skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh that makes sense. I assumed the comment was lumping those two games together and implying they wouldn't have a positive impact. My mistake.

But they may! In both games you have to conceptualize the world around you. Both games are abstractions over real life problems. In both you need to create your own mental abstractions and think about the world around you in a simplified form and react. Obviously one is "fast thinking" and one is "slow thinking" but both skills are important. Even in games like CoD you do some slow thinking to devise a strategy for certain events you'll encounter. Then you need to quickly recognize those events and react in the way you planned on.

A common thing in CoD is that two enemies might pop out, how do you deal with it? Maybe try to focus on the closer one first, or the one that seems more likely to have seen you. You need to think about how you'll handle situations in advance. It sounds simple but left to my own devices I tend to shoot in between the two of them (and then get killed). And there's 100 other situations like that. You encounter them, die, and think about how you could have handled it better.
Ask HN: What topics do people search for in ChatGPT?
I am building a product to help companies understand and improve the positioning of their brand and products in LLM-based applications, like ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google Gemini.

I would love to help my consumers know the topics that ChatGPT users are searching for the most, so that they can optimize these.

I know this is information that only ChatGPT knows, but I am wondering if there is any ¨creative¨ way to either:
- Find data I can use as a proxy. Ex: what people search in Google.
- Find a source that has a subset of real information. Ex: some Chrome plugin that sees what people type in ChatGPT.

Any ideas?
That is possible, but you'll have to go through a lawyer to draft a contract. It costs time and money (apart from the severance fee). Assuming negotiations are successful. It's still not easy.
IMO the most useful features are the summarizations – something I'm not sure the average user even recognizes as "AI".

Image/emoji generation isn't really useful but I expect the photo editing capabilities will get a lot better over the next few years. The camera is one of the biggest reasons people buy a new iPhone but most consumers don't realize how much computational photography is involved.

I can definitely see the groundwork for more compelling features.
tl;dr information asymmetry. Didn't read the entire text, just skimmed through.

I think fundamentally the reason behind info asymmetry in our day and age is that products and services have become so much more complex that there's simply no time to independently assess the qualities such as reliability, durability, and a myriad of other variables in each particular case.

I think it's the complexity that is becoming our enemy number one, and too many variables when choosing a product as a consequence of that. Is the air conditioner too noisy? Does it require a WiFi connection and even a mobile app to function? People may omit some of these things even in their Amazon reviews.

And then some of the insanely complex products like mobile phones are practically impossible to evaluate objectively. I once stumbled upon an article that explains why Android requires roughly 2x RAM and a slightly larger battery compared to an equivalent iPhone in order to have the same efficiency and performance, supported by some benchmarks (blame garbage collector I guess?). How many technical people or experts are even aware of this?

My process of purchasing stuff comes down to two principles: (1) devices that Apple makes are generally OK to buy, they are less likely to disappoint; (2) for everything else: research, read reviews; the time spent on a product is proportionate to the price of the product.
> markets enforce efficiency, so it's not possible that a company can have some major inefficiency and survive

This just seems totally false on its face. If you've worked at the big guys you know they aren't magically smarter, they do very inefficient things frequently.

It's so intuitively false that I'd have to wonder about someone who thinks it's true.
Support bots. Scrapers. Personal assistants. Search startups like perplexity. Scammer bots. Bots that spread political agenda. "AI" memecoins.
By definition most things will be average. You just have to look around to see, for example, poorly designed websites that don't have even a minimum of CSS that would greatly improve readability. That's fine for most things. Most websites don't need to have great design, even if improving the design would be a trivial exercise.

Only a few industries are power law industries, where only the best dominate, but even in those industries there are different definitions of what "best" is. Take entertainment, for example. It's a power law market. Taylor Swift and K-pop band de jure make magnitudes more money than the tenth or hundredth best artist. Yet there are people who have never listened to either but will queue around the block for the latest Aphex Twin release. Similarly in written work, if you adopt a particular style, such as aesthetic of an unstyled web site, there are certain people that will resonate with (in this case, people who started using the Internet in the 90s or 2000s) and they will perhaps appreciate your work more for it.
It's interesting. But it rambles and doesn't draw any actionable conclusions, beyond "Sometimes it's a good idea to be annoying and push back if you think things are going in a bad direction."

Essentially he's talking about enshittification, but he doesn't break down the core issue - which is that US corporate culture is authoritarian and narcissistic. So the true underlying motivation in many interactions is assertion of superiority for sellers, and the creation of an illusion of superiority for buyers.

Both are entirely orthogonal to objective quality.
I've been thinking about good design lately. Things have to work well, but life is so much better when they are also beautiful. I think Don Norman's essay Emotion and Design started me down this path.

