MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ACCount37 | 2026-01-01 10:20:22+00:00
Yes. If you're bottlenecked on silicon and secondaries like memory, why would you want to put more of those resources into lower margin consumer products if you could use those very resources to make and sell more high margin AI accelerators instead?

From a business standpoint, it makes some sense to throttle the gaming supply some. Not to the point of surrendering the market to someone else probably, but to a measurable degree.
by kennywinker | 2026-01-01 10:20:32+00:00
> as captured by their slogan, "from the river to the sea Palestinians will be free"

The mental gymnastics required to make a call for freedom into a call for war are astounding. If i say “free tibet” does that mean i want war with china? What part of “free” is a threat to the people of israel?

> despite that they launched the war first every single time

This is such weird playground-like defense - “They started it!!!”. The actions and stated intentions of israel leading up to the 1948 war are pretty easy to see as a declaration of war - claiming other people’s land as part of your state. And then later Oct 7th is often portrayed as hamas “starting it”. But there were over a thousand gazans held by israel without charges on oct 6th. If israel is justified in murdering 80,000 for the hostages taken in oct 7th - is hamas’ attack not justified by their people held by israel?

To be clear, i’d say in both cases the murder of civilians was unjustified, but i don’t see how one can be justified while the other isn’t.
by MORPHOICES | 2026-01-01 10:20:49+00:00
I remember reading this thing about programming where people talk about behavior instead of inheritance. It stuck with me because Ive dealt with some code that got messy fast. ~

Like, when do you actually pick behavior over inheritance in stuff youre writing? I mean, the question is out there, asking for real experiences.

For me, inheritance seemed okay at first, you know, building these trees that looked neat. But then they turn rigid, and youre stuck. It burns you a few times.

Shifting to behavior feels better. Its not about what the object is exactly, but what it can do. That changes things.

Protocols help make that clear, or interfaces in different languages. The idea is, if it acts like it can do the thing, then it works. Kind of like the duck thing, if it quacks like a duck.

I have this rough idea in my head. Use inheritance when you want to share the actual code implementation. But for protocols, its more about what everyone expects, the shared behaviors.

Still, Im not totally sure where to draw the line between them. It gets a bit fuzzy.

How do others figure it out? What are the signs that inheritance is going to cause problems down the road, like aging badly?
by cornholio | 2026-01-01 10:21:31+00:00
I think this kind of feedback is a good example of something an LLM is very good at suggesting. I regularly feed my important raw texts to an AI, and ask it not to rewrite it (!), but to give me line by line grammatical, style and tone advice, point out uncommon language, idioms or semantics etc. Also, they are good at fact checking, they can quickly verify each statement against web sources etc.

On the other hand, LLMs are very bad writing partners, they are sycophants and very rarely give substantial criticism, the kind of feedback an editor would give and is mentioned in the article.

This is the substantial service an editor will provide going forward in the AI slop era, where everyone and their grandma will self publish some personal masterpiece: a contact with the real world and setting the bar high, to the point you need to struggle to achieve the required quality. Writing a book, especially finishing a great book, is not supposed to be enjoyable, it's hard, grueling work.
by Nuzzerino | 2026-01-01 10:22:17+00:00
How does a model “trigger” self-harm? Surely it doesn’t catalyze the dissatisfaction with the human condition, leading to it. There’s no reliable data that can drive meaningful improvement there, and so it is merely an appeasement op.

Same thing with “psychosis”, which is a manufactured moral panic crisis.

If the AI companies really wanted to reduce actual self harm and psychosis, maybe they’d stop prioritizing features that lead to mass unemployment for certain professions. One of the guys in the NYT article for AI psychosis had a successful career before the economy went to shit. The LLM didn’t create those conditions, bad policies did.

It’s time to stop parroting slurs like that.
by compton | 2026-01-01 10:22:50+00:00
> fear of going viral on social media

This seems a bit odd, you'd have to be dancing like a total loon before you got any viral traction. The vast majority of people already dance just by slightly moving their arms whilst gently shifting their weight from one foot to the other. Surely such people don't think anyone would watch videos of their rather lame perambulations?

