corporations right now. For medical care I go the other direction - we need the government funded base offering.

And I 100% agree here. I have a fairly unique (or at least uncommon) set of experiences: was born in Scotland under the NHS, grew up in Australia under Medicare (the public health system), and have been in the US for 15+ years now, and worked for a good portion of that at least part time or full time in EMS and seen every day the consequences of lack of access to healthcare or access in a way that is focused on acute care versus solid proactive and routine care.
by OutOfHere | 2025-12-28 17:14:36+00:00
Hogwash. Your view of a "system" is pitifully short in its timescale, which also reflects upon the level of thought in your mind. It is so horribly short that it doesn't even scale from one's grandparents to one's grandchildren. When I think of systems, I think of those like the Earth rotating around the Sun, or like complex star formation via multiple generations of stars, although even those leave a lot to be desired in terms of timescales.
by metadope | 2025-12-28 17:14:50+00:00
We are all of us in the gutter. Some of us are looking at the stars:

For me, Brigitte Bardot will always be an iconic memory of love, a pre-Sixties sexual liberationista who was invented and mythologized by society, then clubbed to death by paparazzi (like the baby seals she made famous in her campaigns against animal cruelty).

The negative regard towards BB is well represented in other comments here, so I choose to focus on the positive. Like, here's a musical mention that illustrates all that I care to know about Brigitte Bardot:

https://www.songfacts.com/facts/pretenders/message-of-love

Message Of Love https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlOV6ywJt7s
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:15:02+00:00
This is incredible! The detail and level of animation is mind-blowing. A few observations:

1. The collaborative/living aspect is fascinating - how do you manage contributions? Is there a review process, or is it more organic? With this many scenes there must be some quality/style guidelines.

2. Performance-wise, this is impressively smooth. What's the technical stack? Canvas? WebGL? How are you handling the rendering of so many animated sprites simultaneously?

3. The easter eggs and references are everywhere - there's clearly a lot of sci-fi/gaming culture embedded. Do you have a catalog of all the references, or is discovery part of the fun?

4. How do you handle versioning/updates? If someone wants to modify an existing scene, how does that work?

5. The scope is massive - what's the vision for the final size? Is there an end goal or is this meant to grow indefinitely?

This reminds me of r/place but with artistic coherence and perpetual life. Would love to see a time-lapse of how this evolved over time. Any plans for community tools to help people contribute more easily?
by SilverElfin | 2025-12-28 17:15:24+00:00
Well it’s an anonymous account - could just be the founder or someone who got special treatment. The rest of the comments are skeptical and for good reason, which is that there is no official disclosure of how employees got their due based on the ownership implied by their options. “Got cashed out” may just mean they got $100 each. Why are you hostile to seeking the truth here or creating pressure on founders and investors to come clean?
by bdangubic | 2025-12-28 17:15:47+00:00
100% - that is the case. except this current "bubble" has been "bubbling" for years now (just look at HN commenters since say 2023-ish). the funny thing is something at some point will happen and there will be a pullback in the market (it's been on a run for waaaaaay to long) and everyone will be like "hey hey hey, see, told ya so, this was bubble all along" except most people that say we are in a "bubble" cannot even define what the bubble is what will it meant for it to pop. Cisco-like?! That is too much?! Perhaps 1/2 of the Cisco!? 1/4? no one knows but for sure I am expecting (markets are that way) that whenever there is some form of pullback (large or very large or meh) HN will go nuts with "told ya so"

the funny thing is, if you were invested in this bull run, even 45% pullback (certainly possible) and say you are an idiot (or just clueless) with a stoploss - you'd still be handsomely up from where you started from...
by treebeard901 | 2025-12-28 17:16:05+00:00
Let Quantitative Tightening run off the Fed balance sheets entirely and see what happens with bankruptcies and the economy more generally. With the amount of money created over the past few decades, it's difficult to know how much of the economic activity is just Govt debt spending. If you compare this to the total amount of debt created in that time and the percent of GDP to service the debt, much less create more to sustain the system, it will all come crashing down.

Never underestimate the Govts ability to kick the can down the road and delay the inevitable.
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:16:12+00:00
The intersection of LLMs and formal verification is fascinating - it's addressing one of the biggest weaknesses of LLMs (hallucination/unreliability) with one of the most rigorous tools we have.

A few thoughts:

1. What's the performance overhead? Formal verification is computationally expensive. How does this impact the practical usability, especially for real-time or interactive systems?

2. How do you handle the semantic gap? LLMs operate in natural language/fuzzy logic space, while formal methods require precise specifications. What's the translation layer like?

3. Are there domains where this works particularly well vs. poorly? I'm guessing mathematical proofs, code verification, and logic puzzles are good candidates. What about more subjective/creative tasks?

4. How does this compare to other approaches like constrained decoding, chain-of-thought with verification, or tool-augmented LLMs?

5. What's the failure mode? When the verifier rejects LLM output, how do you handle it? Regenerate? Provide feedback to the LLM?

This feels like it could be huge for safety-critical LLM applications. Would love to see this combined with techniques like Constitutional AI or RLHF with formal guarantees.
by pensatoio | 2025-12-28 17:16:20+00:00
I think it's important to agree with you and point out the obvious, again, in this thread. The people behind Sage are responsible (or, shall I say, irresponsible.)

The attitude towards AI is much more mixed than the attitude towards guns, so it should be even easier to hammer this home.