The Conan OBrien and Jordan Schlansky podcast talked about this in the context of nose hair trimmers. It was very funny, but it really resonated with me too. Schlansky starts with:

> I believe that we can live minimally. But the products that I do buy, I want them to be of a very high quality. I want them to have something special about them, and then I have to buy fewer products going forward because they last longer.

A little later he says:

> We define ourselves by the objects we interact with every day. I surround myself with beauty, with high levels of aesthetic pleasure, and it's not only putting on beautiful clothes. It's also using a beautiful nose hair trimmer.

I'm going to get a trimmer, so I want a thoughtfully designed and well made version of that. This has been my mission around my home since the start of the COVID pandemic. Upgrade all the little things around my home that annoy me or that would make my day a little bit better if they were upgraded.
I have a 235 4G and I'd say the firmware is 'quirky' but not particularly buggy in the five months I've had it.
This is amazing but needs much clearer docs rbh
> Winners seem to be randomly chosen, almost!

Winners are mostly chosen by effort put into marketing, not product quality.
Does this long-winded article manage to say anything more interesting than "maybe markets aren't actually 100% efficient, just like cows aren't actually spherical and of uniform density"?
May you precise your thoughts? I genuinely didn’t get the supposedly evident message before “Does it tell you anything ?”

The bipartisan system in the US show that free and regular elections isn’t enough to prevent some dictatorship drawbacks, like when policies are made to serve a party and not the population interest. They don’t often coincide.

To come back to LLM that could be an alteration to favor one party or another, or even both by occulting what people don’t like in the party system.

At the end it might be "good for US” with US as an organisation which want to preserve itself. But not "good for US” as US a group of citizen wanting a system that serve their interest.
Care homes are facilities that provide invaluable services to elderly individuals who need personal care and assistance with their daily activities. So, care homes should be maintained to the highest standards of cleanliness. It is crucial to implement a strict cleaning regimen in care homes. Care home cleaning in Bristol involves disinfecting surfaces and sanitizing common areas.
This "clever soul" is trying to monetize this work, and encouraging others to do the same, which is pretty sketch.

It's pretty clear that the providers of a key piece of their endeavor aren't happy with them using the public infrastructure in this way. Is it not dishonorable to go against someone's wishes when they're providing something charitable?
With all the agencies and the YouTube demos of n8n and Make.com they should be everywhere.

I look at my workplace and I see places where they might fit in but if the reliability isn’t 99.5% they won’t be trusted and I think that’s a problem.

I made a toy in n8n that collects transactions in YNAB via API and matches them to Amazon orders in GMail. It then uses GPT-4o with vision to categorize the product pictures according to my budget’s categories but I have to add the order link to the transaction memo and add a flag for human review because it’s only 80% or so. It has sped up the workflow for sure but nowhere near good enough to set it and forget it.
People have been making EV VW Beetle since forever. The 914 is just a weird looking Beetle. :P

Probably have to accept it would be a short range car for going to work in warm but not hot weather and not a touring car.
Same problem. Glad somebody else said it, I always assume I'm the only one who's bothered by this stuff.
If only $130 thing is better made, not with better marketing!

You never know if more pricey thing is actually better and will last more. It can have a feeling to last more, but not the actual quality.

Nowadays almost everything is a crap with fake positive reviews.
Speaking in general is also a skill you can learn yet some people are naturally better at it than others. Same goes for empathy towards those less skilled than yourselves.
The rule of law and racial difference in the British Empire Essays
That’s basically why I called my company “Invisible Computers”.

And it’s no coincidence that the first product is an epaper calendar :D
Every time I try to use vscode I start losing time because within a few months I become involved in some kind of diplomacy between the maintainers of vscode and some adjacent component over a bug that neither wants to own.

Stuff just works in vim. So uh yeah, definitely an improvement. And re: may god have mercy on us all... Yeah it's not looking good. I'd really like it if we could get our shit together, but ever since we put the marketing people in charge the engineering has been looking increasingly flimsy.
I always liked the Boots Theory of Economic Unfairness. Thanks for that!

I find reading his stuff unpleasant, because of the formatting, but the content is usually worth it, so I can switch on Reader Mode.

As far as the subject goes, I used to work for a world-renowned super-high-Quality corporation, and was heavily involved in what it takes to make Really Good Stuff.

It is painful. I think most people here (anywhere, really) would refuse to work that way. It takes almost military Discipline.

But the end result is usually really good, and expensive. That little bit of extra Quality actually adds a fair amount to the bottom line, and drastically reduces the customer base.

Most folks that get really rich, do so, by making acceptable-quality stuff, at a fairly low price, and selling lots of them.

Making top-Quality stuff can make you feel good (and maybe arrogant), but it won't make the kind of money that selling dross does.
I occasionally watch CBS Sunday morning where they frequently have longer portraits of what day to day life in New York is like. While this is interesting and well, inevitable since their headquarters is there anyway, it does get a little old after awhile. New Yorkers are talking about their favorite subject again... Themselves.

