MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by no_wizard | 2026-01-29 01:53:36+00:00
> I don’t know what the answer here is

Blood. If things don’t reverse course this trajectory historically leads to bloodshed.

In many respects it already has. How many people have died just this year already because businesses didn’t do what they were suppose to? Because cutting costs with no consequences is seen as the norm?

Of course nobody wants to account for those externalities and when that blood comes back on them they become scared and use government force instead. You’re seeing the trial run with ICE as we write our comments on this forum
by solid_fuel | 2026-01-29 01:53:41+00:00
There's a big difference between seeing an immigration raid where you know whoever gets picked up is going to have access to a lawyer, be subject to proper due process, and at worst be sent back to their home country. We knew - or at least believed - that if they detained someone who was a citizen, that person would be released.

Now, when we see ICE grabbing someone, we know that person probably won't have access to legal representation even if they are here legally, even if they're a citizen. We know they might be sent to a concentration camp in a foreign country they aren't from, and we know they might even get murdered in the street. It's a very different dynamic.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-29 01:54:18+00:00
> I think the big AI players really need a coherent plan for this if they don't want a lot of mainstream and eventually legislative pushback.

That's by far not the worst that could happen. There could very well be an axe attached to the pendulum when it swings back.

> Not to mention it's bad business if nobody can afford to use AI because they're unemployed.

In that sense this is the opposite of the Ford story: the value of your contribution to the process will approach zero so that you won't be able to afford the product of your work.
by maest | 2026-01-29 01:54:25+00:00
A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.

"I have to admit, I'm always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up," the CIA agent says.

"Thank you," the KGB says. "We do our best but truly, it's nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them."

The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. "Thank you friend, but you must be confused... There's no propaganda in America."
by yrds96 | 2026-01-29 01:54:28+00:00
The effort to write shitty code is way less when you are using IA, you can create a 1k lines PR with a single prompt.
This policy is important because no one is saying "we hate AI" but instead advises developers to use it with responsibility. This is coming in time since many people are using it without understanding problems and not being accountable regarding the contributions.
by llm_nerd | 2026-01-29 01:54:39+00:00
Never like this.

The way Noem et al. immediately started with the violent domestic terrorist rhetoric / we've done nothing wrong was absolutely unheralded, and the government was never like this. When there's a shooting you say that the situation on the ground is dynamic, evidence is being amassed, the subjects are on leave pending the investigation, etc.

This was completely unlike the historic norm, and clearly it was the marching orders. They were obviously instructed to ape Trump's habit of utter confidence in the face of devastating reality.

And I mean, it just reflects how Trump operates. Reality is secondary to what you claim it is, and if you lie, and everyone knows you lied, just repeat the lie again and again and it breaks many people's brains until some subset of the population will just go "Wow, no one is so shameless or vile they'd lie like this, so he must be telling the truth!". Similarly, immediately pretend that these situations and slam dunk, quick-close cases with over the top rhetoric (terrorism! ICE agent hospitalized in mortal danger, etc) no further consideration needed, is perfectly coherent with the way Trump has managed to con so, so many.
by spartanatreyu | 2026-01-29 01:54:40+00:00
Right off the bat:

1. Those loading spinners being bumpy pulled my eyes around the screen wildly to the point that they were experiencing pain. They need to be removed.

2. There is a status bar along the top, and an application launcher docked at the bottom. That's way too much vertical space being used, especially on laptops (which I'd wager is going to be the most used viewing modality for this OS). It should be merged into a single bar along one side of the screen.

3. The dropdown at the top left of each window seems to be taking up a lot of space. Especially when you're trying to fit four tabs on the screen. Get rid of it so the tabs can actually be read.

4. At 27 seconds in, there are two close icons in the focused window. That being bad could be a presentation all in itself.

5. Random padding in the status bar.
by Twisol | 2026-01-29 01:55:01+00:00
Also relevant to the quote selected by 'steelbrain:

> Recently, Parvaz Madadi has undergone a painful process of revisiting her past work and memories. [...] She added that she had no confidence in the measurement of Rani’s breast-milk sample, because it had been handled by Koren’s lab.

