skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Take my money, good sir and all the hopes of the oligarchs rest upon you stabilize and keeping going a society running out.

PS: If you dont return, at las return the wheelbarrow, do not worry much then its only paper.
We are approaching a singularity where we actually want to hire the cheating tool, not the cheater.
This is interesting.

We have the same in France. The first big "big surface" stores were named supermarché, then we got hypermarché and the funniest is that now we have superette, a small surface store, branded like the super/hyper but within the city center.

The "ette" French suffix is to reduce the main word.
As opposed to all other interviewing methodologies which are rigourously tested?

Unfortunately in our industry it's pretty much all personal anecdotes on what works better and what doesn't.
Weirdly enough that's about a completely different water treatment plant in a different part of the country.
During Watergate, congress was still aware of it's role as a counterweight to the executive. Nixon would likely have been convicted if he hadn't resigned first, or at least he must have thought so, since he resigned.

But since then, congress has become more and more partisan, with less and less ability to act together in important issues. This was particularily obvious in all 3 impeachment processes that have happened since. In all 3 cases, impeachment was done without the proper bipartisan basis needed for a conviction, basically just to achieve short term political gain.

Like the boy who cried wolf, each repitition means the probability that people will take it seriously next time goes down.

And when the day comes where a president does something that really requires a bi-partisan conviction during an impeachment, congress may be so used to voting along party lines that this becomes impossible.

And maybe worse: presidents may even begin to consider such a conviction an impossibility, and act with fewer inhibitions.
There are some hacking tools for Fritzboxes out there but Avm themselves are pretty good at supporting their hardware for a long time.
The 7490 was released in April 2013 and just received another security update (January 2025).

Quite a long support time.

To me they seem to be the best standard solution that can also be setup by a "beginner" user.
Abort Controller is criminally underrated [video with text]
Looks pretty polished for a solo dev nice work. Datadog is pretty pricy these days and this seems to cover 99% of the use cases. Thanks for the free tier
This was fun and interesting to read, and as an example of a Gift To The Community [^0] I wish it was well preserved and updated with new examples, as the ones linked are down.

[^0]: http://www.rdrop.com/~half/Creations/Writings/Web.patterns/g...
I'm actually glad AI use is revealing misalignment:

If the AI is so good at it, why are we still hiring human to do the job? It just shows how the interview process is not measuring the right thing to start with.
... sure?

There is a trend of flagging many other categories of media on this site, even if its "factual and interesting". I was making a plea to the void of this community to stop eating this category of bullshit.
It's the same for me if I'm working on something unique or interesting, or a new technology.

Some kinds of coding require very little thinking, though. Converting a design to frontend interface or implementing a CRUD backend are mostly typing.
GCC supports it with a flag. C++23's import std is not there at all though.
Japan plans to sell rice from emergency stockpiles to cut prices
Large context are a huge reason
Why would it disappear? I have used the same key bindings (from Sublime) on Jetbrains IDEs for years.
Text version: https://kettanaito.com/blog/dont-sleep-on-abort-controller

I've been using abort controller to simplify cleanup of event listeners.

However, I just learned abort controller could do other things like:

- Abort after a timeout

- Abort calls to fetch()

- Make a custom function/method that can be aborted using the same interface
My friend is a poet and will be the first to say we can objectively judge art. I agree to the extent that there are certain criteria we can look at and objectively make a judgement on the quality of the work. I think bad and good are probably reductive, but we can evaluate prose or cinematography for example and make objective judgements on the qualities exhibited by the work.

