skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
All the ranchers I know don't fertilize grazing land. At most they use manure spreaders
Im expecting the third world war to start anytime now and it will be us against Musk and Trump’s terminators autonomous killing robots. Im half joking when I say that.
The word is it's a serious effort on the part of Microsoft. It's missing a MongoDB wire protocol which they plan to opensource as well. In the meantime it's possible to use FerretDB for that.

I think the biggest use case is big data and dev platform that need application compatibility and wrapping Atlas is less attractive for some reason.
Deepseek CPP for CPU only inference
If the new 12V-2x6 connector was incompatible with the old 12VHPWR connector, they should have (and would have) made it physically incompatible. They didn’t. You cannot blame the user for doing something which is specifically allowed by design.
Not to burst your weird leftist-rightist libertarian bubble, but vaccine passports are actually a fairly normal thing in most of the world mate. You know, it's just about documenting what vaccinations you were receiving throughout your lifetime. Go outside and touch the grass, you sound very angry.
I genuinely wonder if this is a "too big to fail" scenario though, where mass belief (and maybe a helping hand via govt subsidies/regulations) powers it to a point where everything is just kind of worse but cheaper for shareholders/execs and the economic landscape can't support an actual disruption. That's my fear at least.
The Python 2-3 transition and some developments after made it definitely not so boring for me, but hopefully it'll be more stable in the coming decades ;).

"Cannot live without" is a strong wording, but software that I use a lot and that's mature/stable in my experience: shell (zsh, bash, sh), GNU utils, vim, nmap, xfce, git, ssh, mpv, Xorg, curl, and lots of little old CLI tools.
Wall Street Dumping Toxic Elon Musk [video]
I have almost entirely removed loops from my definition of the simple subset of C++. Turns out that in nearly every case anytime I think loop I'm able to find a STL algorithm that does the same thing in a more expressive way.

I do use lambdas all the time, they are very powerful and so worth learning the complex syntax to make them work. I strongly recommended you add them to your list of things you use all the time (replacing loops)

I use templates, but only when I'm writing generic code. Templates in the right place can save a lot of code and errors. However they are rarely needed and so you only need a few people on a large project to write them, and everyone else can say "not in my subset of C++, talk to [someone else]"

> more advanced features you use, the easier it is to make subtle mistakes, confuse someone who hasn't seen that feature before,

Also the more people get used to seeing it. Soon everyone knows those things, and so they won't make the subtle mistakes of be confused. Of course you need to pick the right things to add. Ranges look really useful for people who work on a different type of problem from the type I normally work on - thus ranges are not in my subset of C++, but my impression is they should be very common in other areas. Modules are not currently on my list, but everything I know suggests in 5 years the tools will (finally!) work and I will be converting my code to modules. I'm not clear where reflection sits, I suspect like templates a few experts will be needed on a large project and everyone else just uses them - but only time will tell.
> This paper continued TSMC’s trend over the last several years of presenting marketing papers at IEDM instead of technical papers. [...] there are no pitches in the paper, no SRAM cell size, and that graphs are all relative

Sigh. So basically we assume this is all aspirational spin and that either they haven't finalized the parameters for the process yet or they know the numbers will be disappointing already.

The era of VLSI scaling is over for sure. Hilarious that Intel's complete failure at process development happened at exactly the moment where it could do the least damage.
> It's incredibly far away from doing any significant change in a mature codebase

The COBOL crisis at Y2K comes to mind.
> “The original reason why they hallucinate is because if you don’t guess anything, you don’t have any chance of succeeding,”

This is a better answer than the one I was going to give about it not being in the training data.

> Claude’s system prompt instructs the model that when people ask about niche information that would likely be difficult to find on the internet, it should warn them its answer might be a hallucination.