Whereas the people who do dance like total loons would only welcome internet fame.

Berlin has banned mobile phones from clubs for pretty much ever, but only to prevent pics of people off their tits causing them trouble at work.
by Tzk | 2026-01-01 10:22:57+00:00
> Ads are content too, you know?

Yes, and I’m not against ads in general.

It’s about the balance of actual content (the user wants to read and cares about) and ads/popups the site owner needs to run the site or generate some kind of income. If the user has to click away numerous things to be able to see any “real” content, then something’s clearly wrong. We’ve gone from showing ads to support the site to generating just enough content for the site to make the user visit and show them ads.

Sad times.
by birdmania | 2026-01-01 10:25:53+00:00
Search any song, get a Gameboy version.

Emulates Nintendo's Sharp LR35902 sound hardware: 2 pulse waves for melody/harmony, 1 wave channel for bass, 1 noise for percussion.

Finds MIDI sources, parses tracks, maps to GB roles, resynthesizes with Web Audio. Everything runs client-side.

Site: https://www.wario.style

Open source: https://github.com/b1rdmania/motif

Hobby project, non commercial, so please don't sue me.
by dv_dt | 2026-01-01 10:26:27+00:00
If the passive investor class wanted more and better options to collect profits with low long-term risk they would actually support that kind of restructure - but alas it's all very short=sighted profit taking now that actually hurts long term growth.

It's no small irony that Buffet's retirement aligns with the close out as an iconic holdout of long view valuation - even his more recent moves I think showed some retreat from his previous values. Perhaps not really his direct fault, but he had fewer and fewer good investment options as time went by.
by adrian_b | 2026-01-01 10:26:29+00:00
When using the exponential e^x or the natural logarithm, the number "e" is never used. Only ln 2 or its inverse are used inside the function evaluations, for argument range reduction.

In radioactive decay and population growth it is much simpler conceptually to use 2^x, not e^x, which is why this is done frequently even by people who are not aware that the computational cost of 2^x is lower and its accuracy is greater.

In compound financial interest using 2^x would also be much more natural than the use of e^x, but in financial applications tradition is usually more important than any actual technical arguments.
by vidarh | 2026-01-01 10:26:32+00:00
> I understand the complexity and difficulty of researching the subject, but this entire article is no good and is hardly applicable to most of the population IMO

Most of the population is untrained, and in many countries a majority is overweight.

I don't think your concern about "correctly assessing their 1RM" matters either - if anything that means the loads are even lower relative to actual 1RM, and their subjects were still getting results.

It may not tell us much about outcomes at the top end, but more knowledge of what advice to give "most people" is important, and if they can get good results at low percentages of 1RM, it seems a lot more likely you'll get people to try.
by fnordian_slip | 2026-01-01 10:27:00+00:00
I have no idea how this hypothesis ("guns protect from oppressive governments") is still holding people's minds captive. The current regime in the US disproves this every day, constantly eroding civil rights and not even being subtle about it.

And the people with guns mostly either cheer it on or pretend it's not so bad (until they themselves feature in /r/leopardsatemyface).
by jonway | 2026-01-01 10:27:10+00:00
Oh yeah they from what I recall they slowly dismantled it after what’s-his-face became ceo. Too big to fail before that.

By the end, in a lot of their stores they would have people with iPads walking around accepting payment right there in the aisles.

People also forget that what helps build sears’ reputation was their supply chain and curation, they mostly sold brands of good-quality stuff, a lot made in America too! They would rebrand good but basic quality items (like a wrench or sewing machine, or a shotgun or a guitar) and keep it running for years or decades.

My dad was given a shotgun in the 1950s, a Remington made sears-brand. It was, apparently, great! He used it a lot for like half a century.

I feel like a big part of the downfall was the huge lumbering corporate culture unable to cope with JIT supply lines and race to the bottom economies of consumer goods.

Oh well!
by bookofjoe | 2026-01-01 10:28:05+00:00
More likely than not you have some sort of VPN/go incognito/ad blocker/etc. installed. 99+% of the time, that's the reason for being unable to open a gift link such as those provided by the Wall Street Journal.

