skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Can't wait till we start getting USB4 phones!

Apple still ships non-pro models with USB 2 (mostly to pretend that the 4 models they produce every year have any meaningful difference besides size)
There were people in the Zen 5 release thread saying the reason AMD had < 10% of the increase on single core after 2 years is just the reality of physics. In half that time this year Apple to the single core score of the iPhone from below the 7950X to above the new 9950X.

Scaling has slowed down in some aspects, it's definitely not the late 90s anymore where your PC is just obsolete 4 years later, but things like this are a good reminder execution by chip designers is still by far the bigger factor in how large the generational growth will be.
Swift runs on windows and linux too. It’s not limited to Apple devices by any means.
What is it actually doing with all that compute? Is it every animated thumbnail? Is it scaling thumbnail images? Re-flowing the page 120x/sec? Mining bitcoin?

Anyone know?
> footer of the blog post, where date is usually, has the date

> looking for the date of this text is detective work

indeed, readers are from different generation and expect different things.
Show HN: degengen – go max degen with generative trading pages
HN,

One month of grinding and I'm excited to share degengen.com with you all.

degengen is all about making a more fun, social trading experience that's community first via generative trading pages and generative chats.

I wanted a DEXTools that maximizes fun and community.

How It Works:

Generative Trading Pages: Enter a token name or address, and degengen creates a unique and novel trading page filled with surprises—a generative chat, a trading chart, and other goodies.

Make Changes Instantly: As the page creator, you can make changes using generative AI. Click "make change," describe your desired adjustments, and the AI handles it. You'll need to be connected to your wallet or logged in before generating a page to make changes, as we associate your public key or login with the page created.

Community Engagement: Pages with the highest engagement get automatically linked to the token on the site, promoting community interaction on that page. Anyone can create a new page at any time by entering the token name or address. If a new page gains higher engagement later, it becomes the primary linked page.

Quick Generation: It takes about 30 seconds to generate a page and apply any changes.

Generative Chat: Each page features a generative chat component powered by an LLM, enhancing chats with unpredictable and fun interactions—a true degen experience.

I hope to iterate on this based on your feedback over the next days and weeks.

Happy trenching!
The suggestion of using metaphors for existential framing is nonsensical when one thinks of the ends of the activities, but it makes plenty of sense when one applies it to the process instead.

In a negotiation, as long as I know my boundaries and my decision calculus, then approaching it playfully and in a way that brings the other person into the game is a very constructive (and frankly fun) route. This is what is meant by dance rather than fight.
Check out how many "greenville" s there are. Even several in the same state.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenville

There's even more than one "Las Vegas".
There is, by definition, no illegal crossings when the border is open. So, no, I think your assertion is very ill informed
What Computers Can't Do
Microsoft should develop a dock that you plug this phone into to activate monitor / keyboard and mouse with the full office suite.

Maybe the dock has a little bit of extra ram to facilitate.
>Firstly publishing something on Facebook explicitly gives them the right to "copy" it. It certainly gives them the right to exploit it (it's literally their business model.)

This isn't necessarily true for a user content host. I haven't read Facebook's TOS, but some agreements restrict what the host can do with the users' content. Usually things like save content on servers, distribute it over the web in HTML pages to other users, and make copies for backups. This might encourage users to post poetry, comics, or stories without worrying about Facebook or Twitter selling their work in anthologies and keeping all the money.

>In school we read setwork books. We wrote essays, summaries, objections, theme analysis and so on. Some of my class went on to be writers, influenced by those works and that study.

Scholarly reports are explicitly covered under a Fair Use exception.

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html

But also be careful not to anthropomorphize LLMs. Just because something produces content similar to what a human would make doesn't mean it should be treated as human in the law. Or any other way.
Yeah if the computer had been wrong 3 out of 10 times it never would have been a thing.
> I still think, in the end, the work is mostly done alone, in a pile of books, on your own time.

I feel compelled to link the quote from Good Will Hunting here, I will refrain. However I agree completely. I also went to a “great” school, and I learned everything from overpriced books on my own time. In fact, in my entire tenure of undergrad I never attended a full week of class, not even the first week.
It's crazy to me that we managed to get such an exciting technology both theoretically and as a practical tool and still managed to make it into a bubbly hype wave because business people want it to be an automation technology, which is just a poor fit for what they actually do

It's kind of cool that we can make mathematical arguments for this, but the idea that generative models can function as universal automation is a fiction mostly being pushed by non-technical business and finance people, and it's a good demonstration of how we've let such people drive the priorities of technological development and adoption for far too long

A common argument I see folks make is that humans are fallible too. Yes, no shit. No automation even close to as fallible as a human at its task could function as an automation. When we automate, we remove human accountability and human versatility from the equation entirely, and can scale the error accumulation far beyond human capability. Thus, an automation that actually works needs drastically superhuman reliability, which is why functioning automations are usually narrow-domain machines
Probably city-zipcode-country would disambiguate effectively both for the US (where you could have several Springfield cities in different states) and Europe (where there are probably, for instance, quite a number of `Sainte-Anne` cities on top of Guadeloupe's)

I think we're probably going to get a blog post from you a couple weeks from now titled "falsehoods programmers believe about cities"!
*points at my own profile*

I moved from the UK to Germany, I actively decided against the USA. Why? Consider what was going on politically in the US right after the UK voted for Brexit.