There is a lot to process in this long article. The quote selected by 'steelbrain, concerning Koren's measurement occurs very, very early on, and much of the rest of the article is about contrasting Koren's early presentations of the material against others' testimony. It's worth reading the whole thing

To 'steelbrain: cherry-picking one single quote out of a nuanced article does the journalism here a dire disservice. It's okay for different people to have different beliefs and takeaways from the article. However, your own defense of the biological mechanism here is directly argued against in the "same article" you are admonishing others over reading. That is not conducive to a discussion in good faith.
by Wyverald | 2026-01-29 01:55:22+00:00
>> I also am wearing machine-fabricated clothing and enjoying a host of other products of automation.

> I'm not really a fan of the "you criticize society yet you participate in it" argument.

It seems to me that GP is merely recognizing the parts of technological advance that they do find enjoyable. That's rather far from the "I am very intelligent" comic you're referencing.

> The very least you can do is not impede those trying to fight for those futures if you can't/don't want to fight yourself.

Just noting that GP simply voiced their opinion, which IMHO does not constitute "impedance" of those trying to fight for those futures.
by lemming | 2026-01-29 01:55:27+00:00
My mum has a very simple solution to this problem. It’s a booklet of temporary bookmarks which say “borrowed from Liz”. The bookmarks have a perforated line which allows them to be ripped out of the booklet, and there’s space in the stub to write the name of the book and the name of the person borrowing it. Every time anyone borrows a book it comes with a bookmark reminding them where they got it from. It works really well.
by FridayoLeary | 2026-01-29 01:55:29+00:00
But op is frankly absurd. It sounds reasonable for about 1 second before you think about it. What sets tech apart from every other area of human innovation? And why limit it to that? What about mineral exploitation? Oil etc.

It's just not a well thought out comment. If we focus on the "better path forward", the entrance to which is only unlocked by the realisation that big techs achievements (and thus, profits) belong to humanity collectively... After we reach the enlightened state, what does op believe the first couple of things a traveller on this path is likely to encounter (beyond Big Techs money, which incidentally we take loads of already in the form of taxes, just maybe not enough)?
by fogzen | 2026-01-29 01:55:37+00:00
Because in the world people currently live in, a small class of people own the means of production and the land you stand on, and everyone else has to have a job to access all of the necessities to live. Eliminating jobs means, quite literally, eliminating people's livelihood.

And that same class of people who own everything would rather kill everyone else and also destroy the planet than give up their position or allow any of the socioeconomic changes necessary to change the distribution of wealth.
by TheJoeMan | 2026-01-29 01:56:22+00:00
I take bigger offense to the message that says "your emails were returned undelivered", because that is a lie. A bank, sent to a customer, a lie. "Scale" should never be an acceptable excuse but somehow we let it slide when it comes to the internet.

As an aside, at least the email wasn't "a new document is available in your secure portal click here to view it"!
by snowwrestler | 2026-01-29 01:56:49+00:00
> As someone who desperately needs this technology to work out, I can honestly say it is the most essential tool ever created in all of human history.

For those having trouble finding the humor, it lies in the vast gulf between grand assertions that LLMs will fundamentally transform every aspect of human life, and plaintive requests to stop saying mean things about it.

As a contrast: truly successful products obviate complaints. Success speaks for itself. In TV, software, e-commerce, statins, ED pills, modern smartphones, social media, etc… winning products went into the black quickly and made their companies shitloads of money (profits). No need to adjust vibes, they could just flip everyone the bird from atop their mountains of cash. (Which can also be pretty funny.)

