skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Most “AI” companies are simply wrapping the ChatGPT API in some form. You can tell from the job posts.

They aren’t building anything themselves. I find this to be disingenuous as best, and is a sign to me of bubble attribution.

I also think that re-branding Machine Learning as AI to also be disingenuous.

These technologies of course have their use cases and excel in some things, but this isn’t the ushering of actual, sapient intelligence, that for the majority of the term’s existence was the de facto agreed standard for the term “AI”. This technology does lack the actual markers of what is generally accepted as intelligence to begin with
> This approach eliminates the need for complex setup tools like requirements.txt or package managers...

And yet, the rest of the article is about uv. According to uv itself:

> An extremely fast Python package and project manager, written in Rust.

It's a package manager!
Just type "settings" then and you go to the main menu.
Problem solving, I'm pretty sure it's the driving motivation for many/most coders.

I find pleasure in crafting the solution, sculpting it by hand; putting everything I've got into making it fit the problem like a glove. Coding to me is an artistic way of expressing myself, exploring, always improving; it's part of the fun to me.

And I don't like following instructions in general, don't like being programmed.

So what's in it for you then, if not the problem solving?
How short should it be? Two years? Two months?
Em dashes without surrounding spaces is such a ugly relic that triggers me to no end and is objectively wrong. The dash object is part of the sentence — not the two words it's separating.
Wow, $2000 per lamp, yeah that's pricey.
So they say. But I won't believe it until I see it on an official US government site.

To avoid ideological bias, of course.
HN doesn't like blockchain. They had the chance to get in very early and now they're salty. I first heard about bitcoin on HN, before Silk Road made headlines.
The games state is handled completely different between bedrock and java
How would this circumvent FDIC backing? They wouldn't need to anyways. The FDIC only has around $120B, which is basically a joke compared to the bailouts that would be required in a collapse scenario.
The "Magnificent Seven" stocks (Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla) were collectively up >60% last year and are now 30% of the entire S&P500. They are all heavily invested in AI products.
They're not supposed to write the details down, which is what this person was referring to.

In Asia, they quite often take your CC details and enter it into a text field in their own system in case they need to process it later, including the CVV. Sometimes they're writing it down on paper.

They're not entering it into a PCI compliant system where the digits are masked.
Today's models are far from autonomous thinking machines. It is a cognitive bias among the masses that agree. It is just a giant calculator. It predicts "the most probable next word" from a sea of all combinations of next words.
Normal people benefit far more from cheap energy than the ultra rich. Those people can just buy human labor if that's what is needed. For normal people it might be the difference between having a tractor to plow your field, and plowing it with animal power(possibly your own)
I agree, just because these AI tools give you coding superpowers doesn’t mean you’re a super coder.

There’s a difference between accelerating something you know how to do long hand, and automating something you couldn’t fix or replace yourself.

So it’s helpful to know if you are in a familiar mode or exploratory mode.

I wrote more about these two modes and the element of surprise here https://icing.space/2025/infinite-bicycles-for-the-mind
The difference: in Linux it is a usability issue to be fixed, whereas on macOS it is a feature and explicit design goal to make it that way. In general, I have found that things which are difficult on Linux are so because the problem is difficult, not because the people who make my computer have paternalistic attitudes about my usage of it.
Currently, Nvidia enjoys a ton of the value capture from the LLM hype. But that's a weird state of affairs and once LLM deployments are less dependent on Nvidia hardware, the value capture will likely move to software companies. Or the LLM hype will reduce to the point that there isn't a ton of value to capture here anymore. This tech may just get commoditized.
I'm completely hooked. This is such a good paper.

It hallucinating how it thinks through things is particularly interesting - not surprising, but cool to confirm.

