skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have no idea what assessment you are even referencing. The only assessments you made as far as I can tell were:

1) The post was made to vilify independent security research.

2) The post argues against "the entire modern science of software security".

3) The norms of 1997 are worse than the norms of 2025 and that my support for the argument that "Penetrate and Patch" is a poor security policy is somehow indicative that I prefer the norms of 1997 even though "Penetrate and Patch" was and continues to be the prevailing norm.

To which I argue:

1) Maybe so. However, the arguments against most of the stated practices, in particular everything except idea #4, stand on their own and have stood the test of time.

2) Given the contents of the rest of that post, this is almost surely a statement that idea #4 was wrong which I have agreed was incorrect. I also, separately, argue that "the entire modern science of software security" is basically useless at producing systems secure against common prevailing threat actors as is demonstrated daily. This is distinct from the high level of capability in producing systems and processes that can identify and exploit vulnerabilitys which is a clear win for the "the entire modern science of software security". However, such capability is not very helpful in achieving the former which is the thing usually desired from "security".

3) I am just baffled. I have to assume that you just misread my position. Otherwise you are arguing that the systems of 1997 were default deny, explicit whitelists, engineered for security from the start, and operate in a secure configuration by default. Or that the security processes of 2025 are that way. Both of which are laughable. I guess you could also argue that those principles are bad, but I am pretty sure even the sorry state of affairs that passes for "software security" these days recognizes those are correct principles even if they utterly fail to even attempt them.
On most modern vehicles, the body rusts out, the suspension sags, the paintwork calls it quits and the trim falls apart well before the powertrain dies.
Bahaha oh man this brings back memories. I worked for a startup where the CEO spent weeks working on determining our NPS and talking our ears off about it. At the end of the process, he was so happy - our NPS was higher than Apple! I didn’t really know what that meant but I figured he had an MBA and knew what he was doing.

The startup never became profitable and ran out of investor money 18 months later.

There were many things wrong with the company but this was one of the things that made me most feel like I was in Office Space.
The administration Musk is a part of has just suspended the NEVI EV charger program:

https://electrek.co/2025/02/06/trump-just-canceled-the-feder...

If you care about the world (or even just America), don't buy Tesla.
> Zig is a good replacement for C.

I have never used zig, although I have looked into it. I have used C and C++ for a long time, and would like a replacement for C.

To my mind zig is nowhere near a good replacement for C. It adds way too much extra stuff (e.g. metaprogramming). A good replacement for C would have a similar simplicity and scope to C (i.e. a portable assembler) but address known issues. For example it should fix the operator precedence rules to be sane. It should close-off on undefined behavior and specify things more formally than C, and still allow low-level memory manipulation. To be even better than C it should allow stuff that would be obviously correct in assembler, but is UB or ID in C.
I’d like to see the actual distribution of issues because the impression that i get is that a few people have a lot of problems and a lot of people have few to no problems.
If I cared about longetivity, I would not choose either "shared hosting" or "cloud/serverless".

Set up a small VPS/VM with Debian, run Apache. Yes, you will have to do biennial OS upgrades and set up your own backups, but the main code won't have to change. Apache still makes 2.x releases, Perl still has its CPAN. And if the host goes down or disappears, there are dozens of replacements with identical functionality.
I downvoted because it’s just plain trolling, even if eloquently written. If someone doesn’t like Musk, they can spend their EV budget on something else, like upgrading their furnace, without being the humongous hypocrites the parent commenter is smugly suggesting they are.
Yes, state and local should pick up. The closer to the people a government is, the better it is.

I want the fewest rules that create the most fair economy. And I know very few service better in the hands of government. And that includes bridges:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct
> that has just resigned because of hyper racist comments he made in the past that have come to light.