There are mountains of cash in LLMs today too, but so far they’re mostly on the investment side of the ledger. And industry-wide nervousness about that is pretty easy to discern. Like the loud guy with a nervous smile and a drop of sweat on his brow.

https://youtu.be/wni4_n-Cmj4

So much of the current discourse around AI is the tech-builders begging the rest of the world to find a commercially valuable application. Like the AgentForce commercials that have to stoop to showing Matthew McConaughey suffering the stupidest problems imaginable. Or the OpenAI CFO saying maybe they’ll make money by taking a cut of valuable things their customers come up with. “Maybe someone else will change the world with this, if you’ll all just chill out” is a funny thing to say repeatedly while also asking for $billions and regulatory forbearance.
by llsf | 2026-01-29 01:56:56+00:00
I get it, but you realize that the OP just waved one hand and was done (with paying, getting his discounts and points, etc.).

When we have to reach for the phone, unlock it (with biometric), tap to open the Whole Foods app, and then present the phone to scan a QR code.

While it might be not much more, it is more than just show one hand.
by _heimdall | 2026-01-29 01:57:13+00:00
At least in the US, we've spent the better part of 80 years building a huge amount of wealth and growth on the backs of debt and externalized costs.

Its interesting, in a morbid humor kind of way, to see people realize that these costs always come due.

Globalization allows a huge amount of growth and many benefits you simply can't get with smaller or stronger borders. It also comes with risks, chief among them the risk that any one country loses self sufficiency and competitive advantage.

I do hope that the heaviest cost we (in the US) pay anytime soon is the cost of outsourcing jobs. We don't know how to manufacture anymore, our populace is extremely unhealthy in historical standards, and both political parties are toying with different forms of socialism. There are a lot of bad outcomes that can come where we're heading, we'd get off easy if it stops at outsourcing some of our high paid jobs to cheaper foreign labor.
by mandevil | 2026-01-29 01:57:16+00:00
I don't think that Uber or Lyft are going to invest in self-driving taxis. The capital model is completely different: Uber and Lyft are by design capital light, they own nothing more than the software (1), and someone needs to buy all of these self-driving machines and then someone needs to maintain them, whereas their current model doesn't do that- they can't offer that to any tech partner.

The reason that you don't see more Waymo areas has nothing to do with rider pool or experience, it is because their tech requires pre-mapping everything with LiDAR several times- the advantage is that if you know what is static (because it was in all of that LiDAR mapping) then a simple difference algo can tell you everything that is dynamic in the environment. (Also, they are just starting to hit cities with significant precipitation- SFO, LA, ATX, PHX are all pretty dry cities, they are going into ATL, MIA, DC, etc.)

1: With a lot of suspicion that much of their profit comes from drivers not understanding depreciation of their vehicles, something that the accountants who work for Uber and Lyft will understand very very well.
by falcor84 | 2026-01-29 01:57:43+00:00
> will be given to your family once you die, sounds a bit macabre.

To me it sounds more than a bit macabre - depending on the familial relations, it would seem like a motive for them to commit suicide in order to provide for their children or for their children to murder them. I can already imagine the memoires being adapted into Netflix shows.
by coppsilgold | 2026-01-29 01:57:45+00:00
> To what extent does this watermarking survive transcoding? Would not transcoding multiple times possibly affect it?

They are designed to survive being recorded by a phone at an angle. The embedding is only 1-bit per segment which can be multiple megabytes.

> Why?

Tardos codes scale as the square of the number of traitors times a constant. For example, a movie would typically have 2000 segments -> 2000 bits of encoding. By my calculation, at around 7 traitors some start to skate by detection. And there are ways to make detection additive across leaked content, so with another 2000 all 7 will get caught.

To be clear, what the traitors are doing is pooling all the segment versions they have available to them, and adversarially choose a segment at random. This is the best strategy they have, a close second is to choose the segment that the majority have.
by willio58 | 2026-01-29 01:58:19+00:00
Yeah I do the same. I’ve seen great results from writing out a large slack, copying it into ChatGPT and saying “write this more succinctly”.

Then, of course, I review the output and make some manual edits here and there.