This seems kind of crude, but I have to imagine they’ve explored entropy-based methods. I wonder why that didn’t pan out.
Certainly. But what I was commenting on was the claim that, because "there are basically no migration stories in _any_ indo-european mythological cycles or oral traditions," we can conclude, "migration or invasion (...) was a gradual process that wouldn't have been particularly noticeable in any one life time." I don't think that conclusion is justified.
If you ask ChatGPT about the time Spider-Man rescued Little Red Riding Hood it will go ahead and spin you a tale about that despite them both being fictional characters. By the same token if you ask it for legal citations supporting the theory that left-handed people can't run for office its not immediately obvious what the difference is at a technical level. In practice LLMs don't just run with the later these days but it does look like a hard problem to grapple with.
I've run a bunch locally, sometimes with my own takes on system prompts and other adjustments because I've tried to make them less insufferable to use. Not as absurdly submissive, not as eager to do things I've not asked, not as censored, stuff like that.

I find they struggle a lot with things like long sentences and advanced language constructs regardless of the natural language they try to simulate. When it doesn't matter it's useful anyway, I can get a rough idea about the contents of documents in languages I'm not fluent in or make the bulk of a data set queryable in another language, but it's like a janky hack, not something I'd put in front of people paying my invoices.

Maybe there's a trick I ought to learn, I don't know.
I work largely in the JS ecosystem so for me it would be Express. Everyone says the Express project is dead because they hardly ever update it but IMHO the real reason they never update it is it's been practically perfected.

Express has so many different uses and I've used it on very large scale backend projects for Fortune 500's, shoved it inside lambda functions, and used it to host email templates and build dev tooling with it to overcome shitty API's at work that always go down.

In all those times I don't think I've ever run into an issue that wasn't already solved
Never deploy on a Friday. Therefore, get it deployed by Thursday.
Google has dropped its promise not to use AI for weapons
And on a lot of Reddit and Stack Overflow-type posts. Nobody much replies to a question to say "I don't know".
Actually I think that's the near future, or close to it.

1. Humans also need specific wording in order to program code that stakeholders expected. A lot of people are laughing at AI because they think getting requirements is a human privilege.

2. On the contrary, I don't think people need to hire AI interfacers. Instead, business stakeholders are way more interested to interface with AI simply because they just want to get things done instead of filling a ticket for us. Some of them are going to be good interfacers with proper integration -- and yes we programmers are helping them to do so.

Side note: I don't think you are going to hear someone shouting that they are going to replace humans with AI. It started with this: people integrate AI into their workflow, layoff 10%, and see if AI helps to fill in the gap so they can freeze hire. Then they layoff 10% more.

And yes we programmers are helping the business to do that, with a proud and smile face.

Good luck.
I think conferences are good for a few reasons, but agree they are expensive.

Things conferences are useful for:

- exposing you to new ideas

- letting you interact with others in your community

- carving out time to learn

The last one is really important. Sure, I can watch re:invent videos on YouTube, but will I? Having focused time that isn't interrupted by normal work (or, minimally) is a great luxury that conferences afford.
That seems to be the conspiracists group think, yea.

IRL we invented the field of science to avoid such make belief nonsense.
Emacs. 20 years and all that time I wished I could get rid of it, but every other editor/IDE I've tried lacks a feature (or ten).

Debian. Moves at its own pace, flexible yet stable enough to cope with my idea of a smart move.

Go. I've been playing with it since before 1.0, threw it into production at my first occasion, and all those years it continues to deliver.

Django. Identical story.

...StarCraft (1, then 2). Technically not "tech", but in a competitive setting, it remains strategically, tactically, and mechanically demanding, it reflects that path of mastery, "teach yourself programming in ten years". It shaped my spirit, attitude, but also humility.
Boring is also a desirable property of cryptography.

Boring cryptography is obviously secure.