Σκεφτόμουν την Κύπρο, αλλά οι Άγγλοι λένε όταν κάτι είναι δύσκολο να διαβαστεί: "It's all greek to me"
Tangential…Anyone from the HN community using Yuka app. (Scan barcodes to get info about dangerous additives and other health info about food and healthcare products.) I discovered it in France where it’s rather popular and continue to use it state side. Has changed a lot of my buying/consuming decisions. No affiliation.
I remember first seeing Factor more than a decade ago (maybe even when it just launched, if memory serves correctly). It's really neat to see it thriving.
The worst part is that if you're not running Linux but have a perfectly working 'timeout' command, the script will ignore it and fail.
>In Europe, they have a simpler system. Education is paid for from taxes. If a student does well, they pay for it via taxes. If they don't, then they aren't crippled by debt.

That's all well and good for the student, but what about for taxpayers/governments who's funding that education?

>And likewise it sets up universities to, as you say, "cut courses with poor returns." Like for example "teaching", because school teacher pay is crap, so it has a poor ROI.

Sounds like the solution is to raise teacher pay, which would also have the added benefit of retaining teachers after they graduate. Giving teachers cheap training but paying them poorly seems worse than the status quo because you end up shoveling money into training teachers that'd end up dropping out anyways.
May I suggest reading actual history books? The stories in them can be very good. See "Empire of the Summer Moon" by Gwynne.

https://www.amazon.com/Empire-Summer-Moon-Comanches-Powerful...

Why anyone hasn't made this into a miniseries is baffling. It's quite an epic. Not only that, it really happened. No worries about canon. No worries about sequels and prequels, because there is no beginning or end to historical stories. The stories are fractal, in that there's no end to going into a particular aspect in depth.

There are plenty of others.
> fundamentally ridden with "hallucinations" that will severely limit their practical usage

On the other hand, a LLM that got rid of "hallucinations" is basically just a thing that copy-paste at that point. The interesting properties from LLMs comes from the fact that it can kind of make things up but still make them believable.
Yep, exactly. Current situation is clearly bad, but most of the solutions seem to focus around the idea that dismissing trillions of dollars in debt through bankruptcy is a great idea (it isn't)
Plus, why do we care about that degree? If we could make it so humans don't hallucinate too that would be great, but it ain't happening. Humans memory gets polluted the moment you feed them new information, as evidence by how much care we have to give when trying to extract information when it matters, like law enforcement.

People rag on LLMs constantly and i get it, but they then give humans way too much credit imo. The primary difference i feel like we see with LLMs vs Humans is complexity. No, i don't personally believe LLMs can scale to human "intelligence". However atm it feels like comparing a worm brain to a human intelligence and saying that's evidence that neurons can't reach human intelligence level.. despite the worm being a fraction of the underling complexity.
>> we tend to forget Ada but it was doing what Rust is before it was cool.

As someone who has done a fair bit of Rust and Ada programming, this is not quite accurate an overlooks the innovations of Rust and the strengths of Ada:

In my opinion, Rust's biggest innovations are 1) borrow checking and "mutation XOR sharing" built into the language, effectively removing the need for manual memory management or garbage collection, 2) Async/Await in a low-level systems language, and 3) Superb tooling via cargo, clippy, built-in unit tests, and the crates ecosystem (in a systems programming language!) Rust may not have been the first with these features, but it did make them popular together in a way that works amazingly well.

Ada's strengths are its 1) powerful type system (custom integer types, use of any enumerated type as an index, etc.), 2) perfect fit for embedded programming with representation clauses, the real-time systems annex, and the high integrity systems annex, and 3) built-in Design-by-Contract preconditions, postconditions, and invariants. Compared to Rust, Ada feels a bit clunky and the tooling varies greatly from one Ada implementation to another. However, for some work, Ada is the only choice because Rust does not have sufficently qualified toolchains yet. (Hopefully soon . . .)

Both languages have great foreign function interfaces and are relatively easy to use with C compared to some other programming languages. But Ada is not "Rust but from the 1980s" anymore than Rust is "like Ada, but newer".

Having done a fair bit of C programming in the past, today I would always choose Rust over C or C++ when given the choice.

