skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Threads has 320 million monthly active users and 100 million daily.

It’s certainly not a flop. It’s almost as big as X globally.

There’s a tremendous locality bias around Meta’s products. Social media use is very localized by geography and age. So if all your friends stopped using Facebook ten years ago, you assume that’s probably true everywhere, while in fact they’ve added several billion users on FB since then.
The most perplexing move for me was the decision to not automatically give Instagram users a threads account that they were logged into.

I'm sure Meta has some internal reputation metric for Insta accounts, and it would have been trivial to give all accounts above a threshold immediate access to threads.

But nope, you have to create a threads account to view threads.
> people watching let's plays while working

Is that something people who aren't streamers actually do? I don't think I've seen that in person, ever, but then maybe I'm not the most social creature out there so might just be my bubble.

Personally, I only watch YouTube on the TV. When I'm on the computer I'm either working, gaming or reading, the phone only gets used for phone/texting and social media while in the bathroom, and the TV is basically for normal TV/YouTube/TV shows/movies.
Layout fiddlers make changes people can see and understand.

If your job is massaging data for nebulous purposes using nebulous means and getting nebulous results, that you need to basically be another person doing the exact same thing to understand the value of, there's going to be a whole lot of management saying "Do we really need all those guys over there doing that? Can't we just have like one guy and a bunch of new AI magic?"
Many people will NEVER buy a Tesla because they don't like Musk's politics or behavior.
Paid Automation Testing Tools: Not All Created Equal
I would call those anything but boring and mature. They have had a lot of big changes over the last decade and there's no sign of that slowing down. They've been around for a long time, yes, but today they bear only a superficial resemblance to the standards of 25 years ago. JS in particular has changed radically just in the past 5-10 years alone. Search for "how to do X in JS" and you will find that most of the SO questions/answers you get are outdated to the point of being basically wrong. (At least, that has been my experience learning JS in earnest over the last year.)
People still have televisions and now most come with embedded android and YouTube. I don’t find this surprising that people are leaving cable and using internet streaming for their “tv consumption”.
So remove that? Or disconnect the antenna from the modem?
I think you lack empathy for others, and it's leading you to discount things that matter to people.
That is fine as long as they don't mention any dates that are only relevant to certain cultures. Christmas and Easter? Remove it.
That sounds reasonable. name:en is still "Gulf of Mexico". That way I suppose the app can choose whether to use the general English or US-specific name.
Depends on quantization selected - see https://www.canirunthisllm.net/
The closest I think they got to a concrete proposal was web_view (https://wg21.link/p1108).
There has never been ASIO on Linux. ASIO is a 3rd party (Steinberg) driver API exclusively for Windows.
Often true, but updates of JSON documents in postgres or inserts into nested arrays or objects are much, much slower, and involve locking the entire row. I think if your use case is insert/read only, it works well, though at scale even that can become an issue due to the GIN fastupdate index logic, which can lead to the occasional 20-30 second insert as the buffer gets flushed and the index updated.
I agree with this article, but with one caveat. Don't be the guy that becomes the designated INSERT_OLD_TECH_HERE guy in the office while the rest of the team is working with the cool modern tech that has a lot of jobs in the market, don't pigeon your career by becoming an expert in legacy tech, like COBOL, RPGLE or FORTRAN. You'll find yourself in a position where you'll get fired and won't be able to find another job because there aren't many jobs for your skills and because companies only want to hire people with years of experience in the tech they're using, be it javascript, java, go etc.

And also these legacy techs don't pay that much in general, for every consultant making bank fixing COBOL bugs there are probably dozens or more COBOL developer making less than a javascript developer, so you'll find yourself making less money than a kid with a 3 years of experience in web development, and when you go out in the market trying to switch jobs, you'll have a hard time finding a new job or salaries will suck. Don't be stupid and become the fall guy to keep the legacy debt going while everybody else in the company is learning the in-demand cool stuff and padding their resumes with hire able skills. You will regret it.
Not on these server GPUs.

