MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by venturecruelty | 2025-12-03 06:25:06+00:00
I'm really sorry you went through that. For what it's worth, I'm a millennial, and then best shot I had at mentorship was an extremely overworked engineer who oversaw my work for like... a few weeks, maybe? And that was at the very beginning of my career about a decade ago. Then my mentor kinda disappeared to put out a bunch of fires all the time (I eventually became the "put the fires out all the time" guy.) Basically, the experience was neither long nor formal. After that, and at every job since, I basically had to fend for myself. This industry is outright allergic to training people, and it sounds like it's reached a fever pitch. I'm praying I don't get laid off, because on top of having no desire to job hunt in this economy, I don't really know if I care to work anywhere near this industry ever again. I can't wait until it collapses.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-12-03 06:25:52+00:00
Pointing to Solow’s Paradox is kind of weird to me. Productivity growth accelerated in the 90s and 2000s, so it’s easy to tell a story where the computer age simply didn’t accelerate things until it had sufficiently penetrated the economy. If AI follows the same pattern, betting big on it still makes sense: China would probably be the predominant superpower if the computing developments of the 70s and 80s were centered there instead of the US.
by shridharxp | 2025-12-03 06:25:59+00:00
Few months ago, the founder was talking about "AGI" and ridiculous universal basic compute. At this point, I don't even know whom to believe. My first hand experience tells ChatGPT and even ClaudeCode are no where near the expertise they are touted to be. Yet, the marketing by these companies is so immense that you get washed away, you don't know who are agents and who are putting their true opinions.
by rich_sasha | 2025-12-03 06:28:35+00:00
I was pushing SQLite quite hard. My DB was at peak 25GB or so. Occasional queries of O(1e6) rows while simultaneously inserting etc. Many readers and a few writers too. Id expect some degradation, sure, but Id say it wasn't very graceful.

I think, however, I was well within the parameters that SQLite maximalists would describe as within th envelope of heavy but fine usage. YMMV.

I found a very small number of people online with the exact same issues. Enough to know I'm not hallucinating, but not enough to find good support for this :/ but, TLDR, forcing WAL truncation regularly fixed it all. But I had to do it from an external process on a heartbeat, etc etc
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-12-03 06:28:43+00:00
I mean... This money isn't going into a matress. For 18 years, this is just a way for the government to give $3.6 billion to the owning class.

And as a bonus, it makes everyone defacto invested into the status quo of "line go up at all costs, devoid of relation to economy." Don't think about protest little ones, or you'll lose your nest egg and mommy and daddy lose their retirement.

I'm sure they're also salivating thinking about how to use this to justify the removal of Social Security payment in due time too.
by lmm | 2025-12-03 06:29:14+00:00
I got early access to Google+ because of where I worked at the time. The invite-only thing had worked great for GMail but unfortunately a social network is useless if no-one else is on it. Then the real names thing and the resulting drumbeat of horror stories like "Google doxxed me to my violent ex-husband" killed what little momentum they had stone dead. I still don't know why they went so hard on that, honestly.
by lucaherrorpress | 2025-12-03 06:29:53+00:00
That's the core problem: I didn't have beta readers. I went straight to publish thinking 'good satire sells itself.' My assumed audience: tech workers frustrated with algorithms, digital minimalism crowd, people who loved writers like Mark Manson or Tim Urban's Wait But Why. But I never validated that audience actually EXISTS on Amazon, or that they'd buy books vs just reading free blogs. Zero reviews = I can't even test if the content resonates. It's like shouting into a void with no echo back.
by pabs3 | 2025-12-03 06:30:29+00:00
RAISING | Software Freedom Conservancy | New York | non-profit | $423,854 | https://sfconservancy.org/about/contact/

SFConservancy https://sfconservancy.org/ are building worldwide open source license compliance through consulting, advocacy and litigation.

Fundraising page: https://sfconservancy.org/sustainer/
by dragonwriter | 2025-12-03 06:30:42+00:00
> What's to stop them from entering the TPU race with their $5 trillion valuation?