The guiding principle for whether something is boring or not is the Principle of Least Astonishment. If I can, say, send you a ciphertext that was encrypted with an authenticated mode, and then decrypt it to two valid plaintexts using two different keys, this is astonishing even if the impact of it is negligible.
I mentioned this in one of my other comments but even if AI figures this out where humans can't, I think this will involve coming to the conclusion that there really is an objective, knowable truth at the core of the universe or at least a set of tools will be developed for better discerning what that truth is. Even if you're talking about knowing who someone's spouse is, I'm not convinced we can ever teach a machine how you know what is true unless we're willing to have some sort of basic tenet of what truth is or how to discern it.
Taking a valid and correct observation and then strawmanning it with a crappy comic strip does not turn it into a invalid and incorrect observation.

The whole article above reminds me of when my brother went through his "I don't know why everybody works. They are so stupid" phase in late teens. Except this guy never grew out of it and he is now 30-something.

Stuff like this:

> Poverty is not an objective condition, but a relationship produced by unequal distribution of resources. There’s no such thing as poverty in societies in which people share everything.

The problem with this line of thinking is the line of thinking of "poverty exists because rich people exist". It treats the economy as a zero sum game were wealth is determined by access to natural resources and capital. That in order to for some people to be rich they need to restrict access to those productive and natural resource, thus condemning others to poverty.

A better way to think of poverty is 'privation'. Humanity has struggled against privation for as long as humanity has existed.

The natural state of humanity isn't being rich. When everybody had equal access to everything and there was no private property... It was true that everybody was equally wealthy, but they were also impoverished. It just meant that they were equally likely to die from what we would consider now a minor injury or inconvenient disease. It meant that you could starve to death if you badly twisted your ankle or broke your arm.

Poverty is the default. Anything else is a improvement.

It took 10s of thousands of years of struggle and fighting and dying to get to the point were large percentages of the population dying from communicable diseases and starvation wasn't considered a normal cyclical thing that was simply part of the natural order.

This wasn't that long ago.

We are still at the tail end of the moral panic of "People are no longer dying off faster then they can reproduce in the cities. How are we going to feed all these people? Are they not just going to descend onto the fields and consume the world like locusts?" (which is ironically reflected in some of the statements in the above article)

Now I am all for a person who doesn't want to exist as a cog in the corporate machine. I am also on the side of the person who is willing to accept a lower income in exchange for pursuing better personal relationships or gaming or art or whatever. Great. Go for it. You have only one life live how you want to. If you don't need to put in the government-imposed standard of a 40 hour work week... then by all means don't.

But if somebody writes a small book with the premise of "everybody in the world is a idiot except me"... then I have a pretty good idea on the odds of that statement being true. (hint: they are not good}
Which language? In Java (/the JVM) it's perfectly fine while Mongo is a PITA
10 generations is plenty of time to develop a caste system that discourages intermarriage.
Same, LLMs are interesting but on their own are a dead end. I think something needs to actually experience the world in 3d in real time to understand what it is actually coding things or doing tasks for.
Or instead of saying "I don't know" they ramble on in order to drag the topic into a domain they do know, and then go on and on talking about that. It's incredibly infuriating.
Show HN: Plutus is a CLI tool for income and expense tracking
Hi,

Plutus helps you quickly analyze your income and expenses from the command line using a single CSV file as your data source.

You can use this to help with budgeting or getting your numbers in order for filing taxes. It's focused on individuals who want a simple way to help gain insight on their finances.

It's a zero dependency Python script. No package managers required!

The readme file has a bunch of examples, documentation and a demo video.

I'd love to hear your feedback or suggestions. Thank you.
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." - King Solomon

Litter, palanquin, and sedan chair carriers were fired.

Oarsmen were fired.

Horses were fired.

. . . [time] . . .

COBOL programmers where fired.

and, so on.

What was the expectation; that programmers will be forever? Lest we forget, barely a century ago, programmers started to push out a large swath of non-programmers.