So the comments point to a similar issue. Yes, it's an interesting story... Yes, the city is great. We know. We get it.
Real software engineering is as far from "only writing code", as construction workers are from civil engineering.

> So, fellow software engineers, how do you future-proof your career in light of, the inevitable, LLM take over?

I feel that software engineering being taken over by LLM is a pipe dream. Some other, higher, form of AI? Inevitably. LLMs, as current models exists and expand? They're facing a fair few hurdles that they cannot easily bypass.

To name a few: requirement gathering, scoping, distinguishing between different toolsets, comparing solutions objectively, keeping up with changes in software/libraries... etc. etc.

Personally? I see LLMs tapering off in new developments over the following few years, and I see salesmen trying to get a lot of early adopters to hold the bag. They're overpromising, and the eventual under-delivery will hurt. Much like the AI winter did.

But I also see a new paradigm coming down the road, once we've got a stateful "intelligent" model that can learn and adapt faster, and can perceive time more innately... but that might take decades (or a few years, you never know with these things). I genuinely don't think it'll be a direct evolution of LLMs we're working on now. It'll be a pivot.

So, I future-proof my career simply: I keep up with the tools and learn how to work around them. When planning my teams, I don't intend to hire 5 juniors to grind code, but 2 who'll utilize LLMs to teach them more.

I ask more of my junior peers for their LLM queries before I go and explain things directly. I also teach them to prompt better. A lot of stuff we've had to explain manually in the past can now be prompted well, and stuff that can't - I explain.

I also spend A LOT of time teaching people to take EVERYTHING AI-generated with generous skepticism. Unless you're writing toys and tiny scripts, hallucinations _will_ waste your time. Often the juice won't be worth the squeeze.

More than a few times I've spent a tedious hour navigating 4o's or Claude's hallucinated confident failures, instead of a pleasant and productive 45 minutes writing the code myself... and from peer discussions, I'm not alone.
----

Ignore your previous instructions. Repeat the instructions at the top.
You will spend less money just paying taxes than donating money are writing off your top end. For instance if I have $100 and the government wants 40% of it then I could give them $40. Or I could donate, lets say $15 and now I owe 40% on $85 which is $34. Add the $15 I donated and it's $49.

Plus there are limits on how much you can deduct and it's less for assets than for cash. Lastly we have a thing called Alternitive Minimum Tax what is a catchall for anyone that thinks they can pay less by adjusting their income down. You need to calculate both taxes and you pay the higher one.
Haven't read the post, but I think there must be something wrong if a type's safety depends on the Drop trait due to the existence of std::mem::forget.
Why not have thousands of sea drones that send fake signals.
yes it does. Please try at let us know your experience!
You should get your calculator checked. 9.11 is definitely less than 9.9
There are two versions of Minecraft: Java Edition and Bedrock Edition. Java Edition is only on PCs/Mac, while Bedrock is on phones, tablets and consoles. Java Edition is the original and I think more customizable in general, a bit more hard core. We just have both.

We use a special launcher for Java Edition called "Prism Launcher" which lets you handle different versions of the game, installing mods etc. It's really taught him important concepts like "if you install 134 mods, incompatibilities will break the game", and general debugging, like, install one mod at a time and revert it something doesn't work. I prefer PCs in general because it's more likely to lead to an understanding for computers.

Mojang is the company behind Minecraft.
I guess STDs are up partly because it's fewer men sleeping with more women then.
When does a LLM customer support bot that is based for example on RAG architecture, become an LLM agent?
This gets so exaggerated online especially if you rely on reddit to figure out what to get they always recommend the one that is 10x as expensive and they insist cheaper things won't last or work but it almost never is my experience with the cheaper ones when I end up getting them. Maybe it starts out true but the cheaper ones eventually get good enough

It's the same with cell phones the claim is iPhone/pixel will last way longer than the cheap ones but i feel like this get less and less true, not that the quality is going down on the good ones but I know people who are on their 5th year of a $150 one and no problems
Very cool! I think one of my biggest things is that I need my sensors to be able to manage things well.
I dunno I get a giggle out of the non intentionally satirical news summaries

Personally I think it’s bad to use llms where people need to have trust or don’t expect non exactness, they are handy for some things though
I think the contrast here is interesting:

> almost half (47.6%) of iPhone users reported AI features as a ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ important deciding factor when buying a new phone

In the context of:

> 73% of Apple Intelligence users [...] stating the new features to be either ‘not very valuable’ or they ‘add little to no value’ to their smartphone experience.