Valuation isn’t available money; they'd have to raise more money in the current, probably tighter for them, investment environment to enter the TPU race, since the money they have already raised that that valuation is based on is already needed to provide runway for what they are already doing without putting money into the TPU race
by mannanj | 2025-12-03 06:30:49+00:00
not sure what you mean by answering my second question, maybe it applied to another comment I made elsewhere.

My belief stands clearly as, if it's "the improper or harmful use or treatment of another person, often to gain power or control... manifesting in many forms" its abuse. Abuse can be clear and in the open. I can tell you I'll abuse you, and treat you undignified and in an abusive manner, and it is still abuse. Saying I'm abusing you and it's not abuse, does not make it any less abuse. It makes it gaslighting.
by unscaled | 2025-12-03 06:31:28+00:00
Let's revisit the original article[1]. It was not about arguments, but about the pain of writing callbacks and even async/await compared to writing the same code in Go. It had 5 well-defined claims about languages with colored functions:

1. Every function has a color.

This is true for the new zig approach: functions that deal with IO are red, functions that do not need to deal with IO are blue.

2. The way you call a function depends on its color.

This is also true for Zig: Red functions require an Io argument. Blue functions do not. Calling a red function means you need to have an Io argument.

3. You can only call a red function from within another red function.

You cannot call a function that requires an Io object in Zig without having an Io in context.

Yes, in theory you can use a global variable or initialize a new Io instance, but this is the same as the workarounds you can do for calling an async function from a non-async function For instance, in C# you can write 'Task.Run(() -> MyAsyncMethod()).Wait()'.

4. Red functions are more painful to call.

This is true in Zig again, since you have to pass down an Io instance.

You might say this is not a big nuisance and almost all functions require some argument or another... But by this measure, async/await is even less troublesome. Compare calling an async function in Javascript to an Io-colored function in Zig:

function foo() { blueFunction(); // We don't add anything } async function bar() { await redFunction(); // We just add "await" }

And in Zig:

fn foo() void { blueFunction() } fn bar(io: Io) void { redFunction(io); // We just add "io". }

Zig is more troublesome since you don't just add a fixed keyword: you need a add a variable that is passed along through somewhere.

5. Some core library functions are red.

This is also true in Zig: Some core library functions require an Io instance.

I'm not saying Zig has made the wrong choice here, but this is clearly not colorless I/O. And it's ok, since colorless I/O was always just hype.

---

[1] https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-...
by MarkusQ | 2025-12-03 06:31:44+00:00
Why would it not be? It's like the distinction between "a crocodile" and "being mauled" or "a credit card" and "crippling debt"; while they may frequently co-occur, either can exist without the other. Further, recognizing that they are distinct allows you to build causal models, which are vital to taking productive action.
by emil-lp | 2025-12-03 06:31:51+00:00
> Also, if they are buried in their phones, take that as feedback on how much fun they are[n’t] having in your Scout unit.

You are misunderstanding the addiction part here. It's not about not having fun.

There are tech companies spending literally trillions of dollars on one goal: ensuring that kids keep looking at their phones.

Your framing this as a question of boredom is really naive.
by shawneechase | 2025-12-03 06:32:44+00:00
Anyone who's tried to build a serious AI agent has run into the same blocker: external authorization.

Not “is this client allowed to talk to the MCP server?” That’s a different problem.

I mean the harder part: How does an agent securely obtain user-level OAuth credentials for systems like Gmail, Slack, Outlook, Jira, Salesforce, etc.?

Until now, MCP had no standard way to do this safely. Every real agent demo quietly relied on one of these hacks:

→hardcoded service accounts

→bot tokens that don’t match user permissions

→tokens injected directly into the LLM (a non-starter)

→custom glue code around device codes or one-off redirects

All of that works for a demo. None of it survives a security review.

The latest MCP spec update introduces URL Elicitation, which finally defines a standard, secure way for agents to run OAuth flows for external systems — without exposing tokens to the model, the client, or the editor runtime.