I would LOVE to see Anthropic feed the replacement features output to the model itself and fine tune the model on how it thinks through / reasons internally so it can accurately describe how it arrived at its solutions - and see how it impacts its behavior / reasoning.
Sorry, I’m old and sometimes forget GLP-1 drugs exist now. But that’s kind of my point—those drugs seem like magic because medical interventions for obesity control were so extremely ineffective until just a couple of years ago.

We don’t have anything akin to GLP-1 drugs for opiate addiction, or alcohol addiction, etc.
Serious question as someone who has also tried these things out and not found them very useful in the context of working on a large, complex codebase in not python not javascript: when I imagine the amount of time it would take me to select some test cases, copy and paste them, and then think of a todo list or prompt to generate another case, even assuming the output is perfect, I feel like I’m getting close to the amount of time and mental effort it would take me to just write the test. In a way, having to ask in english for what I want in code for me adds an additional barrier: rather than just doing the thing I have to also think of a promptable description. Is that not a problem? Is it just fast enough that it doesn’t matter? What’s the deal?
Logitech H390
UTF-8 BOM is probably not a good idea for anything other than (maybe) plain text documents. For data, many (although not all) programs should not need to care about character encoding, and if they include something such as UTF-8 BOM then it will become necessary to consider the character encoding even though it shouldn't be necessary.
The power of invested Capital protecting itself is what delays climate change action. Billionaires have a oversized influence on the decisions of Capital, for obvious reasons. Looking at their personal co2 consumption multiplied by their number isn't the measure you should be assessing.
If you're curious, spend some time with it. I think Emacs rewards a deep dive, it's a unique piece of software. Make sure to try org mode and magit and to run through the built-in tutorial. There is also a built-in tutorial for elisp that is quite good.
> People see citations and assume it's correct.

The solution is to set expectations, not to throw away one of the most valuable tools ever created.

If you read a supermarket tabloid, do you think the stories about aliens are true? No, because you've been taught that tabloids are sensationalist. When you listen to campaign ads, do you think they're true? When you ask a buddy about geography halfway across the world, do you assume every answer they give is right?

It's just about having realistic expectations. And people tend to learn those fast.

> Rarely do I need to check a wikipedia entry's source.

I suggest you start. Wikipedia is full of citations that don't back up the text of the article. And that's when there are even citations to begin with. I can't count the number of times I've wanted to verify something on Wikipedia, and there either wasn't a citation, or there was one related to the topic but that didn't have anything related to the specific assertion being made.
So it’s purely ideological without any real world difference?

Are most people better off with Apple defaults?

And it’s not because the problem is “difficult”. It’s because for 20 years it has been claimed that this will be the “year of Linux on the Desktop” and it’s never been good enough for most people.
Only a manager could have such a distorted view. I'd love to work on robustness but product management has 5 years worth of feature JIRAs lined up for me.
There seems to be a widely held misconception that company valuations have any basis in the underlying fundamentals of what the companies do. This is not and has not been the case for several years. The US stock market’s darlings are Kardashians, they are valuable for being valuable the way the Kardashians are famous for being famous.

In markets, perception is reality, and the perception is that these companies are innovative. That’s it.
It's certainly not the norm in Australia, nor have I come across that in probably the last 15 or so years. Running your credit card through the terminal to place a hold on funds is done pretty much everywhere. I'm sure there's a few crusty old operators out there doing things the old way.
Breaking news: the Middle East doesn't care about your sexual identity.
What's also scary is that we know LLMs do fail, but nobody (even the people who wrote the LLM) can tell you how often it will fail at any particular task. Not even an order of magnitude. Will it fail 0.2%, 2%, or 20% of the time? Nobody knows! A computer that will randomly produce an incorrect result to my calculation is useless to me because now I have to separately validate the correctness of every result. If I need to ask an LLM to explain to me some fact, how do I know if this time it's hallucinating? There is no "LLM just guessed" flag in the output. It might seem to people to be "miraculous" that it will summarize a random scientific paper down to 5 bullet points, but how do you know if it's output is correct? No LLM proponent seems to want to answer this question.
Thanks for pointing that out! Looks like they were invalid to begin with in https://github.com/gohugoio/hugoThemesSiteBuilder/blob/main/... but I've fixed it up
Agree, but this has nothing to do with the left / working class. I was also more interested in how Amazon may or may not be censoring or, more likely, deprioritizing, books of certain topics in the West. I already know that China bans ye ol' Tank Man of Tiananmen square. It's the first thing everyone brings up when they want to point out how much more morally superior we are in the West. /s It's so old, it's even boring.
Edit: Those pollution numbers don’t really add up to 1,200x on average. Source has Top 50 richest people produced same emissions as bottom 155 million people combined. Page 8: https://webassets.oxfamamerica.org/media/documents/bp-carbon...