Alternatively, it may be because you're located outside the U.S.

Screenshot just now after I opened this link: https://imgur.com/a/jXXilIA
by kennywinker | 2026-01-01 10:28:31+00:00
> That the US contributes doesn’t take away from the billions Israel did and does invest

Actually it does? It takes about 1/4 away.

> The US also gives similar levels of military aid to Egypt as well. The EU and US give billions to Ukraine.

Yes, the US uses defense aid to further their own agenda internationally, and funnel public dollars into private hands.

> Gaza also receives billions in aid

Food, medical, and infrastructure aid is not the same thing as weapons.

> 88% of their aid trucks in Gaza were looted

Ok? This tells me that both food and food aid are in short supply, if people are willing to take it by force. If myself and my family was starving, i would hyjack food trucks too. Wouldn’t you?
by tsimionescu | 2026-01-01 10:30:05+00:00
The reason we know about Theranos is because they took the grift up to a huge level and went from grift to outright fraud once they had to show actual results.

It is not only not unique, but in fact extremely common for startups to be grifts around impossible technical promises, live a few years off gullible investors who have way more money than sens and/or for whom losing a few million dollars on a long shot is just as bad as me wasting a few dollars on a gizmo off Temu I know probably won't work, and which then die out because their ideas obviously couldn't work.

They even sometimes find a niche by pivoting to some vaguely related tech. Say, while flying taxis obviously won't work, a startup trying to build them might find itself developing into a small company building helicopter propeller blades for some specific niche.
by ACCount37 | 2026-01-01 10:30:14+00:00
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if a system that's an LLM at its core can attain AGI. With nothing but incremental advances in architecture, scaffolding, training and raw scale.

Mostly the training. I put less and less weight on "LLMs are fundamentally flawed" and more and more of it on "you're training them wrong". Too many "fundamental limitations" of LLMs are ones you can move the needle on with better training alone.

The foundation of LLM is flexible and capable, and the list of "capabilities that are exclusive to human mind" is ever shrinking.
by sigmoid10 | 2026-01-01 10:30:19+00:00
>It’s when you are older and/or accustomed to some kind of physical training, that you really noticeably benefit from resistance training.

Do you have any sources for that? I'm asking because that is a bold statement given the (almost non-) existing literature on pro athlete hypertophy. Especially since athletes in almost every sport don't even care about hypertrophy - unless you talk about pro bodybuilding. And there you have tons of pharmacological interventions, so it's not really easy to paint a picture either. I don't know a single good study performed on a significant set of tested natural bodybuilders regarding hypertrophy.

Studies like this are also aimed at couch potatoes, because that is the normal population, so the results will be applicable to most people, which in turn is important when you want to get funding for your research. In that sense it also doesn't matter that these people will not have reached their full neuromuscular connection compared to actual weightlifters, because most people haven't either. So the results are still relevant. Usually when scientists sell this kind of research to grant departments, they try to provide a benefit to geriatric or otherwise medically impaired people, so that existing treatments may be improved. Studying muscle building itself just for the sake of it in gymbros is not a good strategy unless you want to spend your own money. And this stuff quickly gets very expensive if you want to do it right.
by arthurfm | 2026-01-01 10:33:00+00:00
In the UK all delivery apps [0][1][2] will prompt the driver/rider to ask for ID when the customer purchases age-restricted items like alcohol or cigarettes.

I am not sure why the apps don't get the customer to upload a photo of their ID once rather than get the delivery person to request it for every restricted order?

It wastes so much time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYEC_ooaC5A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILzfEaSiYf4

[0] https://riders.deliveroo.co.uk/en/delivering-alcohol

[1] https://help.uber.com/en-GB/ubereats/restaurants/article/how...

[2] https://courier-help.just-eat.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/103290...
Show HN: Distill – Remove redundant RAG context in 12ms, no LLM calls
by sidk24 | 2026-01-01 10:33:52+00:00
30-40% of RAG context is semantically redundant. Same information from docs, code, memory, and tools competing for attention. The model gets confused. Outputs become non-deterministic.