I'm seeing 24GB M40 cards for $200, 24GB K80 cards for $40 on eBay.
What've you got for the browser?

I personally probably won't be very helpful for whatever it is -- I work with the compiler team, so nothing visible -- but I'm happy to +1 your issue during the next feature review cycle or &c
>I contend that it would be better to pick from a pool of professionals who, as part of their entrance into a professional society, agree also to lend their talents to civic duty for the benefit of all.

We already have a word for those people - politicians.

Why is a random lot better than an election, and having the public at least ostensibly vet the candidates and choose one?
Stop self serve, start selling
If that's what it was trying to do, it failed, because the "humorously extreme position" is actually a real experience people have - or at least have with their partners, or see other couples that seem to have it.
In the limit, there are also many ways to debug and patch issues in closed-source projects (someting I've done once or twice myself), unless they're run through an obfuscator or something. But there's always a dividing line where "reimplementing the functionality you need yourself" is far easier than "trudging through an old codebase that's tough to even get building".
This sentiment is also expressed as "Shark not dinosaur".
There'll be demand for both kinds of models, imaginative and dependable.
Please write up your "Pizlo special" on Phi nodes
Remember the master, no raw loops!. :)
Thunderbird for Android / K-9 Mail notifying you late (or never) when Emailed?
There's an easy fix a couple taps away.
working with JSONB in Postgres is painful.

It's powerful, I love that it's there, but actually using it is always such a chore.
What are "sleep sounds"? Like sounds of others sleeping?

Do you experience silence anything during the day or any other time? I couldn't imagine having sounds while trying to sleep, it's my quiet time when I can fully focus on what's inside my head, and outside sounds tend to be distracting. But still interesting how we all are very different, no right or wrong :)
Hopefully the first thing a new CEO and a new CTO (when hired) tackle is lack of communication between the two engineering teams and really make it into one team.

If that happens, there is maybe light at the end of the tunnel: by getting the two groups to talk in responsible, non-blaming way can put you on the path to a solution long term.

If that doesn't happen, or it's non-obvious to incoming leaders, then it's likely a slow death as depicted in the sibling comment.
That’s my point. In a unanswered question, there is nothing to predict (ie «learn» or «think» which I never said), so the AI/LLM will predict using a different source which has responded something, correctness or relevancy be damned.

What’s with your tone btw? RTFA? To me that feels quite unwarranted and in violation of the site guidelines.

Chill out, eh?
If this works at all, they'll be telling AIs to start multiple companies and keeping the ones that work best.

But if that works, it won't take long for "starting companies" and "being a CEO" to look like comically dated anachronisms. Instead of visual and content slop we'll have a corporate stonk slop.

If ASI becomes a thing, it will be able to understand and manipulate the entirety of human culture - including economics and business - to create ends we can't imagine.
> Because at the end of the day my customers don't know and don't care that I use Node vs Deno or Bun, or that I use NPM instead of pnpm, or that I'm not on the latest version of node or Postgres.

They don't know. And they shouldn't!

I don't have any idea what kind of tooling was used to create the drill I bought, just that it drills holes and is at the right price. Same for any other number of products and services.

The person who made the drill cares deeply, as they should. But consumers don't.

Why is software any different?
Part of the problem is that many working developers are still in companies that don't allow experimentation with the bleeding edge of AI on their code base, so their experiences come from headlines and from playing around on personal projects.

And on the first 10,000 lines of code, the best in class tools are actually pretty good. Since they can help define the structure of the code, it ends up shaped in a way that works well for the models, and it still basically all fits in the useful context window.

What developers who can't use it on large warty codebases don't see is how poorly even the best tools do on the kinds of projects that software engineers typically work on for pay. So they're faced with headlines that oversell AI capabilities and positive experiences with their own small projects and they buy the hype.
> That they are independent is the only reasonable assumption

No, this is not true. From the mathematical viewpoint Monty can have any strategy as long as it satisfies the problem statement. Which is, he DID open the door for whatever reason, the rest is uncertain. This literally what Diaconis means when he says "the strict argument would be that the question cannot be answered without knowing the motivation of the host" -- yes, in the strict sense he is indeed correct. This thread started because ryao stated that Diaconis is wrong [1].