But when working with really big C++ codebases, you don't always get to choose so something like Safe C++ is good to help add Rust-like features to C++ code.
Maybe it's an American problem? It sure has declined over the years but I was surprised by the amount of people walking around with books while visiting central Europe this year.
Once GPT is tuned more heavily on Lean (proof assistant) -- the way it is on Python -- I expect its usefulness for research level math to increase.

I work in a field related to operations research (OR), and ChatGPT 4o has ingested enough of the OR literature that it's able to spit out very useful Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) formulations for many "problem shapes". For instance, I can give it a logic problem like "i need to put i items in n buckets based on a score, but I want to fill each bucket sequentially" and it actually spits out a very usable math formulation. I usually just need to tweak it a bit. It also warns against weak formulations where the logic might fail, which is tremendously useful for avoiding pitfalls. Compare this to the old way, which is to rack my brain over a weekend to figure out a water-tight formulation of MIP optimization problem (which is often not straightforward for non-intuitive problems). GPT has saved me so much time in this corner of my world.

Yes, you probably wouldn't be able to use ChatGPT well for this purpose unless you understood MIP optimization in the first place -- and you do need to break down the problem into smaller chunks so GPT can reason in steps -- but for someone who can and does, the $20/month I pay for ChatGPT more than pays for itself.

side: a lot of people who complain on HN that (paid/good - only Sonnet 3.5 and GPT4o are in this category) LLMs are useless to them probably (1) do not know how to use LLMs in way that maximizes their strengths; (2) have expectations that are too high based on the hype, expecting one-shot magic bullets. (3) LLMs are really not good for their domain. But many of the low-effort comments seem to mostly fall into (1) and (2) -- cynicism rather than cautious optimism.

Many of us who have discovered how to exploit LLMs in their areas of strength -- and know how to check for their mistakes -- often find them providing significant leverage in our work.
Give it some time—Marco just radically re-architected the app and is in the process of iterating the UI rapidly. He just added the ability to swipe in the main card again for example.
Ultimately I can memorise 12 words representing my private key. And when the dictatorship finally ends, or I manage to flee, no government can ever freeze my money.

No tax man, no dictator, and no other thief can distinguish someone who memorised 12 words from someone who didn't.
'Breakthru 286' card claims to make your IBM PC or XT five to ten times faster [video]
It was dumb in that it replaced intelligent ideas with action.
Wow, salty :)

How many ML projects for large businesses have you been on?
Hmm perhaps it fails with two or more lines at the start of the user bio? I had an extra paragraph or two of text before.

But maybe it's only looking for a certain number of lines and cutting off anything after that, hence why the interests don't show up for you and the tool fails for anyone with a lot of text before the block.
If out of all the species that ever existed, we're the only ones that understand our own mortality, it makes me wonder what else, by sheer probability, we have yet to understand.
I said is I don't see the utility in reducing the concept from a continuum to a binary "is/isn't"

You seem to have doubled down on the is/isn't perspective and demonstrated what I was referring to. The more you reduce the less useful your reasoning becomes.
The issue is that I can give it a try on a set of toy problems, but finding a real-world-class problem is totally a different story IMHO. That is exactly the reason I asked about people's "experiences".

Anyway thanks for the response.
That was in a time when people didn’t envision every person in the first world having access to their entire lives at their finger tips.

I would tend to agree that today’s apps are… dogshit. Without a doubt, the vast majority of today workloads (99.9%) should be able to run on 2008ish era processing power if they were well programmed.
No mention of Holly Herndon or Mat Dryhurst at all? Whoever wrote this completely failed to do their research — more than anyone else I'm aware of, they've been working to explore the possibilities of how working with AI can be considered Art.

Some assorted reading:

- https://x.com/matdryhurst/status/1830554355025477940

- https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/11/20/holly-herndons...

- https://www.anothermag.com/art-photography/15858/art-in-the-...

EDIT: didn't mention Archillect either. Extremely low value article.

EDIT2: finished reading, and no mention at all about Section 230 protections despite discussing "tech platforms", and a single reference to "fair use" being referenced in a callout box. Whoever wrote this should be embarassed by how little they say with so many words.
This is not related to Lean or Haskell. I'm just wondering why when people are curious about a new general-purpose language, the first thing they test is an HTTP server.
I appreciate your post here and I'm glad you shared, because it's an example of a distributed harm. One of millions to shake out of this incident, that doesn't have a dollar figure, so it doesn't really "count".

To illustrate:

If I were to do something horrible like kick a 3 year olds knee out and cripple them for life, I would be rightly labeled a monster.

But If I were to say... advocate for education reform to push American Sign Language out of schools, so that deaf children grow up without a developmental language? We don't have words for that, and if we did, none of them would get near the cumulative scope and harm of that act.