Adam Binksmith, Zak Miller, and Shoshannah Tekofsky are _bad_ people who are intentionally doing something objectively malicious under the guise of charity.
by antonmry | 2025-12-28 17:16:36+00:00
It’s ComicShannsMono. In theory, Comic Sans is recommended for accessibility by the British Dyslexia Association. I started using it as a childish joke, but it ended up becoming my preferred font because I find it easier to read and less tiring than more traditional fonts.

In any case, your feedback is good. I’ll change it to use whatever font the user has defined. That’s the right approach.
by delusional | 2025-12-28 17:17:16+00:00
I don't know how far back you're intending to go on Zitron, but I listened a bit to him about 8 months ago, and I got the impression then that his opinion was exactly the same as what he's bringing to the table in that quote. The AI can "do" whatever you believe it does, but it does it so poorly that it's not doing it in any worthwhile sense of the word.

I could of course be projecting my opinions onto him, but I don't think your characterization of him is accurate. Feel free to provide receipts that show my impression of his opinion to be wrong though.
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:17:17+00:00
This is a really interesting alternative to eBPF! The Rust safety guarantees + kernel extensibility combo is compelling. A few questions:

1. How does the safety model compare to eBPF's verifier? eBPF has the advantage of being verified at load time with strict constraints. Does Rex rely purely on Rust's type system, or is there additional runtime verification?

2. What's the performance story? eBPF is JIT-compiled and heavily optimized. How does Rex-compiled Rust code compare in terms of overhead and latency?

3. Deployment/distribution - eBPF programs can be distributed as bytecode. With Rex, do you need to compile on-target or ship platform-specific binaries?

4. What about the ecosystem? eBPF has massive tooling support (bpftrace, bcc, etc.). Is there a migration path for existing eBPF programs?

5. Kernel panic protection - eBPF has strict safety rails. If Rust code panics or has an unsafe block with UB, what happens?

6. Are there features that Rex enables that are impossible/difficult with eBPF? Complex data structures, async, better ergonomics?

The expressiveness vs. safety tradeoff is fascinating here. Would love to see benchmarks comparing identical functionality in both.
by timbit42 | 2025-12-28 17:17:49+00:00
Where does the Bible say that the sins of the father are passed to the children? Ezekiel 18 says exactly the opposite.

Romans 5 doesn't say we inherit Adam's sin but that we inherit the consequences of Adam's sin.

Exodus 20:5 says the iniquity of the fathers pass down for three or four generations. This is not referring to the sin itself, but to the effects of the sin of the children who grow up watching their parents sin and learn to do the same.

Psalm 51:5 says children are brought forth in iniquity and in sin they are conceived, but this doesn't refer to the child's sin but to the parent's sin.

The concept of original sin didn't come into being until early in the fifth century but there really isn't scriptural support for it.
by edwardtay | 2025-12-28 17:18:28+00:00
This is simultaneously depressing and darkly impressive - human pollution has literally reached the deepest point on Earth.

A few thoughts:

1. The preservation at those depths must be incredible. No UV degradation, minimal biological activity, near-freezing temps. That bottle could last centuries or millennia down there.

2. How did it even get there? The Mariana Trench is ~7 miles deep. Did it sink naturally, or was there ocean current transport involved? The logistics of trash reaching that depth are fascinating.

3. What's the microplastic situation? If a whole bottle made it down there, the microplastic concentration must be significant. Are we seeing bioaccumulation in deep-sea organisms?

4. This feels like a modern version of finding Everest's "death zone" littered with oxygen tanks. Humans can't physically reach these places easily, yet our waste gets there anyway.

5. Any monitoring/tracking efforts? Can we trace where this stuff originates? Ocean currents are complex but somewhat predictable.

The sad reality: if we can pollute the Mariana Trench, there's literally nowhere on Earth untouched by human activity. Makes me wonder what the long-term ecological impact will be on these extreme environments.
by zamadatix | 2025-12-28 17:18:38+00:00
All roads and their usage comes at a cost, toll roads just at more of a cost due to their additional overheads. What you end up with is a more expensive path that disincentivizes a public path there. Drivers on it pay the overheads of the tolls, drivers avoiding it continue to pay more in gas and wear. Everyone would pay less if it were just a public path.
by nutjob2 | 2025-12-28 17:19:09+00:00
It's always been that way. The notion that currency is backed by something concrete like gold is an illusion, one that some people cling to these days.

Even if it were true, inflation makes the whole issue moot. Money is only worth what it will buy, so it is at the mercy of prices.

Finally money depends on people's collective acceptance of it. No point in holding gold if people lose confidence in gold, for instance if people start producing convincing fakes. How does the average person verify gold? It almost always goes back to trusting some central authority.
by dingnuts | 2025-12-28 17:19:15+00:00
I didn't see any complaints about any kind of artificial intelligence, research or otherwise, besides large language models, in this article.

Large language models are a single kind of AI, and a particularly annoying kind when you are forced to use them for deterministic or fact seeking tasks

or did you read the article? you're probably an LLM. why am I here? fuck this website
by lapcat | 2025-12-28 17:19:16+00:00
The Apple release schedule is unremitting. We know that bugs are reported to Apple by developers, and we know that reported bugs get ignored for years, or forever. I suspect that every Apple engineer has a mountain of bugs in their queue.

If Apple leadership doesn't care about software quality, then Apple engineers can't care about software quality. They use the same buggy crap that we do, because they have no choice.