Just to add clarity, "the past" in this case wasn't even that long ago, as these racist tweets that were uncovered were from June to December of 2024.
The rational move in the face of climate change is to buy a sports car?
Came here to ask about energy density, but it seems the article answered it without answering it.
Does that really align with occupying Gaza, invading Panama and occupying Greenland?

Let alone the loose threats to Canada.
I think high speed rail is perfectly capable of finding delays all on its own, and doesn't need this supposed help
Mad at Meta yet trust their settings? That's gotta be a small crossover in the Venn diagram.
ULIDs Are Awesome
Nice job pretending there aren't a ton of rational comments explaining why this person is wrong that have nothing to do with "identity politics".
We've had since FDR to try and curb the post WW2 federal hyper expansion. Regulations keep growing, our prison population reaches one of the highest rates in world, and we get vanishingly little infrastructure or other benefits for the taxes the common man pays.

Patience has expired.

There was lots of time to use the scalpel. The doctor never showed up, so the pre med dropout showed up with a sledgehammer, dumb and self serving as he may be. Trump is the symptom of the disease not the main cause.
There may not be aha moment in R1-Zero-like training
I keep going back and forth on whether Agents are good for the software development discipline.

While I think it's extremely short-sighted that we continue to push full steam ahead on AI automating away jobs, I can't deny that LLMs have given my development flow a decent productivity boost. 80% of the time, my workflow with Cursor looks similar to the golden path depicted in this blog post - outline the changes I want made -> review the code -> suggest edits/iterate -> ship it. There's undoubtedly a class of problems where this feature can slot in and start chipping away immediately.

The other 20% of the time, Cursor will hit a wall and is unable to complete the task through just prompting. It will either introduce a subtle bug in its logic, or come across an error that it incorrectly diagnoses. These stumbles can happen for a variety of reasons:

1. Poorly documented code - the LLM infers the wrong responsibility for a piece of code, or is led astray by old comments

2. Misleading or unhelpful errors from 1st/3rd party libraries

3. Task is too complex - perhaps I asked for more than I should have

In any case, the "self-healing" functionality that Agents rely on to iterate is often insufficient. Prompting for a fix usually just leads me in circles or further down the path of a bad solution. In these instances, I have to drop the coding assistant altogether and do things the old fashioned way - gain a sufficient understanding of the code and figure out where the LLM went wrong (or just write the solution from scratch).

I guess going back to my initial point, it feels like the easy answer is that Agents are good if you're a senior/experienced developer. This means that in the short-term the demand for junior engineers will dry up, since we have Agents to do the rote work, but doesn't this mean that we're effectively choking out the pipeline for experienced devs? Though they're low in complexity/value, the tasks we will handoff to Agents are immeasurably useful for building software fundamentals.

It seems like in 2025 we've suddenly forgotten about "teaching a man to fish"...
tell that to China
Arguably better UI to the same thing: https://xCANCEL.com/elonmusk/status/1879785727468163505

Which I've found to be hilarious btw. :-)
If I understand your idea correctly, I don't think a "pure" LLM would derive much advantage from this. Sure, you can constrain them to generate something syntactically valid, but there's no way to make them generate something semantically valid 100% of the time. I've seen frontier models muck up their function calling JSON more than once.

As long as you're using something statistical like transformers, you're going to need deterministic bolt-ons like Lean.
No one made that claim. That is a strawman argument.
That's a cool viewpoint but again, your entire premise on this situation is based on something you made up, that is provably wrong.
Sets and Bitsets, from Python to Zig
But we need extra computation to move forward/backward, which is not suitable for the problem
No I'm not mad at Meta, keep up the great work.
I'm also afraid of opening MS Word.
Thank you for the list. I found the pong saver I was missing. Your saver looks cool too! Looking forward to your new one.
I work in a not for profit functional monopoly space. A member body distributing resources according to policy.