For example individual billionaires Yachts alone represent 870x average emissions from someone globally. That’s just in operations and excludes construction.
I don't think it created it, but it exasperated it to extreme levels.
SPHinXsys – Open-source Multiphysics library
Such a huge miss not including the name of the company on the shirts. It could be a fitness logo for all anyone knows.
> the adapter itself is completely passive

I think it was not completely passive, but simple level conversion; DisplayPort is AC-coupled signal, HDMI is DC-coupled.
Designing with Forces (Ryan Singer, 2011 talk) [video]
I found this talk by searching for reviews about the book "Notes on the Synthesis of Form", which gave me this blog [1] talking about the book.

[1] https://www.core77.com/posts/69273/Book-Review-Notes-on-the-...
I can't imagine how that would work with an Apple card? There's nothing printed on them.
are they usually not? is there no industry standard concept of an escalation manager?
Sabine is on my blocklist as she very often puts out really ignorant and short-sighted perspectives.

LLMs are the most impactful technology we've had since the internet, that is why people are bullish on them, anyone who fails to see that cannot probably tie its own shoes without a "peer-reviewed" mechanism, lol.
General question: how do you find and choose abandonware?
I think you're just not used to it.

Quick, tell me how wide this range is, just as an order of magnitude:

285368737954–285368783645

Would be a lot easier if I only included the range at the end which had actually changed, wouldn't it?

That's why it's clearer. Now obviously that was an extreme example, but it's also easier to see at a glance that 1,387–9 is just three pages, as opposed to 1,387–1,389.
That's an en-dash
This reporter is just incorrect, coming up with an incorrect story based on an incorrect Substack post. The Trump administration quote you pasted is in this article.
True. But at the rate we are going, there will not be many fields to plow :)
How is correcting someone else's solutions even close to as fulfilling as creating your own? How can you not lose something by choosing that method?
It's just more hazing so the underclass of engineers don't realize they actually build everything big tech is selling and more.
Late to reply, but I took some time to consider my thoughts. First, I want to be a little bit angry:

>As a quick aside - I absolutely hate how most people treat incentives. So many leaders act like incentives are the only thing you can expect people to follow.
>Hey, my top sales guy sold a $1M deal but did it at -90% margin, but there was no rule against it, so what do you expect?
>There is one main incentive that all employees have - act with high integrity or get fired. Stop excusing people for bad behavior because your little point systems don’t cover every case of common sense.

This is completely unacceptable. The idea that someone could ever feel so insulated from accountability for the business priorities they set that they could even imagine getting away with saying something like this disgusts me. "Oh don't do what I told you and paid you to do, ~do the right thing!~"

Second, to try to directly address the problem: this article shows a complete lack of systems thinking. Systems thinking requires more intellectual investment from managers, but is ultimately the only way to get consistently good results. This is something we established by the 1980s so it's really frustrating that I'm seeing people having to re-prove this in modern times. Yes, it's easier to just blame people for their mistakes, but we stopped doing that decades ago because it doesn't lead to better results.

