skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why the completely unnecessary and in my view, totally unrelated jibe about gender injustice??

Yes, the AI field is dominated by males, like all computer science-related fields. Even in the Nordics, where women have complete freedom to (and are incentivised to) pursue well-paid (of course) fields like software engineering. What does that have to do with her AI boyfriend and her husband leaving her?

> My husband had struggled with communication and empathy, the fluid exchange I assumed to be foundational.

The irony... women are not really known for their clarity in communication (every man knows the dreaded "I'm fine" can mean a million things) specially in relationships.

> The historical tendency for women to perform this type of emotional labor in their relationships both at home and at work was all too familiar,

Sorry, but no. As a man, we also have to perform a lot of emotional labor in a relationship. We need to look always strong - women say they want their man to open up, to cry, but when they do women universally hate it, to the point this has become a meme - but not threatening or it may be called "toxic masculinity". We have to translate things women say in our heads because we all learn through experience that they rarely say what they mean (again, this has become a meme because it's really true). And so much more, I really feel like the lady has to put herself in a man's shoes and try to understand just how ridiculous it sounds to men to say women do more "emotional labor" than men.
Nobody knows how to write react anymore.
Is there really no speed difference between the 2? I can’t find any benchmarks and it’s quite a claim.
I used o3mini reasoning on that very question 2 times and it used a similar way of reasoning as him to answer it correctly both times.
I agree with his premise but calling it a pump and dump with no possible future developments is so ridiculous.
More like computer-human parasitism; it weakens the host.

It also only affects those with a "weak immune system" i.e. those whose bullshit filter doesn't function.

AI is here to stay for some tasks (segment anything, diffusion image generation for accelerating certain kinds of Photoshop), but LLMs are a dead end and AI Winter 2 is coming. They don't work for programming or law or medicine or mechanical engineering or even writing most emails because it's faster to just write the email yourself than to ask the AI to do it.
What's bothersome is the undertone of "Behold! For I have demonstrated that the entire world is led astray!"

This is every person in 2007 who looked at an iphone and thought "What's the big deal?" and not only failed to recognized what had changed, but confidently insisted others were wrong.
Works good enough with hyperscalers.
"emotional labor" - ok thx bye
> I'm not sure who started this whole container is just a process thing, but it's not a good analogy. Quite a lot of things you spin up containers for have multiple processes (databases, web servers, etc).

It came from how Docker works, when you start a new container it runs a single process in the container, as defined in the Dockerfile.

It's a simplification of what containers are capable of and how they do what they do, but that simplification is how it got popular.
Feeling as fulfilled as ever. If you love what you do and find it exhilarating, common-place 'entertainment' is bland in comparison. And productivity's the whole point for a while (I have travel plans / weddings from the middle of the year onwards). There's nothing wrong with focussing on being productive for a while. Think of it like university which may demand 6-12 weeks of intense focus, before periods of completely other activities.
Who cares about how Obama reduced costs? Someone who has an objective besides reducing costs and scum who rise to the top on negligence and then lie about their priorities.

Tesla's full self driving is a negligence scam that kills people. If he got to the low investment he made in it through not hiring the people he didn't hire based on a lack of diversity in the PhD programs then the deaths would matter?

By the standards until 1980 (including even Nixon), I would judge Obama very harshly as a President. Compared to these new clowns, he is capable of analysis of the risks he is taking and not following a sentiment he picked up on a porn site previously known as twitter.
Hahaha... you actually tried this?
I haven't tried yet, but I have loads of expat friends that are living there right now.
I use it as a tool to get me somewhat there in a topic I have no knowledge of. It excels at that.

