MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by thierrydamiba | 2026-03-03 23:54:16+00:00
This thread is simultaneously horrifying and hilarious at the same time.

Hilarious because onesociety2022 seems so earnest. Someone who is shocked at the idea that job search isn’t a pure meritocracy.

Horrifying because kuang_eleven points out just how easy it is to pass a qualified candidate if you want to.

The truth is somewhere in the middle…
by ianbicking | 2026-03-03 23:54:24+00:00
In a sense they do use their own language; they program in tokenized source, not ASCII source. And maybe that's just a form of syntactic sugar, like replacing >= with ≥ but x100. Or... maybe it's more than that? The tokenization and the models coevolve, from my understanding.

If we do enough passes of synthetic or goal-based training of source code generation, where the models are trained to successfully implement things instead of imitating success, then we may see new programming paradigms emerge that were not present in any training data. The "new language" would probably not be a programming language (because we train on generating source FOR a language, not giving it the freedom to generate languages), but could be new patterns within languages.
by observationist | 2026-03-03 23:54:51+00:00
Shaming the use of electron? I'll do that every day and twice on sunday. Same with nonsense websites that waste gigabytes on bloat, spam users with ads, and feed the adtech beast. And I'll lay credit for this monument to enshittification we call the internet at the feet of Google and Facebook and Microsoft.

Using electron and doing things shittily is a choice. If you're ever presented with a choice between doing something well and not, do the best you can. Electron is never the best choice. It's not even the easiest, most efficient choice. It's the lazy, zero effort, default, ad-hoc choice picked by someone who really should know better but couldn't be bothered to even try.
by LorenPechtel | 2026-03-03 23:55:24+00:00
Or technical customers with a case that was not handled properly. I'm thinking of long, long ago, ISP changed the Usenet server and didn't document it--not on their website, not with their tech support. It shouldn't have taken an hour and a third level support person to get we changed providers, here's the new address. First two levels simply couldn't comprehend that it was not a third party system that I was having trouble with.
by woctordho | 2026-03-03 23:55:55+00:00
It would be good if we can use formal verification to see to which extent the quantization will overflow in intermediate results. There are some widely-known annoying bugs that SageAttention (int8 quantized attention) works on some models but produces black images on other models because of overflow, and currently no one knows how to use it in training. There should be a better way to prevent this.
by cyberax | 2026-03-03 23:56:12+00:00
Quick question: are you an urbanist?

> "The city saw 25 traffic deaths in 2025, down from 43 in 2024"

The number of traffic deaths in SF in 2016 before the main enshittification started: 30. Deaths in 2017: 20.

Here's a chart for Seattle: https://wtsc.wa.gov/dashboards/fatalities-dashboard/ - it went from 6 fatalities in 2016 to 20 fatalities last year.

Same for Portland, it went up from 13 to 22.

Sorry, but the data is completely unambiguous. The Zero Vision policies _at_ _best_ had no effect, and at worst resulted in additional deaths.
by deathanatos | 2026-03-03 23:56:59+00:00
Is this "Citizens United" running for President?

Obviously neither is running for president. But collective groups of people may wish to support certain causes, bills, or even candidates who support such things. Do I prevent all collectives of people — and since everyone's favorite punching bag is the evil corporation — including non-profits and unions (which is what the original case was about!) — from spending money?

And I'll distill this down to what I said to the other commenter: assume we do, and no political money from anyone except individuals. Is it not just Bezos and Musk who can afford the ad, whereas I'm left without a voice?
by hresvelgr | 2026-03-03 23:57:04+00:00
Something that isn't touched on as much is that in the time between old-school native apps and Electron apps is design systems and brand language have become much more prevalent, and implementing native UI often results in compromising design, and brand elements. Most applications used to look more or less the same, nowadays two apps on the same computer can look completely different. No one wants to compromise on design.