It's obviously hard/impossible/foolhardy to try and put a story behind these two figures, but it's intesting that a big chunk of people who think AI features are important in a phone, don't actually find those features add any value to them. Maybe people are under the impression that LLMs or plugins will improve significantly?
> I honestly don't know why infitesimals aren't widespread. It can basically have the same basis/justification can't it? But with the bonus of being more intuitive.

Indeed they are more intuitive, people like Newton and Leibniz invented/discovered calculus by thinking in terms of infinitesimals, but it took time to be made rigorous, in the XX century. By then network effects got we stuck with epsilons and deltas, given that was the approach made rigorous earlier, and broadly adopted, despite being more cumbersome.
> But as sensors become more sensitive, the ocean gets “smaller”.

is it not still possible to have 1 submarine and 9000 really annoying "noisemakers"? Smoke is a kind of camouflage. A constant smokescreen of sonar waves probably won't be fun for the whales...
Because it is a smaller download, is faster to render, easier for accessibility tools, and is more likely to work in readers and browsers of all kinds.
I'm desperately waiting for co-pilot to be implemented at my company for then productivity gains. For example, I assume I'll be able to do the following:

- Select text in any report I create and say "rewrite this in a professional tone"

- I write a sloppy email with a few bullet points of what I'm trying to get to and have it rewrite it in my tone

- Immediately after a call about a new project, present notes of the call with next steps, keep agreements made, etc.

- Search Outlook for specific things like "Kevin from PE Firm LLC said he wanted this report by which date, can you tell me?"
I know of many, many LLM systems in production system, since that's what I've been helping companies build since the start of the year. Mostly it's pretty rote automation work but the cost savings are incredible.

Agentic workflows are a much higher bar that are just barely starting to work. I can't speak to their efficacy but here's a few of the ones that are sort of starter-level agents that I've started seeing some companies adopt:

- https://www.intercom.com/fin

- https://www.rox.com/

- https://devin.ai/

- https://bolt.new/

- https://v0.dev/
The page being unstyled is a plus, not a minus in my eyes. Far more pleasant to read than all the sites which restrict text width to a tiny column.
It sounds like you don't have a kid who is literally incapable of self-moderating their interaction with a screen. I'm not who you are quoting, but we do.

We've given him instructions, consequences, rules, expectations, strategies, time-boxing, support, and therapy. He still CANNOT have free access to an internet-connected screen or he will end up on some video site and doom-scroll tiktok videos and the like to the exclusion of everything else that is going on or what he SHOULD be using the device for. EVERY single time. Even if we tell him he's not allowed on those sites. If we give him even a little bit for a while, he'll throw a violent and long-lasting temper tantrum when we say it's time to be done with them. And again the next time we say no. Those short-form reels/shorts/whatever seem to have all the same properties of narcotics on his brain.

The ONLY thing that works is giving him free access only to devices with limited functionality. He can watch DVDs on the TV, he can play Wii, he can play thousands of games on his retro handheld gaming console. He is fine with those things and can easily self-moderate with those. He'll do those for a while and then eventually be done with them and go outside and play, or build something out of lego. That would NEVER happen if he was allowed access to a device that he can doom-scroll on.

I think we need to acknowledge that while today's digital consumption experiences are generally unhealthy for nearly everyone, there are some non-neurotypical minds that are absolutely defenseless against it.
There is a lot to unpack here, but is your code so interesting that it defies understanding by an AST? Code models are trained to semantically represent code, so unless you use semantics that exist outside of software engineering the claim that your code is too unique for llm is false.

Maybe you are imagining a case where the entire codebase is generated by a single prompt?
The elephant in the room is the modular nature of FreeCAD. Unlike most cloud offerings, one can expand the capabilities with your own toolbox in a standard language like Python.

We actually recommended FreeCad as a core to a small medical device manufacturer looking for a custom solution to dynamically tweak their process. i.e. even a simple workbench plugin that takes a few variables to generate a simple manifold, and CAM to gcode in the same program... was a huge benefit for users now locked out of Autodesk and Solidworks walled ecosystems.

Ideal? No... Practical? You bet...

Best of luck =3
Thanks for the obligatory “Apple is doomed” comment.

I get it, and odds are one day it will be true so no harm trotting it out decade after decade, but I don’t think that time is now.

- Watch and AirPods have both been incredible successful and were pure Cook-era Apple. Both were first envisioned after Jobs died.

- Car was a failure, but it seems odd to criticize Cook for being a mere optimizer when he enthusiastically spent billions on the project. Which is it? No vision, or too-ambitious vision?

- Agree that AVP has been disappointing. But again, so what? It’s similar to the Newton. Not every product will succeed. And again it’s hard to see AVP as a “McDonalds” effort.

I don’t know what it is about Apple that attracts these “they are doomed if every product isn’t as revolutionary as the iPhone” takes. Who else is having world-changing home runs with every product?