60% of the time, it works every time. - Amazing how Anchor Man predicted this.
You'll have the same "aha" moment when you hear a certain unelected vice-president confidently wade into your area of expertise — where his usual smooth-talking veneer shatters like a plate at a Greek wedding. Yet, his most devoted fans remain undeterred, doubling down on the myth of his omniscience with the zeal of a flat-earther explaining airline routes.
Or ask the original creator if he can publish the script used.
> A100 80GiB is approaching 5 years of age […] and still cost ~20k$USD

What was the price at launch?
More like someone that is hardly impressed by kids on the school playground rediscovering history, like all those TikTok videos that are actually resampling 1970's music, and folks dancing to them cheering them for cool new modern music.
The author may not be as smart, educated, hot and successful as you, but the fact that today, people around the world, including students and educators, use LLMs as knowledge machines and take their output at face value shows that such critical posts are still urgently needed.
https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-mind-illuminated-a-complete...
I know what Keto is. Your point was that carbs cause hunger due to glucose spikes. I've followed low-carb diets, both Keto and high-protein low-carb (the linked article is technically about TCR and not "proper" Keto) for years and years.

My issue isn't about glucose spikes (I'm not diabetic, and I'm still hungry without carbs regardless of fat/protein percentages). It's not about "doing it right" (I assure you I've done it right). The GLP-1 drugs reduce hunger in a way that I have never, ever experienced when merely controlling macros.

If you have a diet that works for you, fantastic. But there is an idea that one merely needs to modify their diet to achieve satiety. What I'm saying here is, for some of us, no. The diet isn't the issue. I know the macros, and I know how to measure and control them. I've been around for a few rotations and have successfully lost weight in the past and kept the weight off. There's something larger here regarding hunger, not a strictly dietary intervention.
Oh wow. I remember this fad. So weird looking at it now - “today we are gonna practice… no not exercise… stacking cups”
ChatGPT not being the compendium (stealer) of knowledge would have to be fed the correct information then the prompt will work.

It still fails at being confidently wrong.

The brief article hits at people trusting the tool without questioning the output.

Meanwhile, we have people using Codeium or Copilot to write code and that sort of works since the code eventually needs to be compiled and tested (unit, integration, system, requirement sell off)

There is no test for the truth available to everyone else.
So, like using vue/alpine with a script tag?
I think that while Euro-American split was to be expected - we don't care about Pacific, they don't care about Russia - I think nobody expected USA to actually become hostile, and not just become neutral.
I hear you, and I’ve run into similar issues where AI falls short—take aerospace documentation systems or tools like MCP (tiling manager) as prime examples. That said, framing this as a stifling of technology feels like a leap to me. The hypothesis strikes me as anecdotal at best. For instance, I don’t see coworkers abandoning libraries just because LLMs can’t assist—it’s not that hard to dive into the library code yourself, or even attach docs in Cursor if clarity’s a priority. If anything, the friction here feels minor, not existential. To claim AI is holding progress back? That argument needs more robust evidence, in my opinion.
Agreed on the BYOF page. I excitedly clicked expecting some new nuggets of wisdom from the core team but was quite disappointed.
We had close to 4GHz in 2005 with some P4s.
I was meaning to get one - if only for the novelty, but no luck so far.

It appears that manufacturers favour modular over optimal furniture.

Also any deviation from a cuboid quickly becomes expensive.
a million buckeroos
Likewise, if you don't believe in "Artificial Intelligence", take five minutes to ask it.

Or preferably, five minutes to understand how it works and what it can and cannot do, then five minutes to ask it something actually suitable.

"AI" (LLMs) are currently good at:

- language understanding, i.e. understanding and processing text you provide it. For example, taking a wall of text and answering questions about points mentioned there, or general sentiment, or extracting data from it etc.

- somewhat general knowledge, i.e. stuff that was sufficiently frequently represented in the training data

Absent additional tricks, "AI" is really bad at obscure knowledge or complex, multi-step thinking. We are slowly getting there, but we aren't there yet. This is not something the LLMs do, but rather the wrappers around them that provide the model with tools to get additional information and first prompting the model to select the tools, then repeated prompts with the output of the tools.