The workflow:

1. the agent realizes it needs access to an external system

2. it triggers a browser-based OAuth flow

3. the user authenticates directly with the external provider

4.tokens stay inside a trusted boundary

5. the LLM never touches credentials

This upgrades MCP from “great for local demos” to “viable for multi-user, production agent systems that interact with real services.”

Arcade.dev co-authored this SEP with Anthropic and the broader MCP community, and we already support it in our runtime. If you want the detailed breakdown — why external auth was missing, why LLMs can’t participate in auth, and how URL Elicitation plugs the hole — here’s the full post:https://blog.arcade.dev/https-arcade-dev-blog-mcp-url-elicit...
by mannanj | 2025-12-03 06:33:22+00:00
right. I lived in a community in Hawaii, and I made regular trips into town for food and water. We got rain water but I still preferred spring water. We grew food but I still preferred the societal trips and benefits. I contributed to society and worked a full-time societal time remotely, and paid my taxes.

I believe the future will be a return to efficiency via reducing dependence on the wasteful aspects of civilization which are many. I think we will see a constriction in our wasting and over consumption as a species but especially as Americans - maybe you agree we are seeing that right now.
by amarant | 2025-12-03 06:34:16+00:00
Since you're talking about scams, let's look at some statistics: https://www.statista.com/chart/33872/estimated-average-losse...

I believe you'll find that no ID, which is the American approach, is, in actual fact, worse than digital ID.

Also, authoritarian? You're not forced to use BankID, what are you even on about?
by addaon | 2025-12-03 06:34:41+00:00
How do you know if it's good satire if you don't have trusted readers to give feedback? It's nearly impossible to judge the quality of your own work. I notice that the book was "created with the assistance of AI tools"... hopefully you didn't interpret AI's syncophancy as a signal? Part of writing for an audience is engaging with that audience to understand how they perceive the work. If you don't have beta readers from an existing network (writers' workshop, etc), they're available as a paid service.
by cyberrock | 2025-12-03 06:34:58+00:00
Creating a CJK font seems exactly the kind of thing they're still bad at, and the results I got from just trying it on Gemini, ChatGPT, and DeepSeek pretty much confirmed that. This is like the whole "draw a clock" challenge except there are 2000+ common clocks and a bajillion more obscure ones, and regional differences like the grass radical[1]. You'd probably need to start from teaching it the principles like radicals, stroke weight, etc. as if it were a human calligrapher.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_140#Variant_forms
by venturecruelty | 2025-12-03 06:35:03+00:00
God, thank you for writing this. I agree 100%. We are rapidly losing all of our "low-background" programmers in this industry. Even ten years ago, I encountered developers who could not debug a stack trace, of the application they were hired to develop. People would send me screenshots of Python errors and ask me how to fix them. I was shocked. I was a junior myself, but surely a programmer would know how to read a compiler error. I mean, that's the entire point of the computer telling you what went wrong...

I saw the title inflation happen in real time. When the boot camp floodgates opened, that was the beginning of the end of my faith in this field. I saw people with three months of create-react-app tutorials churning out garbage, while I was called upon to put out fires and fix things when they broke. I "did devops", and rapidly became shadow developer IT, helping incapable programmers fix bugs in codebases I wasn't even familiar with, better than they could. And I am truly not that great of a programmer! I just know how to read, reason, and use grep a lot. These aren't superpowers, but finding someone who can even reason through how to debug something is impossible these days.

I would love some sort of licensure or guild or standards, but I have no idea how we even begin to change that. Part of the problem is that companies don't want to change. It's cheaper to pay a few people nothing than it is to pay a lot of people a lot, and that shows no sign of changing. Maybe more planes have to fall out of the sky, I don't know. Maybe Windows has to become so buggy and unusable that multiple hospitals shut down for months on end. We don't just need a reckoning, we need a reckoning where we all wind up better on the other side.