That last thing is the key in both written communication and in code, you HAVE to review it and make manual edits if needed.
by mellosouls | 2026-01-29 01:58:58+00:00
Tangentially, Burnham has a long history with these sorts of public-sector private vampires, having been up to his neck in PFI (of "£200 to change a lightbulb" fame) in his stint leading the NHS.

eg.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/28/labour-debt-peter...

https://doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/the-truth-about-the-lies-tha...

etc
by IAmBroom | 2026-01-29 01:59:00+00:00
Also, using a stick as a scratching tool is not really on the same spectrum as flint-knapping a knife, sun-baking a pinchpot, or sharpening a fire-hardened spear point.

This is like those articles that claim that trees "communicate" because they exude more waste products under duress, or somesuch horseshit.
by NoPicklez | 2026-01-29 01:59:08+00:00
The difference there is that Supra's and 86's are performance cars, whereas Camry's and Corollas arent. You can't compare a Hatchback to an 86.

The Model S is comparable performance to the Model 3 performance.

My point is that the latest models 3 & Y are more affordable alternatives to the S & X and more widely available globally.
by jychang | 2026-01-29 01:59:41+00:00
It's because they're doing 4 of 256 sparsity, which was a bad decision caused by financial limitations.

Training cost (FLOPs) = 6 * active params * total tokens. By keeping the MoE experts param count low, it reduces total training costs.

I don't think this was a good move. They should have just trained way past chinchilla like the other major labs, and keep sparsity above 2%. Even Kimi K2 is above 2%. GLM is at 5%, which makes it very expensive (and high performing) for its small size.

Arcee went the other way. They trained a massive 400b model (bigger than GLM-4.5/4.6/4.7, bigger than Qwen3 235b A23b), but only have 17b active params, which is smaller than Qwen and GLM. It's just undertrained and undersized (in terms of active parameters), and they got much worse performance than those models:

https://45777467.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/457774...

It's not a bad showing considering the limitations they were working with, but yeah they definitely need double the active experts (8 out of 256 instead of 4 out of 256) to be competitive. That would roughly double the compute cost for them, though.
by Twisol | 2026-01-29 01:59:48+00:00
> I don't understand this urge to demonize the parents, who on top of having lost a child, have to stand these witchtrials.

Neither the article nor the commenter you replied to has demonized the parents. Yes, both the evidence discussed in the article and the opinions of those interviewed indicate direct administration of a pharmaceutical; it is appropriate to discuss this. Nobody has pointed the finger at anyone; it would indeed be quite inappropriate for such a discussion to be held in this forum.
by grayhatter | 2026-01-29 01:59:55+00:00
> Now a situation has been created where everyone involved in those Signal chats could be...charged with conspiracy.

That's factually incorrect. You you're welcome to conspire all you want. It doesn't become a chargeable offence until you, or someone else who has contributed to the planning, commits some overt or articulable action towards that end.

It's not illegal to be present in a signal chat. It's not even illegal to hypothesize violent resistance/protest. It *is* illegal to make plans to violently protest, and then pack your car full of weapons.

Conspiracy is notably different from solicitation; because it's also illegal to encourage someone to commit a crime, even if you don't yourself plan to participate.

> Conspiracy charges were political punishment.

Nah, I do agree it probably gives the appearance of it being politically motivated. But regardless of how you feel when "your side" is "attacked". That's kinda how the legal system works. If you don't charge them with conspiracy, all the evidence you've collected where they admit they know what they're doing is illegal runs the risk of being thrown out, or otherwise challenged. If you want to charge someone for assault or battery, and you have text messages where someone claims they don't care if someone gets hut. If you exclusively charge them with the assault or the battery. And they put forward the affirmative defense of, yeah it happened, but they pushed me first. You've just opened the door to an acquittal because the video someone got starts halfway through.

Being careless enough to allow that to happen might even be prosecutorial malpractice.

> Compare it to the situation in Minnesota.

I try to avoid whataboutism.

> Can protesters show up at an someone else's workplace and start blowing whistles at everyone? Diners? Medical offices?