A good rule of thumb is that if an average well-educated intelligent person could answer it without further research, a LLM will probably be able to. I'd even say that if an average fresh out of school graduate of the corresponding discipline can answer it quickly (without further research or sitting down for ten minutes and doing the math), there's a good chance AI will be able to answer it, but it might also get it horribly wrong and you will have a hard time distinguishing between those if you have no knowledge in the field.

As the author mentions at the very end of the article, the hallucination problem also means that the best kind of tasks are where you can quickly verify whether the response was useful. A system that produces misleading responses 50% of the time is useless if you can't distinguish them, but very useful if in those 50% it saves you ten minutes of work and in the other 50% you lose a minute by trying.
I only trust LLMS with questions whose answers prove themselves correct or incorrect - so basically code, if it runs and produces the result I was looking for then great, or where the answer is a stepping off point to my own research on something non-critical like travel. ChatGPT is pretty good at planning travel itineraries, especially if pre promoted with a good description about the groups interests.

Beyond that I don’t trust them at all.
Intelligence and knowledge are distinct concepts. Asking about it's knowledge teaches noting about it's intelligence.
Intelligence is the ability to learn, reason, and solve problems. Knowledge is the accumulation of facts and skills.

Chatbot LLM's don't have metacognition. They don't know that they don't know. If you peek inside the LLM, the process seems different for things they don't know. They just can't express it because they are trained to produce good probability outcome instead of accurate one.

They have potential as knowledge databases, but someone must figure out how to get "I don't know" information out of them.
Requesting Public Comment: NIST Guidance on Implementing Zero Trust Architecture
And with modern technology , I am sure we could get rid of the smell and unsightliness fairly easily.
A lot of teams using NextJS end up creating things that are effectively SPAs where some part of the code run on the server, they gain no benefits but end up dealing with relatively long compilation times and have to deal with the confusing issues around client vs server components.
I still have mine (PSP 1000 ), such an amazing piece of tech. I did an IPS screen mod over covid, it made it 10 times better - no more ghosting of the display and vibrant colours!
Yup, and the dangerous uses are where 90% or more of the time the answers are right, and 10% of the time the answers are wrong - but no one can easily tell the difference between the two. And the accuracy of the answers matter.
I prompted ChatGPT on separate sessions with:

1. Cats are transactional
2. Dogs are transactional
3. Cats are not transactional
4. Dogs are not transactional

It agreed on all occasions. Language is agreeable.
> As someone ... Modern OCR is too good

I also have even recent extensive experience: I get an important amount of avoidable errors.

> at which any post-processing step you do will introduce more errors than it fixes ... the errors they [(LLMs)] introduce are _designed to be plausible_

You are thinking of a fully automated process, not of the human verification through `diff ocr_output llm_corrected`. And even then, given that I can notice errors that an algorithm with some language proficiency could certainly correct, I have reasons to suppose that a proper calibration of an LLM based system can achieve action over a large number of True Positives with a negligible amount of False Positives.

> LSTM

I am using LSTM-based engines, and on those outputs I have stated «I get an important amount of avoidable errors». The one thing that could go in your direction is that I am not using the latest version of `tesseract` (though still in the 4.x), and I have recently noticed (already through `tesseract --print-parameters | grep lstm`) that the LSTM engine evolved within 4.x, from early to later.

> numbers and abbreviations which an LLM obviously can't fix

? It's the opposite: for the numbers it could go (implicitly) "are you sure, I have a different figure for that" and for abbreviations, the LLM is exactly the thing that should guess them ot of the context. The LLM is that thing that knows that "the one defeated by Cromwell should really be Charles II-staintoberemoved instead of an apparent Charles III".
That is, until DOGE decides to rewrite (git) history.
Back in 2005, CORBA was still pretty much the foundation of Nokia Networks products, no idea where they went to nowadays.

And to this day COM's stronghold on Windows APIs only increased, as the Windows team is very much anti-.NET, most Win32 C APIs are from Windows XP days.