I think largely though the problem here is that “good” is too vague to mean anything to anybody without expansion. Good why? There’s a difference between saying a book is good and a book is well written. Likewise if someone tells me Dan Brown is bad they’ll have to tell me why. Maybe I’ll agree and no longer like the book, or maybe I’ll agree it falls short in plot or characterization but I’ll still like it, and then it will be a guilty pleasure.
In theory you’re already paying the merchant fee in the “price”. So merchant found a way to improve margins and credit card companies found a new revenue source
Lately, it feels like DeepSeek is everywhere. Whether in boardroom discussions, tech panels, or casual conversations, this AI model has become the latest buzzword.But beyond the hype, is DeepSeek truly reshaping how businesses operate, or is it just another fleeting trend?
In refining 0x4CE9EC : 0xDA94D1 (Le Mars) in 01h 14m 32s 457ms I have brought glory to the company.
Praise Kier.
5⃣4⃣3⃣6⃣0⃣
1⃣0⃣9⃣0⃣3⃣
3⃣1⃣9⃣1⃣6⃣
2⃣9⃣7⃣3⃣9⃣
9⃣9⃣8⃣7⃣7⃣
#mdrlumon #severance
lumon-industries.com
A caveat with statically linked language runtimes
It depends on what theory you're working in (at which point deciding whether to use one theory or another becomes more like a phisolophical question).

I'm mostly familiar with type theory, of which there are many variants, but the most common ones all share the most important characteristics. In particular they identify theorems with types, and proofs with terms, where correct proofs are well-typed terms. The nice thing is that terms are recursively enumerable, so you can list all proofs. Moreover most type theories have decidable type checking, so you can automatically check whether a terms if well-typed (and hence the corresponding proof is correct).

This is not just theory, there exist already a bunch of tools that are being used in practice for mechanically checking mathematical proofs, like Coq, Lean, Agda and more.

When I said "in theory" however it's because in practice enumerating all proof terms will be very very slow and will take forever to reach proofs for theorems that we might find interesting.

Since we're in the LLM topic, there are efforts to use LLMs to speed up this search, though this is more similar to using them as search heuristics though. It does help though that you can have automatic feedback thanks to the aforementioned proof checking tools, meaning you don't need costly human supervision to train them. The hope would be getting something like what Stockfish/Alphazero is for chess.
Employees Leading Themselves: The Power of Self-Managed Teams at Work
That is a fair point.

This was the final technical screen so definitely something worth doing in my case.

The reason I posted a reply was there is a lot of negativity around AI in the hiring process. This was an excellent example of using AI to the benefit of all parties.

Instead of nit-picking on stylistic things from a smaller code-sample,
one can nit-pick on the implemented complexity. I think it is a higher quality signal.
IMO the number one biggest contributor to this problem is "watt hours", it a cursed unit, a name which sows confusion. Even if it were named nonsense like "floops", the world would become a better clearer place.

It automatically sounds as if it involves watts, hours, or even watts per hour, but it's actually none of those things. It's just (joules * 3600), where that fixed multiplier comes from a quirk of history in how we subdivided our clocks.

My advice? Whenever you see it, replace it with "jumbojoules", as in "I used 87 kilo-jumbojoules running that appliance this month."
Agree. For example, Dragon's Egg by Forward is not a well written book by most of those metrics, and yet I very much enjoyed the novel due to the creative story.
(blog author here) That is the kind of thinking which just unnecessarily gatekeeps innovation.

There's always someone "in control" of a server. But even more important, there's always someone (or usually a group) in control of deciding which shell should be the default on an OS. And these are the people that should be reached somehow.

And Oils is just as much a snowflake as Bash, Tcsh or Ksh. All of them are POSIX compliant (though not sure with tcsh), all of them bring own additional features. But the only shell with additional features which don't suck (by being 30yo) is from the Oils project.
The law makes it a nesessity. If they don't do all they can to protect their trademark, they loose it. It's not like copyright.

And ofcourse the lawyers have to make themselves needed somehow.
Yes. There are a very small handful of early adopters in the year 2025 for a feature ostensibly added in C++20.

So, like I said, modules don’t exist in practice and I’d be shocked if in 2030 modules were considered normal.

C++11 was pretty game changing. C++14 and C++17 only took a few years to reach widespread adoption.

It’s very safe to require C++17 today. C++20 was a little slower and because of the modules fuckup it’s a bit inconsistent. But it’s largely fine to use.