The more important question is what roles will push out whatever roles AI/LLMs create.
>a lot of cointeies that har participated in Americas wars without demanding quid pro quo

Name a country that helped in one of Americas wars without enjoying "most favored nation" trading status with the US and not enjoying a promise by the US to come to their aid if they are ever attacked.
Get Started with the Model Context Protocol
Couldn't agree more. If the most interesting part of your project is your technology stack, you're probably not working on something interesting.

It's like those hobbyists who invest all of their time and money into buying high-end expensive kit, but lack ability.
Yeah, sometimes people on HN make this assumption in the other direction, insisting that such-and-such a project is surely very mature (with a very quiet userbase) and not dead, on account of it not having any recent updates. But sometimes projects are truly just dead and buried. E.g., the million old frameworks and libraries that haven't been touched since 2005 and haven't had a functioning website since 2015. Bonus points if the only downloads were hosted on a SourceForge clone that also no longer exists outside the Internet Archive.

It's sometimes possible for a project to have 0 bugs to fix and 0 in-scope improvements (for performance, compatibility, etc.) left to make, but only if its scope is extremely limited. Even Knuth still gets bug reports for his age-old TeX.
Can Knowledge Hurt You? The Danger Of Infohazards (And Exfohazards) [video]
He's still hated by people who don't like Epstein Island. He left Microsoft under a cloud of sex-pest drama.
Production AI Engineering starts with Evals [video] (2024)
One of my absolute favorite pieces of software of all time is "Toot!", the Mastodon client on iOS. It's because it exemplifies this type of development extremely well, with most interaction in the app having some kind of fun little thing attached to it. Favorite a post? It starts an animation from the start turning the entire post gold, which persists and IIRC shimmers occasionally. Boost a post? It pops it out and moves the post up the screen before putting the post back. There are lots of little fun things it does, and it just makes it so fun to interact with. We need more software that embodies this type of design, letting things be more fun or whimsical, instead of super serious or "corporate fun" (e.g.: Notion).
Wouldn't some sort of proof of work be a good solution to the captcha problem?

Specially since all of the sudden, a bot service running hundreds of thousands of requests will suddenly and inadvertedly have to compute cryptographic hashes at the cost of the user running the bots?
What if AGI is extremely expensive to run?
For what it's worth, looking at the benchmarks, I think the machine they built is comparable to what your MBP can already do. They probably have a better inference speed, though.
They were trained on forum posts and this one also misses tbe opportunity and instead explains and guesses that...

Ah, I don't know.
You can pretty easily submit shareholder proposals for trolling purposes or ask questions.

Other investors will probably vote "no" to your proposals, but for many companies you can force a vote for a pretty low minimum. In Canada, you're legally entitled to submit a proposal if you've owned C$2000 shares for 6 months.

https://www.osler.com/en/insights/updates/when-can-a-company...
Hey! I haven't spent a decade of smiling through the pain to be considered an amateur lackey.
If you’re just glancing, then sure… and maybe if it’s only glancing-level important then that’s fine.

In my experience there are almost always some issues (either legit or misguided support requests,) PRs for docs and features, updates to libraries for vulnerabilities or deprecated code. Worth looking at stuff that isn’t open also. Even if it’s a 10 year old project and the last commit is from 6 months ago fixing a seemingly minor bug, if there more than a few stars or forks, and there aren’t ignored issues and PRs sitting there, I’d consider it trustworthy.

And if it does look abandoned but was active at some point, it’s always a good idea to take a stroll through the forks.
Just to be clear, not your parent, and not really a fan of STEELMAN. But.

> Input-output parameters are mutable references.

In/out can also be by value, it would copy any updates back after the call.

> Input parameters act as a copy or readonly reference

This is what your parent is getting at: the idea is that in/out/inout describe intent, not mechanism. The compiler chooses the mechanism for you.

I think in a language that's intended for lower-level tasks, describing mechanism is important. That said, outside of STEELMAN, there's an argument to be made for in/out/inout, and in fact, there's been some discussion over the years, for example, &uninit T as a sort of variant of out.