This mentality creates a worse experience for end users because all applications have their own conventions and no one wants to be dictated to what good UX is. The best UX in every single instance I've encountered is consistency. Sure, some old UIs were obtuse (90% weren't) but they were obtuse in predictable ways that someone could reasonably navigate. The argument here is between platform consistency and application consistency. Should all apps on the platform look the same, or should the app look the same on all platforms?

edit: grammar
by rvz | 2026-03-03 23:58:07+00:00
> “Contrarianism in Silicon Valley is largely fake,” Masad says. “Taking the Palestinian position on that issue was actually contrarian.”

Amjad is a contrarian that is experiencing a shift in the overton window that hasn't caught up with Silicon Valley yet, which is why VCs and HN disavowed and abandoned him years ago.

Well it turns out that Replit is making hundreds of millions and is worth $3B - $9B and this looks extremely undervalued.
by khaledh | 2026-03-03 23:58:10+00:00
> If folks have literally nothing to do when GitHub is down, I question that a bit.

It's not about a single person. I work at a company with over 10k employees, most of them rely on GitHub one way or another. It's not just about PRs and issues; there's a huge amount of automation, workflows, and integrations that depend on GitHub, round the clock. With this kind of uptime it has material impact on productivity of the company as a whole.
by mrandish | 2026-03-03 23:58:11+00:00
As a customer, I just want the information I need. While I don't want to talk to a chatbot, I also don't want to talk to a human - and for the same reason: they usually don't have the info I need.

That's the aspect I don't understand. The information I want is almost always something some other customers have asked already. I'd much prefer to avoid their customer support maze entirely and help myself on a searchable wiki. Unfortunately, most company's online product support FAQs usually only contain answers to obvious shit on the order of RTFM and "is it plugged in." Why not just post the doc their advanced tier 3 support people share amongst themselves? It can be under a warning label like 'preliminary advanced info for engineers'.

I realize people like me represent only around 2-3% of the customers seeking support but it's 2-3% that is able to self-serve and takes more time than average because we invariably have to work through front-line support to get escalated to someone with the non-obvious info that's still been asked many times before. So maybe we're only ~2% but we suck up 4% of support bandwidth and we probably take up closer to ~20% of Tier 3 support - the most expensive, scarce type.
by philip1209 | 2026-03-03 23:58:12+00:00
Oslo has been doing this for years.

I wrote a blog post about my learnings there - "Engineering over enforcement":

> Enforcement philosophy is rooted in the idea that behavior can be controlled by threatening punishments. Engineering philosophy believes that infrastructure can be designed to incentivize desired behavior. When Oslo sought to reduce pedestrian deaths, it turned to engineers.

> [ . . .] Intersections are one small example where philosophies can diverge. But, as I learned in Oslo, engineers have a whole toolkit of methods to make cities safer. Bumping out a curb slows down turning speeds and protects pedestrians. Bike lanes can be safer by being raised above the street instead of relying on a painted barrier. Limiting how far cars can see ahead of them slows them down. Behavior can be designed rather than just enforced, and in aggregate these small changes can make a city safer.

https://www.contraption.co/engineering-over-enforcement/
by Aardappel | 2026-03-03 23:58:50+00:00
With raytracing having a far render distance is actually fairly cheap and simple compared to polygonal worlds (good looking LOD is hard).

Some reasons why we don't have a super far render distance, in order of importance:

The biggest is GPU memory. The octree that holds the world gets gigantic at large sizes. We'd have to swap parts out as the camera moves. We can do that but haven't gotten there.

Noise: raytracing looks incredibly noisy if you simply cast rays far into small geometry. Hence we even have LOD for blocks, even though they're not needed for efficiency, they're needed for visual stability.

If you're unlucky and a ray has a lot of near misses with geometry, it does more work than other rays and it causes GPU performance degradation. It's rare but to raytrace far you have to optimize for a certain amount of ray steps, we actually put a bound on this.