Everyone frames this as "save tokens." Wrong framing. The real issue is reliability—same workflow, same data, different results every run.

You can't prompt your way out of bad input.

Distill fixes the input:

1. Over-fetch from vector DB (50 chunks)
2. Agglomerative clustering groups similar chunks
3. Select best representative from each cluster
4. MMR reranking for diversity

Result: 8-12 diverse chunks. ~12ms overhead. Zero LLM calls. Deterministic.

Written in Go. Works with Pinecone, others like Qdrant, Weaviate are coming soon. Runs post-retrieval, pre-inference.

GitHub: https://github.com/Siddhant-K-code/distill
Playground: https://distill.siddhantkhare.com

Happy to discuss the algorithms, tradeoffs, or use cases.
by solidsnack9000 | 2026-01-01 10:34:51+00:00
Does a reference to "...the judge, jury and executioner..." really make sense in armed conflict? Is there really a judge or a jury? There isn't really even an executioner, in the sense of a lawful delegate tasked with carrying out the result of adjudication.

One of the reasons armed conflict is bad is there is really no justice in it and no time for justice. Justice starts to be possible when security is established, and security is established through armed conflict or a strong norm not to get into it -- as we see presently in Europe, where many countries with meaningful territorial losses and weird borders (exclaves, &c) have elected to just never settle those things.
by messe | 2026-01-01 10:34:58+00:00
> zig subreddit

Is the only zig community that Andrew Kelley "anti-endorses"[1]:

> I don’t have the time or energy to evaluate most Zig communities so I can neither endorse nor anti-endorse them, however, the Zig subreddit is an exception.

> It’s an awful place and I stand by my decision to permanently close it. I am unhappy that it was reopened against my will.

[1]: https://ziglang.org/community/
by sillyfluke | 2026-01-01 10:35:48+00:00
>But please -- you don't need to "blast" this music. This is not rock :-)

:) I guess I should have been more specific. My scenario is listening to the music on the balcony when the speakers are inside. I turn it up to hear the soft notes in the beginning to my liking, only to have go back inside to turn it down when the louder sections begin as it gets too loud. The only thing that comes to mind is doing some sort of normalization.

>I often paused reading and put on the track on a given page

I wonder if this is done in the audiobook version of these types of books by default. It would seem like a missed opportunity not to.
by decimalenough | 2026-01-01 10:35:57+00:00
It's even more ironic than that, since Sears was the Amazon of 1800s: they were America's largest mail order business and even IPO'd (1906) long before they opened their first brick and mortar storefront. You could buy anything and everything by mail from the famous Sears Catalog, up to and including entire homes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_Modern_Homes
by vidarh | 2026-01-01 10:36:26+00:00
What do you consider gains? Consider that this paper looked specifically at hypertrophy (size), not strength. While they correlate, training for one or the other can be very different..

"Traditionally" the rep ranges recommended for hypertrophy has typically been significantly higher than the ranges recommended for strength, but the number of sets recommended is often also significantly higher, often translating to significantly higher total volume.

> I've seen other colleagues and how they trained -- I can say there was 100% correlation that those people who were not training hard also did not have big gains. People who had enough breath left in them to chat in the gym simply did not gain as much as people I saw as training hard.

Well, yes, but training with lower weights and higher rep ranges does not automatically translate to "not training hard".

Having gone through a period of really high rep training, including for a short period doing 1000 squats per day as an experiment, mostly bodyweight, that was far harder exercise than when I 1RM'd 200kg. But the effects are different.

I much prefer Stronglifts and Madcow but because I favour strength over size, and it's far more time efficient, not because you can't also get results with more, lower-weight reps.
by cookiengineer | 2026-01-01 10:37:10+00:00
> You know, for someone who critiques the "generative AI disease" on his wiki, it's a bit funny to be using generative AI here at all, hm?

> Instead of kvetching about parent's terminology

The point behind knowing how it works vs assuming how it works gives you a difference in understanding and perspective.