I can get why we do satisfaction scores, but NPS never made sense to me. Like, does the justice system do NPS for family law cases? It's not like you can get divorced in a 7-11 by the clerk, and even mediation is a process inside the model so NPS in a non competitive self-regulated monopoly.. what does it even mean to recommend to others?
that's... that's the joke.
I thought it was about metrology and got excited
"300 to 500 is more typical of some older chemistries."

And this is almost purely a function of the very first charge cycle the battery receives. If the initial charge cycle is fairly aggressive, you can actually pull something like 1500 cycles out of those older chemistries, at the cost of actual capacity. We're running tests on this right now in a lab in San Diego. Almost all non-solid-state Li chemistry batteries are similarly affected.
Touch button area also serves as a holding point (e.g. for a pinky finger or a thumb base) that doesn’t touch the screen. When I bought my SE, my buddy bought 13 mini, which had full-surface touch. Our every telegram discussion ended in him “recording audio” because you cannot exit an app without touching screen at bottom-right with the meaty base of your thumb. I was happy I went SE. I also bought a non-frameless tablet for my grandma for the same reason, because people have to firmly hold devices without touching the screen somehow. Her previous tablet had thin frames and every time she wanted to show something to me, it “oh, flew away again”, because she touched the screen. Modern design is done by people who value only form without even thinking of function. This is pure idiocy, literally as in idiocracy movie. Same for this new SE which is just an iphone now, cause they can’t help but idiot it.
Owning 3 cars of the same car over 7 years doesn’t scream reliability to me.
What changes and what's any indication that they would ever have been positive regardless of these people?

Unilaterally taking a chainsaw to federal agencies, against their congressional establishment, in a rush in the first three weeks of the administration, is a terrible idea no matter who's running the show.

Even if that were somehow a positive thing, the goals range from ridiculously dubious to outright evil.
I think we’re seeing a lot of culturally rooted assumptions about the nature of government bubbling to the surface. There’s a lot of people who subscribe to progressive managerialism, which was championed by Woodrow Wilson. This is the dominant culture of knowledge workers. What Trump is doing is deeply upsetting to them. They will invoke things like records laws or the Impoundment Act or whatever, but nobody gets this worked up about laws requiring paperwork. They’re upset at the idea that you could just have a president who runs the executive branch however he wants regardless of what the civil service wants.

Most Americans, by contrast, are populists, either left-populists or right-populists. The breach of orderly practices doesn’t get them worked up. Look at how AOC frames what’s going on. She doesn’t talk about paperwork violations—her supporters wouldn’t care. She accuses Musk of robbing the Treasury, threatening to stop social security payments, etc. I don’t think those things are true, but it’s the kind of thing that would move her populist supporters to action.
Your own source says that violent victimizations is up YoY, and crime reporting is down YoY
I looked up Reinoud Lamberts's old homepage on the internet archive, and was amused by his licensing scheme:

> Pay the license fee, which is US $29 per Linux

> workstation, US $499 per user on any MicroSoft operating

> system, and US $49 per user on any other system. Send

> money orders for the required amount to Reinoud Lamberts,

> [address redacted]
To be clear, I don't think it's a coordinated conspiracy type thing when I say it's abused.

This original posts topic is about how posts are voted on also. It is on topic in this case
Testing with "Banana... Banana???? Banana!!!!!" Yields interesting results each time, and none so far the way a human would read it.
This is such bullshit. Obviously 2/3 of NSF funding is not going to "DEI". These are a handful of people who have bad opinions and got relatively small grants that are a tiny fraction of NSF funding. One is $100k. Since when do we tear down all of American science because we don't like what a handful of professors have to say? This is such Nazi scapegoating shit.
I think these endless debates about whether open-weights models qualify for a particular piece of terminology are... tiring. That said, I think the debates would benefit from discussing model training and model inference as two separate systems, because that's what they are. It's possible for model training to be closed-source while model inference is open-source, and vice versa.