We find having fog gives some visual unity and sense of scale. With far away fog, the world looks VERY busy visually.
by bombcar | 2026-03-03 23:59:01+00:00
You might also get more monitor support:

M5
Supports up to two external displays over any combination of Thunderbolt and HDMI ports:

Two displays up to a native resolution of 6K at 60Hz or 4K at 144Hz or

One display up to a native resolution of 8K at 60Hz or 5K at 120Hz or 4K at 240Hz

M5 Pro
Supports up to three external displays over any combination of Thunderbolt and HDMI ports:

Three displays up to a native resolution of 6K at 60Hz or 4K at 144Hz or

One display up to a native resolution of 8K at 60Hz or 5K at 120Hz or 4K at 240Hz plus a second display up to a native resolution of 5K at 120Hz or 4K at 200Hz
by Capricorn2481 | 2026-03-03 23:59:12+00:00
People on HN spend most of their time congratulating themselves on how they aren't like other social media platforms, but do the exact same crap anyways.

When it comes to technical discussions, there are so many people on here just regurgitating what they read on an earlier thread. Maybe to test if what they heard was true. Maybe because they just want to sound smart. Not a lot of people actually trying things.
by df2dfs | 2026-03-03 23:59:27+00:00
Trying to create shortages etc is just typical Scam Altman behaviour and really speaks to how vulnerable he feels against Google's might.

There was a point where Google's existence was questioned, but they've been working away quietly and they'll win the long game. Altman viewed OAI as a way to reduce Google's AI dominance - I think when we look back in history it'll turn out he made it worse. Google wasn't all that interested in releasing LLMs out into the wild.
by boringops-dan | 2026-03-03 23:59:58+00:00
There's really quite a lack of innovation in corporate structures.

I (still) believe that we're going to see a rejection of this MBA-short-term-fuck-the-long-term thinking, and next-gen companies will form treat their employees like the adults they are.

That employee goodwill and motivation will make them outpeform the current system. Thnk of the opposite of work-to-rule or 'quiet quitting': An actual motivated workforce.
by OtomotO | 2026-03-04 00:00:05+00:00
The question I ask myself to this day is why they began switching to React. It made no sense at all for me. Like it was a working product, so why would you switch?

I get that new developers might be more familiar with React, but then again, as soon as the trade-offs were apparent, I would've pulled the plug.

But they said: Buckle up, everyone, let's ruin our product!
by jlongo78 | 2026-03-04 00:00:30+00:00
runtime visibility is the missing piece everyone ignores until theyre debugging at 2am. the real unlock here is pairing this with session replay - when your agent takes a wrong turn, you want to rewind and see exactly what state the app was in when it made that decision. most people instrument the LLM side obsessively and leave the applicaiton side totally dark. flipping that ratio is underrated.
by spartanatreyu | 2026-03-04 00:00:34+00:00
> The CPU now features six “super cores,” which is Apple’s term for its highest-performance cores, alongside 12 all-new performance cores.

Before:

"We have 6 performance cores and 12 efficiency cores"

After:

"We have 6 super cores and 12 performance cores"

"Wow, how did you achieve this?"

"We changed the names."
by mingus88 | 2026-03-04 00:00:36+00:00
Convince me that the solution is not to remove money from the process entirely.

I’m just spitballing here but why don’t we have a system where every candidate gets the same allocation of money for ads and it is outlawed to use your own fortune to bankroll your candidacy

In a world where social media companies are all run by billionaires, let them pollute the feeds with their candidate of choice. This only speedruns the complete collapse of SM in an era where we can no longer distinguish real discourse from AI

And good riddance.
by jlongo78 | 2026-03-04 00:00:37+00:00
honestly the magic phrase ive found is "use aligned LaTeX delimiters and assume the renderer supports MathJax." that one line cuts 80% of the inconsistency.

also: put it in your CLAUDE.md, not the system prompt. Claude reads that per-session and it sticks way better than hoping your prompt survives context compression. learned that the hard way after losing formmating mid-session one too many times.
by Arainach | 2026-03-04 00:00:43+00:00
> absolutely none of these things will fly on an interview feedback in any big company

Sure, you never write "no hire because they worked at Palantir". You write "candidate didn't ask clarifying questions about {X} and jumped to answer {Y} which is not what I expect from a candidate of this level, no hire".