Yes? I've heard of protests almost every where, haven't you?

Follow up question, are Diner servers/cooks or physicians/nurses empowered to legally abduct people by force, and then protected from liability for any crimes or needless harm by qualified immunity?

If not, I think it's fair to apply different standards to different cases, and asinine to say, well what about [completely different group doing a completely different thing]
by llsf | 2026-01-29 02:00:27+00:00
But you all realize that the OP did not even have to reach for his phone. He just waved his hand to get his Prime discounts, pay and get his rewards.

I get that it is fairly easy to use the app on the phone (although my WF has terrible reception, which is frustrating enough when I come to pick up packages), but waving your hand would still be faster.
by bastawhiz | 2026-01-29 02:00:59+00:00
I've always wondered what the play was with these. I can tap my card. I can tap my phone. I never leave home without either of those. I can't use Amazon One online, it's purely a retail thing. I need the thing it's replacing in order to onboard. So... Why?

If this came around on 2010, it would have been a hit. Maybe even 2015. Now, it's simply redundant, or something more nefarious (but I can't imagine how).
by cheema33 | 2026-01-29 02:01:00+00:00
"Oh you're doing work? That's so cute... we're gonna close whatever apps you had open, because we're updating now. We own your computer.
You had unsaved work? Too bad, it's gone, get bent."

This, a 1,000 times. I hate, hate, hate this "feature". My Macs don't do that. My Linux systems don't do that. The whole, "screw you, we don't care" attitude of Microsoft is quite appalling.

Microsoft now makes it very difficult to disable this feature. After a few registry edits, I thought I was able to put a stop to the madness. But, then it went to rebooting on its own again.
by lotsofpulp | 2026-01-29 02:01:42+00:00
Can you be more specific? Suppose I put $1M into developing a business.

For whatever reason, construction hits a snag or revenues are not enough to cover expenses, how would it become “society’s” problem? Do I get made whole by the government giving me $1M, and the government takes posession of the property?

If so, I foresee a lot more opportunities for corruption.
by squibonpig | 2026-01-29 02:01:58+00:00
The purpose of any particular arrangement could be said to be to proliferate and dominate others, insofar as if it doesn't do that then it doesn't exist and will be overwritten by other arrangements. In this case we humans wouldn't want to spread an extremophile bacteria, we'd want to dominate it and minimize its presence. Human colonization is different from what you're talking about.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2026-01-29 02:02:06+00:00
> Ah, so organised or criminal but not both?

No, this misses their point. They are organized and some within the organization commit crimes, that does not mean the crime is organized. Hence asking about whether you consider ICE to be such an "organized crime" group because they can be described as (1) an organization (2) some members of which have committed crimes.

> If you don’t believe the criminal activity is organised, you can find the PDFs distributed in the Signal groups which contain instructions on violating the law.

What PDFs can be found and what criminal activity do they refer to?
by Telaneo | 2026-01-29 02:02:15+00:00
h.265 can get annoyingly heavy, but the better compression isn't coming from nowhere. But for less powerful machines, H.264 works just fine and works back far enough that even I got surprised. Even LGA 775 machines will do that just fine, and h.264 is more or less a constant lowest common denominator.

If it can't play a blu-ray off CPU, then it's either so old that DVDs were the media du jour, or it was never meant to be in a general-purpose computer. They'll do e-mail and Office in a pinch, and they'll play video within their limits, but venture outside for anything else, and it all comes crashing down.
by nfriedly | 2026-01-29 02:02:27+00:00
The moto g100 is a good example of a midrange phone with decent specs, including video output. It launched at $400, and can be bought for around $200 these days.

It has a Snapdragon 870, 8gb RAM, 128gb storage, a microSD slot, headphones jack, and a big enough battery to last 2 days. It's a little chunky, and it's not waterproof, but beyond that it's just about everything I ever wanted in a phone.

Motorola, of course, has already abandoned it. But it still gets up-to-date Android via Lineage OS and other community made ROMs.