We simply do not address distributed harms correctly. And a big part of it is that we don't, we can't, see all the tangible harms it causes.
Online Dating Caused a Rise in US Income Inequality, Research Paper Shows
A specialized LLM could possibly meet his criteria already.
A country's which population is educated, usually bodes well, unless it's an authoritative govt one, in which case dumbing down the population is the way (from the govt POV, at least)
I'm afraid there are... 1,700+ cities[0] in the world called "San José"

That's quite a bit of scrolling you'd be forcing those people to do.

[0]: https://www.ncesc.com/geographic-pedia/what-is-the-most-comm...
> just harder to learn about when distribution was more difficult.

The future was already here — it was just not very evenly distributed.
Not sure absolute perfection is a concept that can exist in the universe of words.
Simpler isn’t always preferable: note that the key feature from the consumer perspective in that system is

> you pay no matter what

Meaning if it’s assumed “despite learning little, you still will be able to pay for it”, there’s no longer any motive force towards quality, as your payment is assured. Incentives on taxpayers thereafter who want to minimize their tax burden would therefore be optimizing primarily toward cheapness of the educational process, rather than efficacy and quality of the education which outbound students received.

A vigorous market for education, would suggest you would likely get a variety of nodes along a “costliness to quality” options frontier.
I think most people would agree with me in saying the European model sounds pretty swell compared to forcing people into declaring bankruptcy because of economic/personal factors potentially out of their control, while also inserting an incredible amount of volatility into the entire university system that would make long term institutional planning much less possible.
So, to recap, a large global industry is built on a foundation that the true identity of a particular currently-anonymous person must never be identified and certainly not posthumously.
Isn't that obvious without invoking godel's theorem etc?
Your first guess is precisely right: the court ordered him to post that notice on his Twitter accounts and website. It's for a limited time of a few months.
Oh man, that’s horrible, that definitely makes me rethink my eating habits as well, oy

This is why we need cellular agriculture
Most DNG files, not all DNG files. In the past DNG files were always raw uncompressed files.
There are some great docs here for using the API:
https://podcastindex-org.github.io/docs-api/#get-/search/byt...
on Nikon cameras you can choose between compressed and uncompressed raw files. So I’m assuming you haven’t been around that many cameras.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4635816
100%, for mobile devices performance has more to do with overall efficiency than it does actual long lasting compute heavy workloads.
Stack Overflow rarely surfaced a solution to your particular problem, but solutions to tangential or otherwise very similar problems. You still had to reason around the posters problem context and try to see if it really matched your own. You still had to have some understanding.

LLMs present a solution as if it is 100% in the context of your problem. You arrive at a solution without being forced to think at all if the solution applies to your problem.

Without being forced to, many will not. I teach programming and I can tell you it is so so obvious when students are just blasting shit from ChatGPT into their submissions without thought.
I mean, a lot of trades do have standardized tests. The LSAT for law school, the MCAT for medical school, and the CPA exams for accounting come to mind. I don't know why computer science hasn't organized in this manner, maybe because it's a younger field or maybe because there are simply too many people and employers don't care enough about having certified employees.
Shakes fist at clouds... Back in my day we called these "bugs" and if you didn't fix them your program didn't work.

Jest aside, there is a long list of "flaws" in LLMS that no one seems to be addressing. Hallucinations, Cut off dates, Lack of true reasoning (the parlor tricks to get there don't cut it), size/cost constraints...

LLM's face the same issues as expert systems, without the constant input of experts (subject matter) your llm becomes quickly outdated and useless, for all but the most trivial of tasks.
"No equipment from adversary countries should be allowed in American infrastructure." Seems like an extreme take. Wouldn't it be better to accept the best equipment that has passed audit regardless of origin?
I lived across from a farm in Ireland for a few years, and sometimes I heard the most horrible wailing coming from the barn across the road. It was about 180 meters away, so quite loud.

I asked a mutual neighbour the next day "were they slaughtering the cows last night?" And they just said "oh, no, they just took the calves away and the cows get sad".

As a parent myself I feel worse about dairy than beef. Weirdly I think I'd be more comfortable eating a carnivore than an herbivore. That feels more "fair", in a sense. But it's a horrendously inefficient way to get calories.
Germany is not exactly known for cheap plans, but apparently it’s worse in the US and you can only get comparable plans if you pay yearly, which I guess might just barely make a $5 parking contract worth it.
Shellcheck, and really any linter (and arguably also any other form of programming language safety, like static typing or compile-time memory safety), is not there for the very experienced author (which it sounds like you are).

Those mechanisms exist for the inexperienced author (especially in a team setting) where you want some minimum quality and consistency.

An example where Shellcheck might be useful for you is when working with a team of junior programmers. You don't necessarily have the time to teach them the ins and outs of bash, but you can quickly setup Shellcheck to make sure they don't make certain types of errors.

I think your position is totally valid and nobody can or should force you to use a linter, but I think that even for you there _can_ be situations where they might be useful.