Now even if you try to play the card of "reasonable assumptions" and rule out "boring" strategies because they are "giving the game away" this still won't eliminate all "non-independent" cases. The space of possible probability distributions here is way bigger than your list above. I can come up with an infinite number of "reasonable non-independent" strategies for Monty.

For example:

1) He rolls a dice before the game in his dressing room, secretly from the audience.

2) If he gets 6: he will open a door if you guessed incorrectly. If you guessed correctly he won't open the door.

3) If he gets 1-5: he will open a door if you guessed correctly. If you guessed incorrectly he won't open the door.

The situation is still the same: you've made your guess, then Monty opened the door with a goat and now you need to figure out whether to switch or not. It matches the problem definition stated above: the door was opened but we don't know why.

Let's see your chances if we assume Monty follow the dice approach:

event A: you've guessed correctly from the first try

event B: Monty opened the door

P(A|B): probability that you've guessed correctly given that Monty opened the door -- if it's less than 50% you should switch

P(A) = 1/3

P(B) = (1/6)x(2/3) + (5/6)x(1/3) = 7/18

P(AB) = (5/6)x(1/3) = 5/18

P(A|B) = P(AB)/P(B) = 5/7

So, in this case Monty doesn't "give up the game" -- there's still a significant random aspect to it. However in this setup for you it's better for you to stay (5/7 of winning) rather than switch (2/7).

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43005371

UPD fixed a typo, it's 5/7 not 5/8
The most likely next tokens could be "I don't know". The output need not have any relation to thought or knowledge.
I don’t know if many on orange site knew about New Games Journalism - a pre-gamergate attempt to talk about video games in personal and political terms, applying gonzo journalism to reviewing games. Mostly a push to take games seriously as a cultural force. This article feels like a strong precursor to it
or partially unmaintained, a security nightmare and not compatible with a lot of stuff you might need to be compatible, too

boring tech is nice, if it can get your job done, is compatible with modern security standards and allows fast reliable development

sadly that isn't always the case

especially security standards have shifted a lot in the last 10+ years, partially due to attacks getting more advanced partially due to more insight into what works and what doesn't

deployment environment and pipelines have shifted a ton, too, but here most "old" approaches continue to work just fine

data privacy laws, including but not limited to GDPR, bring additional challenges wrt. logging, statistics and data storage

regulations in many places also require increased due diligence from IT companies in all kinds of ways, bringing new challenges to the software live cycle, dependency management, location of deployment. Points like 4-eye-principle, immutable audit logs, and a reasonable standard of both dynamic and static vulnerability scanning/code analysis can depending on your country and kind of business be required by law.

If your boring tech can handle all that just fine, perfect use it.

But if you just use it blindly without checking if it's still up to the task it can easily be a very costly mistake, as costly as blindly using the new wide spread hyped tech.
They generate one token at a time and they all have different probability, so it won’t know what’s good unless the probability leads them to say I don’t know which would be rare unless is a very short ask. Right?
PHP is definitely the original serverless! You upload your code and someone else runs it!

CGI is also serverless

I wrote a couple articles with these comparisons, and related issues:

Comments on Scripting, CGI, and FastCGI https://www.oilshell.org/blog/2024/06/cgi.html

Comments on Shared Unix Hosting vs. the Cloud https://oils.pub/blog/2025/02/shared-hosting.html

---

I'm not the only one who thinks this: https://www.devever.net/~hl/mildlydynamic

AWS Lambda: CGI But It's Trendy. Recently we've seen the rise in popularity of AWS Lambda, a “functions as a service” provider. From my perspective this is literally a reinvention of CGI, except a) much more complicated for essentially the same functionality, b) with vendor lock-in, c) with a much more complex and bespoke deployment process which requires the use of special tools.