Finally, the reality is that I have never in my career seen a situation that could be made better by applying more blame. The reason for this is because there is no such situation, and anyone who suggests there is so fundamentally misunderstands what we are trying to do that they simply can't contribute to this kind of discussion. When you blame a person you are specifically choosing not to fix the system that actually caused the problem.
And of course the DOGE employees will comply ...
That isn't the denotation of my post; I was not characterizing Linux as a whole, but only responding to your specific (unsound) analogy. It works better for me, for a number of reasons including that above. Perhaps it will work better for you, as well. :)

The second part of your post is incoherent to me, I can't tell what you're trying to say.
> You can do something like this

Do people actually do this? Is it included in the standard library? If not, should it be?
I found a real Dr. Worm:

https://www.reddit.com/r/tmbg/comments/1f31sx5/hes_a_real_dr...

(I don't know if he plays the drums)
I go back and forth. I share your amazement. I used Gemini Deep Research the other day and was blown away. It claimed to go read 20 websites, I showed its "thinking" and steps. Its conclusions at each step. Then it wrote a large summary (several pages)

On the other hand, I saw github recently added Copilot as a code reviewer. For fun I let it review my latest pull request. I hated its suggestions but could imagine a not too distant future where I'm required by upper management to satisfy the LLM before I'm allowed to commit. Similarly, I've asked ChatGPT questions and it's been programmed to only give answers that Silicon Valley workers have declared "correct".

The thing I always find frustrating about the naysayers is that they seem to think how it works today is the end if it. Like I recently listened to an episode of Econtalk interviewing someone on AI and education. See lives in the UK and used Tesla FSD as an example of how bad AI is. Yet I live in California and see Waymo mostly working today and lots of people using it. I believe she wouldn't have used the Tesla FSD example, and would possibly have changed her world view at least a little, if she'd updated on seeing self driving work.
Searching 400M image vectors on modest hardware
We recently ran an experiment to upload and search the LAION-400M dataset (~400M 512d CLIP vectors) using a fairly minimal setup:

- 64GB RAM
- FLOAT16 vectors (half the usual size)
- Binary quantization + oversampling
- 2-stage search (prefetch in RAM, rescore on disk)
- Async disk IO (via io_uring)

We hit ~54GB RAM usage and achieved sub-second query times.

We documented everything, including memory breakdowns, hardware configs, upload scripts, and tuning tips.
This one is U+4E00, CJK Unified Ideograph-4E00. So it's a common character between Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. This should be "one" in all three. And it does technically look a little different than a dash: https://unicodeplus.com/U+4E00
Arguably, its not the judges responsibility to know the law, but that of the lawyers. Both sides should find the relevant laws and case law, and the judge then decides what applies.
I don't understand this at all.

If my application performs some function dependant on data from an API(e.x. showing tax information, letting a user input tax information, and performing tax calculations and autocomplete), how do I extend that UI easier with MCP than with an HTTP REST API.

Even with MCP I need to update my application code to add UI elements(inputs, outputs) for a user to interact with this new functionality, no?
Man, look at all those keywords I remember from college. I wish I got to use fancy well-known algorithms. Instead all I'm doing is building UI components and REST APIs to present elasticsearch results. All the fun stuff is buried in black boxes.
I want to armchair quarterback this:

> I suffered through a particularly acute week of on-call pain. At one point I was in my third or fourth video call about the same long and protracted smoldering SEV and, in a moment of frustrated weakness, I made an offhand comment about just being tired of repeatedly handling the same problem. [...] With the utterance of a single sentence, I opened a rift in the relationship with my manager that remained until the day I left that job.

It's possible that the manager dropped the ball in two ways:

1. Perma-haranguing an employee, when manager should instead have had a talk with employee about what was bothering the employee. (And split it, between the little that really needs to be said right now, while employee is already overextended, and what can happen after they recharge.)

2. The root cause of the recurring problem might be something management should've tackled already. Which is additional reason not to blame the employee, for calling out the problem in frustration.
Embrace the confusion with the AI—it’s a sign of progress!
I don't think it is. The moderation guidelines explicitly say there can be site weightings. I think it's likely there is a negative site weighting on Daring Fireball and multiple other sites.