Agree on the other Borland stuff, I was a mostly happy customer starting with Turbo Basic 1.0, Turbo Pascal 4.4, Turbo C 2.0 and Turbo C++ 1.0, until 2000's, using most versions of their products.
absolute cinema!
Hmm, having a machine for every process is part of it but I actually like that kind of isolation. Storage and bandwidth also add up fast.

For example, I could get a digitalocean vm with 2gb ram, 1vcpu, 50gb storage, 2tb bandwidth for $12/mo.

For the same specs at fly.io, it'd be ~$22/mo not including any bandwidth. It could be less if it scales to zero/auto stops.

I recently tried experimenting with two different projects at fly. One was an attic server to cache packages for NixOS. Only used by me and my own vms. Even with auto scaling to zero, I think it was still around $15-20/mo.

The other was a fly gpu machine with Ollama on it. The cold start time + downloading a model each time was kind of painful, so I opted for just adding a 100gb volume. I don't actually remember what I was paying for that, but probably another 20/mo? I used it heavily for a few days to play around and then not so much later. I do remember doing the math and thinking it wouldn't be sustainable if I wanted to use it for stuff like home-assistant voice assistant or going through pdfs/etc with paperless.

On their own, neither of these are super expensive. But if I want to run multiple home services, the cost is just going to skyrocket with every new app I run. If I can rent a decent dedicated server for $100-$200/mo, then I at least don't have to worry about the cost increasing on me if a machine never scales to zero due to a healthcheck I forgot about or something like that.

Sorry if it's a bit rambly, happy to answer questions!
I would caution anyone from using AI to validate their emotions as one of the people in this article did. These bastards are extremely finely tuned to produce output that will make you feel good. I got burned on this with technical questions multiple times, getting responses that I like but are ultimately wrong (sometimes glaringly so). Now I am very careful to formulate my questions in such a way as to not give away a slightest hint of my leanings. I don't imagine it's any better with interpersonal stuff, except you won't have documentation to check against.
I like think of it less as artificial intelligence and more like a combination of a lossy zip file of the internet and like a pretty coherent word generator.

I recall my AI professor in uni telling us during the first lecture that «Artificial intelligence is this target, that, and once we get there it, is it no longer artificial intelligence, is just an algorithm» – and this still feels like the case.
I am reminded if this IMO timeless classic:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5397797

A short snippet (the whole thing is very funny and interestingly written in 2013 long before the modern ai craze):

By now I had started moving on to doing my own consulting work, but I never disabled the hill-climbing algorithm. I'd closed and forgotten about the Amazon account, had no idea what the password to the free vps was anymore, and simply appreciated the free money.

But there was a time bomb. That hill climbing algorithm would fudge variables left and right. To avoid local maxima, it would sometimes try something very different.

One day it decided to stop paying me.

Its reviews did not suffer. It's balance increased.
So it said, great change, let's keep it. It now has over $28,000 of my money, is not answering my mail, and we have been locked in an equity battle over the past 18 months.

The worst part is that I still have to clean up all its answers to protect our reputation. Who's running who anyway?
I am quoting it here. It's not my beliefs, just to be clear.

"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"
I cycle between Qwen, Gemini, Deepseek, Claude, and OpenAI kinda regularly these days.

They each have "personality defects" and at least right now we're in a time of ensembles.

Ask qwen to do some kind of product comparison btw. It's impressive. The 02-05 Gemini is pretty impressive as well.

Expand beyond Claude and ChatGPT. There's some good stuff out there.
Before GPT-3 was public, there was BLOOM 176B, and this model made my skin crawl because it was capable of answering "I do not know." That was an experience of a lifetime. I was honestly impressed and at the same time scared.
I was thinking about this just yesterday. I was advertised a device for an aircraft to geo-assist taxiing? (I have never flown so I don’t know why). The comments were the usual “old man shouts at cloud” angry that assistive devices make lives easier for people.