C++23 probably needs another year or two. But also C++20 and beyond haven’t added much that’s worth upgrading for.
Yet said poor programmers would never pass the test I specified, without committing fraud. That, and the other conditions I specified, ensure so.

If the AI premise is true, then it's this or good programmers, and good companies will never meet.
C++ concepts are a failure due to them only checking one side of the contract. And the other is basically impossible to implement without breaking other parts of the language
Any program that uses a database has a very similar problem to global variables.

As Gilad Bracha has pointed out, types are antimodular, and your database schema can be considered one giant type that pervades your program, just like globals can be.

I don't think we have tools to compositionally solve this, across different programming languages.
That isn't even PascalCase. This is camelCase.
I think deep research as a service could be a really strong use case for enterprises, as long as they have access to non-public data. I assume that most of this guarded data is high quality, and seeing progress in these areas might end up being even more impressive than it is now.
You mean a diminutive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminutive

> A diminutive is a word obtained by modifying a root word to convey a slighter degree of its root meaning, either to convey the smallness of the object or quality named, or to convey a sense of intimacy or endearment, and sometimes to belittle something or someone.

Yeah, it's funny, a word consisting both of an augmentative (the opposite of diminutive) and a diminutive.
Filesystem Vulnerabilities in Bootloaders: A Hidden Risk for Verified Boot
I would like to bring attention to this project. They aim to function in an application firewall like manner and manage to block connections by category, classified by domain name. Android only though, and the 'full' version is available only on f-droid due to some anti-adblock-like Play store policy. https://trackercontrol.org/
This seems pretty similar to Rust's `format_args!` macro, which however avoids these issues by being much more verbose and thus something people are less likely to use like in those examples. It does however have issues due to the abundant use of temporaries, which makes it hard to use when not immediately passed to a function. I wonder if C++'s fstrings have the same issue.
Optimizing with Novel Calendrical Algorithms
Privacy Commissioner warns of 'digital doppelgangers'
Hmm, that is interesting; reading is harder? You have to read a lot of code anyway right? From team members, examples, 3rd party code/libraries? Through the decades of programming at least I became very proficient and rapidly spotting 'fishy' code and generally understanding code written by others. AI coding is nice because it is, for me, the opposite of what you have; reading the code it generates is much faster than writing it myself even though I am fast at writing it; not that fast.

I have said it here before, because I would love to see some videos of HNers who complain AI gives them crap as we are getting amazing results on large and complex projects... We treat AI code the same as human code, we read it and recommend or implement fixes.
South Korea can train the US navy. Teach them how to build again:

https://www.voanews.com/a/us-navy-looking-to-s-korean-japane...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJkyurhnAQo
You can swap it to only run on shortcut. You get used to when it will save you time / be accurate relatively quickly. It's a nice little autocomplete that saves me time- but I couldn't stand the automatic mode.
Started ok to good. Latest season is near masterpiece especially in terms of dialogue
Show HN: AutoCode-Turn README.md into working software (Sonnet,DeepSeek,o3-mini)
Please do. Don't forget to appreciate the mantra-like repetition of Brian Taylor Cohen and Qasim Rashid Esq memes.
Thanks, I appreciate the feedback! Datadog is obviously super powerful, maybe partially warranting the price tag, but most of the time the gazillion features just confuse me to the point that I don't want to use it.
Also reported via: Services Australia forced to pay ‘digital doppelganger’ $10,000 over data mix-up

https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/02/03/services-australia-digi...
Hah. What's interesting about this is that since it doesn't require everything to actually be converted to a string, one can implement things other than just printing. So you could also implement interpretation, eg:

pylist = python(f"[ y*{coef} for y in {pylist} if y > {threshold}]")
Fork of Win 7.
How would that look like? And what would be the societal implications?
What’s most strange to me is why this Bilt company would pay for that data feed and somehow think it provides some value to you. It’s obviously just creepy way of saying we know too much about you
Dear Tech CEOs, Here's why 70 or 90-hour work weeks make no sense to me
Maybe they save the good voice recognition tech on ads.
Patriot is unlike anything else. Magical in a way it worked.