> For example I have a hard time seing how one would, while following the Ironman requirements,

You're right. STEELMAN updated this section to say

7I. Restrictions to Prevent Aliasing. The language shall attempt to prevent aliasing (l.e., multiple access paths to the same variable or record component) that is not intended, but shall not prohibit all aliasing. Aliasing shall not be permitted between output parameters nor between an input-output parameter and a nonlocal variable. Unintended aliasing shall not be permitted between input-output parameters. A restriction limiting actual input-output parameters to variables that are nowhere referenced as nonlocals within a function or routine, is not prohibited. All aliasing of components of elements of an indirect type shall be considered intentional.

Ada has "access types," which are pointers. You can declare them as aliased or not. Via this mechanism, you can pass both an aliased variable as an in parameter, and an access type that points to it as an in out, and still modify the variable, even though it's in. This will give you surprising behavior, but it's not UB, so you get "oh hey that number is not what it should be" not "this means half your program is optimized away.

However, unlike Rust, Ada does do strict aliasing, and so you can also get miscompilations that way. It requires the moral equivalent of unsafe, though. See https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-7.5.0/gnat_ugn/Optimizati... for an example.

Ada does prevent data races, because it has a built-in task system, and that task system only allows multiple tasks to access "protected objects" that are basically RWLock<T> in Rust terms.
There is a lot said about exploitation in the book and in the comments here on HN. I would like to start a kindergarten (a day care for toddlers and pre-school kids) in Switzerland, where such service is very scarce and expensive because the state does not subsidize preschool childcare. What HN community recommends me on the form of legal entity that I should use to start this venture? Options available are corporation, non-profit association or co-operative. What would be the most ethical and non-exploitative option which would work business-wise at the same time?
Alright, it supports four languages, but that’s still not much.
Derbauer and Buildzoid on YouTube made nice informative videos on subject, and no it is not "simply a user error". So glad I went with 7900 XTX - should be all set for a couple of years.
Java, it isn't all caps, and has three years support, plus 2 extended support, in the case of Oracle, other JVM vendors offer even longer times, e.g. from Azul, https://www.azul.com/products/azul-support-roadmap/

Most compilers of ISO languages, some of them were all caps named, others not.
> You’re looking at an economy in which the best human is worse at any and all jobs than the worst robot.

Yeah yeah, they said that about domesticated working animals and steam powered machines too.

Humans in mecha trump robots.
I wish PostgreSQL would support better syntax for JSON updates. You can use `->>` to navigate the JSON fields, but there's nothing similar for updates. You have to use clumsy functions or tricks with `||` and string casting.
Yeah, this is where my money is on the watch time. I've also seen things like doctor's office waiting rooms running through a curated playlist endlessly.
For the same price ($1799) you could buy a Mac Mini with 48gb of unified memory and an m4 pro. It’d probably use less power and be much quieter to run and likely could outperform this setup in terms of tokens per second. I enjoyed the write up still, but I would probably just buy a Mac in this situation.
you are supposed to say it's snow leopard
In fairness, that successful is probably less to do with the merits of the product and more to do with the timely exodus of users from Twitter and aggressive marketing from Meta’s other properties. I’m not saying Threads is bad—I haven’t used it—only that the success or failure of social media offerings is rarely attributable to the platform itself as opposed to the network of users.
Alignment Issue: Corporate vs. Academic Values

For businesses, it's bad optics if their "Super Intelligent AI" admits it doesn't know something. It's better to be 100% confident and wrong than to be uncertain.

That’s why they spent all that time with rebranding... AIs don’t "lie" anymore, they "hallucinate."
I found the whole "renaming things war" the first time stupid; as it peaked with renaming "master" to "main", highlighting both an ignorance and literacy problem.

This time around, it's just as stupid, it's just coming from the other side.

I'm hoping this exposes both sides to how ridiculous this crap is.