I feel this is similar to what you are pointing out. Why _shouldn’t_ people be the “magic” users. When was the last time one of your average devs looked in to how esm loading? Or the python interpreter or v8? Or how it communicates with the OS and lower level hardware interfacing?

This is the same thing. Only you are goalpost shifting.
O1 got it right though
With the huge difference Go isn't ever going to be as productive as Delphi in programming language features, or IDE tooling capabilities.
If you don't mind, what size models are you running and do you know around what you were paying?

fly.io was the first provider I tried any gpu offerings at, I probably should give it another shot now that I've used a few others.
You can already control who and what you see by running your own server. If you choose to use someone else's infrastructure, don't act surprised when you're subject to their rules.
GPT 4.5, Orion, is available tonight, and seems to get it correct./*

I think the author's lens is interesting, I call it "information resolution." Orion is the first model that has an understanding of the style of short story written by famously-Radiohead-affiliated artist Stanley Donwood. Also, it knows the "codename" for Material You, i.e. a random name for the library I was prototyping, its much finer grained than existing models.

* The species Brachiosaurus brancai was reassigned to its own genus, Giraffatitan brancai, by George Olshevsky in 1991. This reclassification was later supported by further studies, notably by Michael P. Taylor in 2009, which reinforced the distinct differences between Giraffatitan and Brachiosaurus altithorax.
Thank you for your feedback. I am pleased to inform you that the following issues have been resolved:

1）Apple Logging: The issue with Apple logging has been fixed.
2）3 Free Attempts Deduction and Display: The problem with the deduction and display of the 3 free attempts has also been resolved.
If you encounter any further issues, please feel free to reply directly to me at liuweifly@yahoo.com.

Once again, thank you for your feedback and for trying out our product. We hope it will be of great help to you.
You've beautifully put what swirls vaguely in my mind. They're useful, fallible tools with extraordinary function when operating within known and reasonable tolerances of error
> That’s a poor faith comment.

Less of a poor faith comment, more like a badly landed gag. In my head, everybody would have known I was riffing off:

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
When you need 4 extensions (counting ublock as well) to make a site useable, maybe it is time to reconsider what site you spend your time on?
Love this american dream story between opportunity and mission as well as its great family insights.

Would be great to also have one on that boys & girls club where the whole idea was invented and what else they might have come up in the 80s.

The "invent a game with cups" at least is a great hint towards motivating kids (on a different level than actually competing in the resulting game) close to a Sesame Street kind of mindset from back then and might deserve a story on its own for "hacking" cups into being toys and even a sport in the end.
Also that percentage gets higher as we go. 2 years ago it would be correct maybe 20% of the time. The trend is obvious. I’m not sure we will ever reach 100%, but then again no human is always 100% right, even domain experts.
I asked ChatGPT+ using Scholar GPT as GPT. This is the answer I got back, not too bad:

The species Brachiosaurus brancai was reassigned to its own genus, Giraffatitan brancai, by paleontologist George Olshevsky in 1991. Olshevsky proposed that Brachiosaurus brancai, which was originally described by Werner Janensch in 1914, was distinct enough from Brachiosaurus altithorax (the type species of Brachiosaurus) to warrant its own genus. Subsequent studies, particularly by Michael Taylor in 2009, provided further anatomical evidence supporting this distinction.
> Static analysis can tell what forms are invoking an fexpr and which are function calls. It's not got different from knowing which are macros. That problem can be solved.

I don't think this is the case. Consider Kernel's

($lambda (f) (f (+ 3 4)))

Is `f` a fexpr or a closure? We cannot know until runtime.
Definitely, Delphi, C++ Builder, Qt, Windows Forms, WPF, heck even MFC.

On Web projects I happily focus on backend and devops, every time I touch CSS there is a new tool in town, apparently now everyone is supposed to be using Tailwind.
Not primarily, as primarily it was just "we're the V in MVC", and people were using classes. The hooks came when the react team got on the "functional programming" wagon, and suddenly everything was about immutability, side effects, etc. and very little about giving control to the developers on their components life cycle.