People who don't think this is true probably never used PHP or CGI ... You don't manage the server; you just upload your code!

Architecturally, it is the same. From the user experience, it is the same.

PHP and CGI also scale infinitely, because they are stateless. Meta scales PHP to a user base of half the world's population. They could also scale CGI/FastCGI.
That's not the whole story, though.

If it did say "I don't know", it still wouldn't know when it should. Instead, we would get confident expressions of uncertainty; and we would label them hallucinations, too.

This actually happens, just not very often.
I guess my question would be how it handles updates, inserts, and deletes on nested components of objects. These operations in postgres’ JSONB can be a huge problem due to needing to lock the entire row.
Somatic mutation as an explanation for epigenetic aging
I like to point out that sufficient stupidity/ignorance can be indistinguishable from malice. Consider it the impact of people living within their bubbles or the result of enormous blindspots.
If YouTube Music wasn't so shit, I'd agree with you. Right now I'm holding off on YouTube Premium only for the fact that they want me to pay for YouTube Music too (which I don't need nor want). If they had a cheaper plan without YouTube Music I'd jump on that immediately.
Is that so bad? If the only way to ensure a language's preservation and continued use is to mangle and evolve it? I think that's kind of a neat concept, to be honest. To live is to change.
"They" are not always stating that which is obvious to everyone. "They" are usually suggesting better ways and these ways are often enough based on engineering and science. What is put on the front page of media is, of course, the obvious, the nonsense, the sensational, the clickbait.

You don't have to say something new to a younger generation if that younger generation hasn't understood or even heard the old, the obvious, yet.

Youngsters might have heard some of it but their brains are often high enough on punched drugs (food and drink and media) that fuck with their brains to make them think 'I don't care', 'People don't care', 'nobody cares' ... and then there are the 'media-sigmas and cool kids' who sing that shit in choirs and canons.

A lot of things go to waste and yet there is tons of useful stuff coming out of recycling and up-cycling and that's just two methods with a very small "margin" and undeveloped.

There are those design and architecture blogs and firms and there is cool shit all the time and wonderful projects everywhere but the pointlessness of the over-engineered financial reasoning behind yearly sursurpluspluses is stacked against that.

You don't catch and bring a culprit to justice if you drop the investigation, which might have to circle long enough for some other brain or pair of eyes to find the final puzzle piece.

And not everyone wishes they were happier.

There's enough to criticize about anarchist, leftist critiques and groups and collectives as well, though, just as much exploitation of youth, gullibility and pain and crisis, and problems, really, but not systemically.

And there's that fallacy, something ad hominem, I think, so we should focus on what is said and written and, if obvious but unsolved, get to the bottom of it instead of saying "I don't care", "nobody cares", "human nature in the 21st post marketing psychology and decades of punched food, drink, drugs, meds and media century"
Terrific hobby? Sign me up!
> C++ exposes all this complexity because it's not willing to break anything, ever.

That is also why people use C++ for large complex problems. Not doing that is why python3 took forever to replace python2. When you have a lot of code that works it isn't worth the money to rewrite it if you can help it.
Drivers and control panels for interfaces are also an issue on non macOs and windows platforms. I don't see hardware vendors changing that any time soon.
The 1.58-bit DeepSeek R1 dynamic quant model from Unsloth is no joke. It just needs a lot of RAM and some patience.
While building VideoToBe (95% accuracy, speaker-separated transcripts), we've noticed an increasing demand for native-language podcast transcription.

We currently offer single transcriptions and plan to launch annual subscriptions which would make transcriptions extremely budget-friendly.
Interested in understanding:
What AI tools do you use to repurpose content?
For non-English podcasts, what features would make transcription more useful?
How are you handling technical jargon in transcripts?
Likely smaller actually.
You are actually getting overly philosophical. The reason is that a step of chatbot training is to fine tune the base model to less frequently respond with non answers.
I have not read the article, but the answer is: Because they are specifically built not to. Its like asking why so few salesmen end a call with "yeah it seems our product is not the right solution for you"
Damn, if we're also made redundant for posting snickering jokes on HN I'm definitely going to need a new occupation.
> If there numbers were the "best", then they would give them. They did not. So... they probably aren't.