My guess would be it was algorithmically applied based on past tendency for them to gather early flags or flamewar comments, rather than personal animus. Why there would be a site weight rank is not falsifiable except by the mod team.

But whether there is one seems much clearer. Daring Fireball submissions perform very poorly, the notable one that should have been #1 by any measure was "Something is Rotten in the State of Cupertino".

Might be the most notable Apple article of the decade. That it wasn't number one suggests negative site weight. Which, I'll repeat, is explicitly within the public guidelines for how the site is run. Not a paranoid conspiracy. I doubt the mods would comment on specific site weights as that would open a whole can of worms. Which is frustrating for sites, but I can't think of any social media algo that's public.
I have misophonia but only from humans eating, for some reason I enjoy the sounds of my pets and other animals in nature eating.
Summer and sunshine anyone ain't gonna go to Canada, though. :)
For everyone who owns a Tesla
Are you sure about that?

We're several years in now, and have lots of A:B comparisons to study across orgs that allowed and prohibited AI assistants. Is one of those groups running away with massive productivity gains?

Because I don't think anybody's noticed that yet. We see layoffs that makes sense on their own after a boom, and cut across AI-friendly and -unfriendly orgs. But we don't seem to see anybody suddenly breaking out with 2x or 5x or 10x productivity gains on actual deliverables. In contrast, the enshittening just seems to be continuing as it has for years and the pace of new products and features is holding steady. No?
> The current valuation for it is because the market thinks that it's able to write code like a senior engineer and have AGI, because that's how they're marketed by the LLM providers.

No it's not. If it was valued for that it'd be at least 10X what it is now.
Exactly. If some company ever does come up with an AI that is truly miraculous and magical the very last thing they'll do is let people like you and me play with it at any price. At best, we'd get some locked down and crippled interface to heavily monitored pre-approved/censored output. My guess is that the miracle isn't going to happen.

If I'm wrong though and some digital alchemy finally manages to turn our facebook comments into a super-intelligence we'll only have a few years of an increasingly hellish dystopia before the machines do the smart thing and humanity gets what we deserve.
I've tried all kinds of approaches. The only ones that ever worked were based purely on the person communicated to, not how I communicated. (ie, the person cared)

I've had nice conversations about it, the person listened, but was only able to be reasonable quiet for a short period of time. And then simply reverted. (they didn't care)

I found the best solution was simply to face this head on and deaden my reactions to it. This reduced my reactions to a living tolerable level.
You can still see the original bias on the official US sites if you squint hard and look under the sharpie corrections.
Ah yes, the "computer graphics, which has generated billions upon billions of revenue and change are just a fad" argument.

What next, "This Internet thing was just a fad" or "The industrial age was a fad"?
A decompilation and port of Sonic Advance 2-a GameBoy Advance game written in C
I highly recommend using Alfred. I’ve been using it since before Spotlight came out, tried and then disabled Spotlight, and went back to Alfred. It’s extremely configurable but highly usable out of the box. Sort of like creating your own CLI shortcuts to open files, apps, copy things to the clipboard, etc.

https://www.alfredapp.com/
Maybe a dumb question, but how can you brigade against on Hacker News if there is no downvote of submissions?
Being anti woke/DEI does not mean you oppose civil rights. Plenty of African Americans and other minorities dislike woke/DEI. They don’t want to be thought of as a diversity hire but still enjoy their rights to vote and use the same bathrooms as their white peers.
Have you ever seen a glacier before? In real life?
The "Oh, I'm special because I drive a Tesla" defense. No, people who drive Teslas aren't special or protected. They just drive a particular brand of EV.
The research posted demonstrates the opposite of that within the scope of sequence lengths they studied. The model has future tokens strongly represented well in advance.
Good resource, boys. Thanks for sharing.