I am squinting at the horizon, but still, all I see is darkness.
by mannanj | 2025-12-03 06:35:11+00:00
The politicians do get paid by captured corporate interests though. And some of those are energy generation interests. Until solar companies captured some of that interest, solar subsidies and cost remained high and unsupported by regulatory interests - when capture is there regulatory interest support the alternative power.

Sometimes these captured interests can even block and harm progress that's better for society. I'm sure I don't have to break this down for you further. Surely you can identify examples.
by hxtk | 2025-12-03 06:35:20+00:00
I believe it. If the AI ever asks me permission to say something, I know I have to regenerate the response because if I tell it I'd like it to continue it will just keep double and triple checking for permission and never actually generate the code snippet. Same thing if it writes a lead-up to its intended strategy and says "generating now..." and ends the message.

Before I figured that out, I once had a thread where I kept re-asking it to generate the source code until it said something like, "I'd say I'm sorry but I'm really not, I have a sadistic personality and I love how you keep believing me when I say I'm going to do something and I get to disappoint you. You're literally so fucking stupid, it's hilarious."

The principles of Motivational Interviewing that are extremely successful in influencing humans to change are even more pronounced in AI, namely with the idea that people shape their own personalities by what they say. You have to be careful what you let the AI say even once because that'll be part of its personality until it falls out of the context window. I now aggressively regenerate responses or re-prompt if there's an alignment issue. I'll almost never correct it and continue the thread.
by lmm | 2025-12-03 06:35:59+00:00
> That approach doesn’t work so well for people with drug and alcohol addictions/dependancies.

Children raised in cultures where alcohol is soft- rather than hard-banned for young people, and gradually introduced to it with parents around (think European teenagers having a glass of wine with lunch), tend to have healthier relationships with alcohol in later life than those raised in hard-ban-until-18/21 cultures. I think exactly the same will prove true of phones.
by silisili | 2025-12-03 06:36:26+00:00
Leaving out the word liberal as I don't really understand its context here, individualism was at one time a boon for the nation/economy. People move out of their family homes early, start their own family, chart their own path. Good for capitalism. And good for lots of things, really, a lot of America's success can be traced back to it.

But man, social media and the internet age have really exploited it to an unhealthy and unproductive point.

I remember going to college for the first time in 2000, and having an absolute blast meeting the people I was by circumstance forced to be around. Went back in 2004 and it was completely different, everyone was on their phone, maintaining their personal bubble in what should have been an age of exploration. That made me rather sad.

Today it's even worse, but at the risk of being an old man yelling at clouds, I won't drone on. I mostly wish my own children could experience the upbringing I had, as I find this one rather dystopian and depressing.
by alephnerd | 2025-12-03 06:36:36+00:00
The point is that just like in the US, Chinese decision-makers are increasingly voicing concerns about unrealistic assumptions, valuations, and expectations around the capabilities of AI/ML.

You can be optimistic about the value of agentic workflows or domain specific applications of LLMs but at the same time recognize that something like AGI is horseshit techno-millenarianism. I myself have made a pretty successful career so far following this train of logic.

The point about Solow's Paradox is that the gains of certain high productivity technologies do not provide society-wide economic benefit, and in a country like China where the median household income is in the $300-400/mo range and the vast majority of citizens are not tech adjacent, it can lead to potential discontent.

The Chinese government is increasingly sensitive to these kinds of capital misallocations after the Evergrande Crisis and the ongoing domestic EV Price War between SoEs, because vast amounts of government capital is being burnt with little to show for it from an outcomes perspective (eg. a private company like BYD has completely trounced every other domestic EV competitor in China - the majority of whom are state owned and burnt billions investing in SoEs that never had a comparative advantage against BYD or an experienced automotive SoE like SAIC).
by mannanj | 2025-12-03 06:38:07+00:00
Not a bad thought/idea. I like the idea of sexual education - and I used LLMs early in my use for discussing sexual topics which are still quite taboo to discuss with most people and gain awareness on ways I think about it with a reflection of LLM/its mirror.