Consider recent Mistral-Small release. The model training is almost totally closed-source. You can't replicate it. However, the model inference is fully open source: the code and weights are Apache licensed. Not only that, but Mistral released both the base model and the instruction-tuned model, so you have a good foundation to work from (the base model) should you prefer to do your own instruction tuning. In fact, Mistral has also open-sourced code to aid in the fine-tuning process as well. So you really have everything you need* to use and customize this inference system. And for most practical purposes, even if you had the original training data, it would be of no use to you.

It's also worth considering the inverse scenario. Suppose Meta were to release a big blob of pre-training data and scripts for Llama 405B, but no weights. This clearly qualifies as open source, but it is basically useless unless you have many millions of dollars to do something with it. It would do very little to democratize access to AI.

* Asterisk: There is one situation where having access to the original training data would be really, really useful -- model distillation. Nobody can match Meta's ability to distill Llama 405B into an 8B size, because that process works best when you can do it on identically distributed data.
Part of the problem with this whole thread is that there are lots of colleges out there, and lots of students, and they all have different goals, and expectations.

I went to university in the 90s and got degree in comp science. Their stance was not "preparing us for a job" but rather creating an understanding of computers, algorithms, and so on. The theory was "learning how they work" means that on the job you make more informed decisions.

For example - in databases understanding theory (3rd normal form, searching, sorting etc) leads to better database design (in any database). Learning everything about one database (in our case Informix) is not necessary.

For my career, this approach worked well. I've been able to easily transition to new things, the fundamentals don't change, just the syntax.

But, when choosing a college, it's important to align your expectations with their strategy. Most disillusionment either college happens when these don't align.
> Model weights are something like a bytecode blob

Can you update a bytecode blob as easily as finetuning and prompting models? It only takes a few input-output pairs and a few dollars worth of compute. They are more like an operating system and fine-tuning/prompting is like scripting on top. Similarly with Linux, you can download a LLM and run it locally.
You started it first, my dude:

>This is Tobin.. but without the Paradigm.

>Now no one hates that furry bastard more than me (and I challenge you to try)

>I know my fate for trying.. how many will join me knowing that?
props for using the /copy endpoint feature of Google docs. saves a lot of hassle when teaching
Certainly not! They're going to tell a chatbot rewrite it in node.js and React.
I don't know if they still do it. But there were so many similar stories in the past. That's why I adopted domain checks using whois/rdap before registering. Their search interface is used only for price comparison using bogus second level domains.
Not at all - I feel like you're saying that since the Cultural Revolution was anti-intellectual, it was thus against "theoretically smart, high-achieving young people".

But that analogy is even more apt for today - these young, energetic, just-out-of-school people want to tear down "elitist" institutions, just like students in the Red Guard did the same. One of the founders of the Red Guard who kicked off the Cultural Revolution was Nie Yuanzi, a Vice Chair of the Department of Economics at Peking University. I hope her Wikipedia page clarifies the analogy I was making: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nie_Yuanzi
Show HN: I built an AI satirical news site because news was depressing me
I got tired of feeling down every time I read the news, so I built a site that takes real news articles and rewrites them in the style of The Onion using GPT. It pulls from various RSS feeds (BBC, Fox News, TechCrunch, etc.) and uses AI to generate satirical headlines and content in the style of Jon Stewart.

How it works:

- Fetches news from multiple RSS feeds across different categories

- Uses GPT to generate witty headlines (it first generates 5 options, then picks the funniest one. I found this actually does well in choosing a funnier option)

- Rewrites articles in a satirical style while (TRYING) to preserve the core facts

Future plans:

- Let users add their own RSS feeds for personalized satire

- Add local news integration so you can laugh at what's happening in your city

- Implement different comedic "personalities" (think John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, different political affiliations, sassy gossip, etc.)