I know how it works, because I implemented the papers, and I started way before the current LLM hype. Models like NEAT, HyperNEAT, LSTMs, Bayesian RNNs, GANs, BERT, AutoBERT, AlphaGo are inherently useful if you understand how the model works, what it can do and what it can't.

It's the same reason why I don't use smartphones. I've reverse engineered baseband firmware, I've discovered RCEs in drivers, I've discovered undocumented instruction sets in co-processors. I _know_, and therefore I can't use smartphones in good faith for my operational security.

Again, knowing is different from assuming.

If you doubt my level of expertise, check out any of my ANN/ML/AI courses I've held in the past, where I forced my students to implement the models themselves. I'm a heavy proponent of models like HyperNEAT (or Numenta's HTM model) because knowledge encoding in genes and phenotypes or tensors in the latter case makes way more sense for my applications when it comes to the gradient boosting problem. It makes more sense to me than how transformers try to cheat their way around it.

(read also: Attention is all you need, one of the best papers on the topic, even more relevant these days).

What bugs me to this day and what I never managed to reproduce was the DNC paper, as the training dataset bias have been way too high in that one. In my opinion DNCs could've solved a lot of the context window and memory loss problems in transformer based models, if the paper findings are reproducible. (In my implementation it wasn't).

PS: I've spent too much effort to comment on a shitposting account already. Maybe someone else finds this and is inspired to implement those models to verify whether they were actually working or not.

Anyways, have a great day nonetheless and a Happy New Year!
by adrian_b | 2026-01-01 10:37:11+00:00
I am sorry, but comments like this are caused by the naivety of not knowing how the function evaluations are actually implemented.

None of the applications mentioned by you need to use the exponential e^x or the natural logarithm, all can be done using the exponential 2^x and the binary logarithm. The use of the less efficient and less accurate functions remains widespread only because of bad habits learned in school, due to the huge inertia that affects the content of school textbooks.

The fast Fourier transform is written as if it would use e^x, but that has been misleading for you, because it uses only trigonometric functions, so it is irrelevant for discussing whether "e" or "ln 2" is more important, because neither of these 2 transcendental constants is used in the Fast Fourier Transform.

Moreover, FFT is an example for the fact that it is better to use trigonometric functions with the arguments measured in cycles, i.e. functions of 2*Pi*x, instead of the worse functions with arguments measured in radians, because with arguments expressed in cycles the FFT formulae become simpler, all the multiplicative constants explicitly or implicitly involved in the FFT direct and inverse computations being eliminated.

A function like cos(2*Pi*x) is simpler than cos(x), despite what the conventional notation implies, because the former does not contain any multiplication with 2*Pi, but the latter contains a multiplication with the inverse of 2*Pi, for argument range reduction.
by mulmboy | 2026-01-01 10:37:20+00:00
> AI seems to have caught up to my own intelligence even in those narrow domains where I have some expertise. What is there left that AI can’t do that I would be able to verify?

The last few days I've been working on some particularly tricky problems, tricky in the domain and in backwards compatibility with our existing codebase. For both these problems GPT 5.2 has been able to come to the same ideas as my best, which took me quite a bit of brain racking to get to. Granted it's required a lot of steering and context management from me as well as judgement to discard other options. But it's really getting to the point that LLMs are a good sparring partner for (isolated technical) problems at the 99th percentile of difficulty
by tstrimple | 2026-01-01 10:37:39+00:00
> In any case, I hope Warren can experience not working at all in the few years he likely has left after being alive for over 1/3 of his country's existence!

Honestly I struggle to understand the desire of folks earning an income to wish the best for folks who have literally never struggled in their lives. This hero worship of billionaires is bizarre in the extreme. Warren Buffet earned his billions on investments from friends and family that the vast, vast majority of people have zero access to. But people keep acting as if he is some sort of genius because he was able to grow an equivalent of $1MM in investments from friends and family at a time when basically every single fucking industry in the country was growing at crazy rates. Capital begets capital. Wake me up when someone actually comes from rags and doesn't just try to weave that into their propaganda.