The same crew made another show and I couldn’t get past 2 episodes.

Patriot was really a celestial event in the world of TV
To use a line sometimes attributed to Beria, “give me the man and I will give you the case against him”. By which I mean that I’m sure they will find some means of making you sorry.
Surrendering is an excellent way to put it. With the increasingly ubiquitous access to LLMs that are (for all intents and purposes) good enough - I think we're going to see the average person's proficiency at any skill which is fundamentally a "craft" (i.e. writing, foreign language, music, coding, etc.) decrease dramatically.
What is the managed way in this context?
The Mediterranean diet is a lie
If they do that, they will paint a gigantic target on their back. Everyone will rename themselves to Super Mario as exit strategy for their startup.
“I-I love you.”
Los Angeles Fire Aftermath Seen From Space (Google Maps Satellite)
it sounds like ai doesn't really change that situation
Some good points! I believe that CEOs should focus on the well-being of employees for a long-term growth story together.
This was no nice! had fun reading it.

Also learned the meaning of the conspicuous word pulchritudinous, which in the default Oxford languages dictionary Google uses [1] comes up with
"Dan gazed admiringly at the pulchritudinous brunette" as usage example.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=pulchritudinous
Where do you buy their details from?
For scaffolding? I still use snippets (with tooling ofc).

Around 85% of the time, it seems like it takes me more time to write what I want to code in natural language to an AI prompt (and then correct it) than it would to actually code what I want.

The 15% of the time when I want something like "Write test cases to cover this module" is something a snippet couldn't do anyway.
Thanks for this info. This is paid.
I knew a veterinarian who never ate anything like mussels.

Asked why, he said "I know what they eat."
"You're holding it wrong" doesn't make a small, too light, crooked, and backwards hammer any better.
I love FairEmail, the mail client. Crazy to say this but it may be better than all the desktop mail clients I have used.
Traditional ML is no stranger to measuring accuracy in terms of agreement with human evaluators.
> You misunderstand, the two hypothetical power plants have an equivalent instantaneous power output in watts.

Yes, but they have different capacity factors. That is, the solar plant is not producing power at night, but your calculation gives it credit for it.

It's best to just keep sane units; e.g. say this plant generates 3 petajoules each year, and kills 6000 birds/year, so it kills one bird per 500 gigajoules.

A coal plant is about 33% efficient, and coal has about 30MJ/kg of specific energy; so we get about 10MJ of electrical energy/kg. So each 50,000 kg of coal mined and burnt would produce the same amount of energy that Ivanpah does between killing birds.
That is your own code and only your libs then, no imports? Or you work in a language where imports are small (embedded?) so you know them all and maintain them all? Or maybe vanilla js/c without libs? Because import 1 npm and you have 100gb of crap deps you really don't understand which happens to work at moment t0 but at t1, when 1 npm updated, nothing works anymore and can't claim to understand it all as many/most people don't write 'simple code'.
They were evil before.

Previously they’d take your LinkedIn password and try using that to log in to your email account to grab your contacts.
This is precisely how English is the lingua franca of developers around the world, and a lot of (not all, of course) companies in e.g. Germany or Japan hire English-speaking programmers.
I use snippets off & on. They came in very handy at a previous company I worked with. Curious on the other answers because I've had some vague ideas for making snippets better but haven't looked deeper into what else is out there and a little wary of AI.
It helps with reasoning in some sense, and the net balance might be positive in how much reasoning it enables, but it definitely hurts local reasoning. You need broader context to be able to analyze whether the function is correct (or even what it's supposed to be doing if you don't actively work to prevent entropic decay as the codebase changes). You can't test that function without bringing in that outer context. It (often) doesn't naturally compose well with other functions.
> This is clearly designed to keep people busy worrying about their survival while Elon and them continue on with their hapless refactor.