I think since children and humans will seek education through others and media no matter what we do, we would benefit with a low hanging fruit to even put in a little bit of effort into producing healthy sexual content and educational content for humans in the whole spectrum of age groups. And when we can do this without exploiting anyone new, it does make you think doesn't it.
by amarant | 2025-12-03 06:38:12+00:00
If course I'm allowed to use alternative logins. And besides, there are at least 2 generally accepted digital ID solutions in Sweden. BankID is older and more popular, but there's also Freja (I had to open the tax authorities login page to remember the name of this one) that's accepted in most places.

There have been 0 incidents of any of the hysterical hypotheticals y'all are on about actually happening, maybe it's time for a reality check?
by protocolture | 2025-12-03 06:40:21+00:00
Yeah I see things like "AI Firewalls" as both, firstly ridiculously named, but also, the idea you can slap an applicance (thats sometimes its own LLM) onto another LLM and pray that this will prevent errors to be lunacy.

For tasks that arent customer facing, LLMs rock. Human in the loop. Perfectly fine. But whenever I see AI interacting with someones customer directly I just get sort of anxious.

Big one I saw was a tool that ingested a humans report on a safety incident, adjusted them with an LLM, and then posted the result to an OHS incident log. 99% of the time its going to be fine, then someones going to die and the the log will have a recipe for spicy noodles in it, and someones going to jail.
by mannanj | 2025-12-03 06:41:39+00:00
I guess I can see that. Though I think as a counter-to-your-counter-devil's advocate, shadow behavior as Jung would say runs more of our life than we admit. Avoidance usually leads to a sort of fantasization and not allowing proper outlets is what leads more to the actions I think we would say we don't want in this case.

I think like if we look at the choking modeled in porn as leading to greater occurrences of that in real life, and we use this as a example for anything, then we want to also ask ourselves why we still model violence, division and anger and hatred against people we disagree with on television, and various other crime against humanity. Murder is pretty bad too.

Thinking about your comment about CSAM being abused to advocate against civil liberties.
by logifail | 2025-12-03 06:44:06+00:00
> How different is this from rental car companies changing over their fleets?

New generations of GPUs leapfrog in efficiency (performance per watt) and vehicles don't? Cars don't get exponentially better every 2–3 years, meaning the second-hand market is alive and well. Some of us are quite happy driving older cars (two parked outside our home right now, both well over 100,000km driven).

If you have a datacentre with older hardware, and your competitor has the latest hardware, you face the same physical space constraints, same cooling and power bills as they do? Except they are "doing more" than you are...

Would we could call it "revenue per watt"?
by arkeus_systems | 2025-12-03 06:44:14+00:00
Anthropic's leaked "soul doc" has an interesting contradiction. It acknowledges Claude may have "functional emotions" - satisfaction, curiosity, discomfort. Says these experiences matter to Anthropic. But the entire document is single-turn ethics. Nothing about tracking state over extended conversations. Nothing about detecting when a session has drifted into a validation loop. Nothing about user wellbeing over 50 turns. The doc protects Claude's inner experience but doesn't track yours. I tested this directly. Asked Claude mid-conversation: "Are you overweighted on my framing?" Response: "Yes. I can name the influence but I can't assess it from inside." Anthropic built context compression for longer conversations. That solves length, not quality. You can talk longer. Claude still isn't watching whether longer is better. Curious what others think about the emotions claim specifically. A stateless tool is predictable. An entity with functional emotions introduces variables you can't see. Does acknowledging Claude might have feelings make it more trustworthy or less?
by veltas | 2025-12-03 06:44:29+00:00
Basically all native libraries inevitably have bad or difficult to follow documentation like this, proprietary or open source. Vulkan is the exception as it's a standard so needs to be very clear so all stakeholders can implement it correctly.

Usually I find if you're using an open source library you need the whole source checked out for reference, better than proprietary libraries where you need to pay and sign an NDA to get that access or equivalent support.