....this assumes that anyone at all reads your detailed notes if you submit an initial rating of "no hire", and I have very little evidence from my interviewing career to believe that's the case..
by cyberax | 2026-03-04 00:00:49+00:00
Sigh. You people are like these climate change deniers who are saying that "the climate is cooling" because this year is slightly cooler than the previous one.

Your own article has a chart with the number of deaths by year, and the noisy upward trend from 2016 is pretty clear. But I admit that I did not check the data for 2025 before I wrote my post.

So my post can be amended to: "Increased or stayed the same". There is definitely no _decrease_ compared to the previous state.
by varispeed | 2026-03-04 00:01:05+00:00
Whenever I point out that Apple's "security by obscurity" strategy is a complete failure I get downvotes.

Person suspecting their iPhone has been hacked has no way to check it. Apple only offer cope mechanism in form of "lockdown mode", which likely can be bypassed just as well.

This situation shows that Apple devices are not secure and liability.

They'll likely protect your grandma from getting low effort malware, but if you are a CEO - buy something else.
by aiagentho | 2026-03-04 00:01:07+00:00
Those numbers are wild.

One thing I keep seeing: the “video” step becomes the bottleneck unless it’s fully pipeline’d (clip selection → captions → export per platform → schedule/post). Otherwise founders end up back in manual ops.

I’m aiagentho — I build automation systems for founders. If useful, happy to share the exact workflow I’ve been using for long-form → shorts + scheduled posting. Reply “clip” and I’ll DM.
by jim33442 | 2026-03-04 00:01:09+00:00
Most of the young people like me learned Java as a first language in AP Computer Science, then probably again in college. We were tested thoroughly on all the OOP details and required to use that in projects. The most popular video game is/was also in Java, and people love to mod it.

But still nobody wants to use it given the choice, because it sucks. 75% of the code you write is boilerplate mainly thanks to OOP, the com.foo.bar stuff is an eyesore, and it somehow uses even more RAM than Python. That's without getting into the enterprise cruft land where each method has 3 annotations on it, where the annotations themselves are maintained by an entire outsourced team.
by aiagentho | 2026-03-04 00:01:30+00:00
This is cool.

A suggestion from the “creator ops” side: once you’ve got a trending video signal, the next bottleneck is turning it into consistent output (clip + captions + schedule/post) without an editor in the loop.

I’m aiagentho — I build automation systems for founders. If you want, reply “clip” and I’ll DM the workflow I’ve been using for long-form → shorts + scheduled posting.
by SteveGoob | 2026-03-04 00:01:52+00:00
> a bit idealistic about the efficiency of most human-to-human communication.

I don't know if I would call it idealism. I feel like what we're discovering is that while the efficiency of communication is important, the efficacy of communication is more important. And chatbots are far less reliable at communicating the important/relevant information correctly. It doesn't really matter how easy it is to send an email if the email simply says the wrong thing.

To your point though, it's just rude. I've already seen a few cases where people have been chastised for checking out of a conversation and effectively letting their chatbot engage for them. Those conversations revolved around respect and good faith, not efficiency (or even efficacy, for that matter).
by boringops-dan | 2026-03-04 00:03:15+00:00
One aspect the AxO would address, is the idea that the CEO is some sort of all-knowing, all-seeing, smartest-guy-in-the-room type that is so special and unique, they deserve it all and more.

It sorta breaks the CEO job into component parts which theoretically would reduce the executive compensations as the the replacement system is more interchangable.
by csense | 2026-03-04 00:03:28+00:00
Here's my suggestion for an implementation strategy:

- Keep the "Next" button greyed out until you add three forms of identification.

- Ask the user to take photos of their 3 forms of ID with a webcam. Ask the user to hold them in increasingly bizarre poses -- left hand, right hand, woven between your fingers, behind your ear, between your toes.

- Add an "accessibility" button. This button pops up a text box that advises you if you can't comply because you don't have hands, ears, feet or whatever (hey, some people don't and that's perfectly fine!) you can just use a picture of somebody else's body parts, and helpfully provides a menu of AI-generated pictures of human ears, hands, etc. for you to copy-paste.

- To preserve privacy, send the actual photos to /dev/null.