I'm not sure that we can say that. They may be keeping their cards close to their chest for any number of reasons. Unless they think they also had "bad" numbers in the past several years when they were doing the same thing.
It looks like it's up to the US Marshals Service to uphold the judge's order, which is pretty much one of their only jobs. If that doesn't happen... we're cooked.
Tbf a lot of things "just work" on some devices, for some people's workflows -- even if it's happening every day for you, it might not be happening on the machines the engineers are living on. This can be because of different workflows, or habits, or particular combinations of versions/configurations (e.g. iPhone sku <A> with OS version <B>, laptop with SKU <C>, carplay with software version <D>, ...).
USB the protocol perhaps, but USB-C (and all of the connector/cable/PD complexity) is very far away from boring.
It's also a terrible comparison since Korea's writing system was created specifically to be easy to learn, write, and read.
Could you say what exact model+quant you're using for that specific test + settings + runtime? Just so I could try to compare with other numbers I come across.
One major critique: why do we think junior programmers really learn best from the grizzled veterans? AI coaches can give feedback on what someone is actually seeing and doing, and can be available 24x7. I suspect this can enable the juniors of the future to have a much faster rise to mastery.
While that was apparently true in 2015, it doesn't work on today's Rust: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...

I'm not sure what the difference was, given that the representations haven't changed, and I'm doing this without invoking the optimizer.

EDIT: I had issues with Miri so I dug into the MIR myself:

let uncopied : *const Uncopyable<*const B> =
match magic {
Magic::B(b) => &raw const b,

StorageLive(_4);
StorageLive(_5);
_5 = move ((_3 as B).0: Uncopyable<*const B>);
_4 = &raw const _5;
StorageDead(_5);

_3 is magic, _4 is uncopied, and 5 is b. move here is like ptr::read, which means that uncopied points to a copy of magic, not aliasing magic, and is dangling. Because this is UB, it gets optimized straight into the panic.

After I figured that out, miri started working, I must have made a mistake earlier. It will tell us the same thing:

test test ... error: Undefined Behavior: memory access failed: alloc113986 has been freed, so this pointer is dangling
--> src/lib.rs:24:13
|
24 | assert!((*uncopied).value != std::ptr::null());
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ memory access failed: alloc113986 has been freed, so this pointer is dangling
|
= help: this indicates a bug in the program: it performed an invalid operation, and caused Undefined Behavior
= help: see https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/behavior-considered-undefined.html for further information
help: alloc113986 was allocated here:
--> src/lib.rs:18:16
|
18 | Magic::B(b) => &b,
| ^
help: alloc113986 was deallocated here:
--> src/lib.rs:18:23
|
18 | Magic::B(b) => &b,
| ^
= note: BACKTRACE (of the first span) on thread `test`:
= note: inside `magic::<&str, &u8>` at src/lib.rs:24:13: 24:30
note: inside `test`
--> src/lib.rs:36:5
|
36 | magic::<&str, &u8>("magic string");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: inside closure
--> src/lib.rs:35:10
|
34 | #[test]
| ------- in this procedural macro expansion
35 | fn test() {
| ^
= note: this error originates in the attribute macro `test` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)

This code started failing in Rust 1.12, when MIR happened, so that's exactly my guess as to what fixed it.

Funny enough, if we take the critique in the forum as correct, and try with a union: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...

Rust will:

1. force us to use ManuallyDrop
2. the API makes this move explicit, and we get a compile-time error!
Yes. I think part of the problem is how good it is at starting from a blank slate and putting together an MVP type app. As a developer, I have been thoroughly impressed by this. Then non-devs see this and must think software engineers are doomed. What they don't see is how terrible LLMs are at working with complex, mature codebases and the hallucinations and endless feedback loops that go with that.
Show HN: A minimal web service template based on Next.js