- Add social features to share

Tech stack: React, Node.js, OpenAI API, RSS parsing

I built this because doomscrolling was affecting my mental health, and I figured injecting some humor into the news cycle might help others too. Would love feedback from the HN community!
Webhosting is one of the most scammy shitty industries. I worked in it for 15 years. Do not give that industry any sort of benefit of the doubt. There are good companies but there are a lot of not.
What? This is a crazy take. I feel we (humanity) has truly understood addition to a very high degree. The fact that we can see what an LLM is doing and understand “oh it’s doing addition in a rather roundabout way via Fourier transforms” is a testament to just how well we understand addition — we can recognize hundreds of different ways to achieve the operation, know that they are equivalent, and pick the most convenient one for the situation
What is so bad specifically about play?
Did UCLA Just Cure Baldness?
You mean the China where nobody has a voice and the government is allowed to do whatever they feel like whenever they feel like to whomever they feel like? The same China where property rights don't exist so there's no need for eminent domain. The same China that, oh nevermind
I think you may have hit upon a novel combination of ideas here. There is something called "social simulation theory" regarding the purpose of dreams, but I don't think it has a neuroanatomical description included.
Yes you can be a pendant about a topic to a degree that you manage to confuse even yourself, or you can understand the term is also commonly used to refer to the typical metal oxide cathodes we all are familiar with (NMC, LCO, NCA, lipo). From context it's really the obvious interpretation.
> And what power did most of these professors have if not their minds?

You're completely missing the point. Their academic careers put them in a position where their role was literally to shape and influence the next generation. As they were not fervent supporters, their role posed a threat to the regime. They could be profoundly dumb or grossly incompetent professors for what its worth. It's just that they didn't lockstep with the regime and the regime didn't wanted to risk it.
As I mentioned deeper in the thread, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42969519, Java seems to have caught up with Kotlin and Scala language wise. (With Scala3 having the most extensive type system.)

The ecosystem also seems to have petered out. Akka, spark, and flink used to be reasons to do scala. But they have decent java interfaces now.

I’ve had too much struggles convincing colleagues that actually more information in the type is convenient. It seems like the same religion of untyped vs typed.

What is left as reasons to choose for scala or Kotlin?
Tesla, as a car company, keeps botching basic car company stuff. Reliability. Parts. Repair. Pricing. New models.

- The Model 3 came out in 2017, which was a while back. The Model S did get a mid-cycle refresh.

- The Cybertruck has been a dud. Sales are way down.[1] Rivian apparently outsells it.

- By now, Tesla's Fake Self Driving isn't fooling anybody, now that people have seen Waymo really doing it.

- Tesla is behind in batteries. They can now make round lithium-ion cells, the previous generation of technology. The current generation is more like BYD's "blade" battery, packaged up in rectangular modules. The next generation is fully solid state batteries, which CATL, BYD, Toyota, and Samsung are spending billions to make work. Tesla does not seem to be active in that area, beyond lab efforts.

- China is getting rather good at making electric cars cheaply. It's not all labor cost. It's partly better design.
BYD's "e-axle" is a unit with wheels, axles, differential, and motor. Plugs into a power electronics box and a battery. Plug in a CANbus cable to the controls and go. Simplifies manufacturing.

- Tesla has repeatedly failed to get their costs down. Sales are down. Profits are down.

- The CEO is not devoting full time to the job.

These are all classic car-company mismanagement problems. There are points in GM, Chrysler, and VW history like that.

Tesla likes to pretend they are a special snowflake, but they haven't been that for over a decade.

[1] https://electrek.co/2025/01/02/tesla-cybertruck-sales-are-di...
Did they ever manage to make the in-screen sensors secure? I remember seeing articles for the early generations where they were easy to trick.
"Demolition Crew"? That's a very kind euphemism for a collection of sycophant clowns that have no experience in government. Indeed I could not find a single one that had any experience.
Yes, the economist trends towards more factual reporting and less propaganda. Great call.
The Republican Party's loyalty/obedience to Trump so far is unprecedented even in general terms, so it's reasonable to expect a lot of his requests will be reflected in the final budget.