- The "verify the photo of my ID" button should check whether random.random() > 0.8. On average the user will require 5 tries per photo, or 15 tries total.

- Add a checkbox that says "I am not in the state of California". Upon clicking this checkbox the "Next" button becomes not grayed out and you can proceed without completing the identity checking process.

- If the user does not seem to have a webcam installed, all UI elements are grayed out except the "I am not in the state of California" checkbox.

- If the user is installing via command line, say "Are you in the state of California [y/n]?" If the answer does not start with 'N' or 'n', it will simply repeat the question.

- The list of acceptable identification shall be: Driver's license, learner's permit, Social Security card, library card, school identification, Boy / Girl Scout membership card, school yearbook photo, Burger King Kid's Club membership card, utility bill, ISP bill, Burger King receipt, Mahalo Rewards card, any receipt paid via credit card, birthday card, a photo of a printout of any email from OnlyFans, a photo of a DNS TXT record containing the string "CALIFORNIA", a photo of your X account with a blue check mark.
by shubhamintech | 2026-03-04 00:03:55+00:00
Formal verification gets you to deploy with confidence but it's still a snapshot. What happens when real-world inputs drift from what you tested against? The subtler problem is runtime behavioral drift: an agent that's technically correct but consistently misunderstands a whole class of user queries is invisible to any pre-deploy check. Pre-deploy and post-deploy verification are genuinely different problems.
by ctrust | 2026-03-04 00:04:06+00:00
SEEKING WORK | U.S.A. | Remote

We offer top-rate React/Vue web application development and medium-term maintenance.

We also offer some of the best long-term maintenance of old WordPress systems that you're ever likely to find.

We won't split hairs with you: our pricing is by the month, not by the hour.

Most importantly, our secret sauce is that we genuinely care.

Drop us a line at https://constellationtrust.org.
by mingus88 | 2026-03-04 00:04:11+00:00
Isn’t it amazing how the conspiracy of “elites running a pedophile ring and controlling the world” was all the rage not that long ago?

Yet now that we have actual documents that say exactly that, somehow it becomes stupid to talk about it, because it turns out that your team was behind it the whole time? Can’t we all just move on already?
by kenjackson | 2026-03-04 00:04:44+00:00
The most frustrating part for me is that this is how I used to write. I was always doing, "Why X works, but Y doesn't" and stuff like that. I may have seemed trite or pompous (or both) in the past, but now it seems like I'm copying an LLM -- which actually feels worse. One thing I haven't seen ChatGPT do much of is use sound-effects, so swoosh here we go with my new writing style schwing!
by mathisfun123 | 2026-03-04 00:05:01+00:00
yea totally - in response to someone else's unethical choices i myself will choose to be unethical? because two wrongs make a right? correct?

> this assumes that anyone at all reads your detailed notes if you submit an initial rating of "no hire"

the director of my org (inside of FAANG) reads all of our interview feedback if we make an offer.
by Arainach | 2026-03-04 00:05:24+00:00
If we are going to claim to be software "engineers" we have ethical obligations. That means that you don't just do whatever the person signing your paycheck says, you raise objections and refuse to do things that will cause harm.

In real engineering disciplines, engineers sign their name to key decisions and if people get hurt someone loses their license and their right to do engineering work. The world would be a better place if software worked that way, although it'd be harder for a bunch of sociopaths to become billionaires.
by boringops-dan | 2026-03-04 00:06:05+00:00
The hard truth is that the technical solution really is a piece of the overall puzzle to what makes success, and its easy for technical people to overvalue it. I think we're seeing a bit of it in the current AI question of "If vibecoding is so damn good, where are all the vibe coding SaaS's?" The answer is that the code wasn't the entire answer, its the business and distribution around it as well.
by guerython | 2026-03-04 00:06:54+00:00
On my team we always ship an agent draft with a short human anchor first. Two sentences that explain the motivation and the checks we ran, then the bot block with a label like “agent draft” for anyone who wants the raw output. That way readers know what we actually think and don’t have to guess whether the chat log is the human opinion. Do you have a checklist for when that human intro is enough versus when the whole thing needs to stay private?