Huh? Trump's not engaging in some conspiracy to protect Elon. He's always liked tariffs, and this is him doing what he believes.

Cut it out with the weird conspiracy theories. They're not helpful.
> that a human would literally spend two thousand lifetimes to go through it even if that was all the human did with their days.

Well, `cp` would go over that data even faster, but depending on what retention/conclusion is reached from that it may or may not be impressive.

Humans are fundamentally limited by our biology, and rotating a tiny sphere and turning pages and serial processing does make certain hard limits on us.

A two years old can definitely say stupid stuff, or have wildly incomplete/incorrect models of their reality, but can most certainly already think and reason, and update their internal models at any point.

> Tiny scientific achievements, only acting as fresh graduates with regards to software

I don't believe they are anywhere close to being as good at software as a fresh graduate. Sure, many people write terrible code, and there are a lot of already solved problems out there (not even just solved, but solved thousands times) - LLMs are definitely a novel tool when it comes to finding information based on some high-ish level patterns (over exact string match, or fuzzy match), and they are very good at transforming between different representations of said data, with minimal (and hard limited) reasoning capabilities, but I have never seen evidence of going any further than that.

I don't think your grades are "correct" - e.g. a random generator can easily create new vectors, but I wouldn't call that intelligence. Meanwhile, that two years old can do a novel discovery from their POV every couple of day, potentially turning around their whole world model each day. To me, that sounds way "cooler" than a statistically likely token given these previous tokens, and LLMs definitely need some further structure/architecture to beat humans.

--

I do like your last quote though, and definitely agree there!
Global Switch Day: How to Get Started with Mastodon
Why would they need to when they get contracts anyway due to tariffs and the Jones act?
I read books that I know they are bad as I'm reading them, and still keep reading them. One example is Dan Brown's books, other examples might be Twilight Saga, or books that are very repetitive to send the message like "Leaders eat last" or "Surrounded by idiots". They are written in an addictive way you have to keep reading, and makes them popular (not good). They have a lot of paragraphs or full chapters that are very clearly written in one go and never looked back to fix mistakes. Usually you could get rid of entire chapters and the book would be the same.

Then you have good books, where you can feel that the author took care of doing a good job. They are not redundant, and they don't use dirty cheap tricks to keep you engaged. They might be even repulsive or unnerving (I'm thinking of Kafka's The Metamorphosis or The Trial), and some people can find them boring.

The point is that you can read both of them. It's like watching a quality TV show (maybe The Wire), but also watch some Kardashians. You can easily tell which one is good, and which one is bad but made in some way that you want to keep watching even when you know you are wasting your time and getting nothing in return other than a goog feeling that disipates as soon as you end watching. It's like reading a danluu blog entry or wasting one hour in TikTok or Instagram: one of them is good, the others are tricking your mind to keep you engaged. There's nothing bad in wasting some time, but IMO it's important to be aware of what is happening, that not all content is the same, and that popularity doesn't necessarily means good.
That's only needed if you use multiple threads. In a single thread global vars are just fine, and much simplier than passing around ctx
I don’t really see why it’s so hard to interview someone remotely because of AI or speech to text. I’m not aware of any system that is so advanced or fast enough that having a video call and decent conversation skills and carefully listening to the candidate can’t identify 99.99% of people using AI. Even without video, it’s no hard to have a conversation and guage their skill level and ask questions and listen to the answers carefully. You can tell when the conversation is not fluid or the answe given is at a level that is a mismatch with their apparent sophistication. You can ask an unreasonably obscure or difficult question and see if you get an LLM answer. You can suss it out. You don’t have to do in-person interviews.
Regarding the evolution of the law:

Long ago when Google tried to launch its very first phone somewhere in Europe I can distinctly remember that it was initially not allowed to because of some regulation that mandated a company selling telephones to have a customer service.

Can't remember if they eventually found a loophole or if the regulations were changed.