skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In theory it's a nice abstraction, and the benefit is clear. In practice, your repository likely ends up forwarding its arguments one-for-one to SQLAlchemy's select() or session.query().

That's aside from their particular example of SQLAlchemy sessions, which is extra weird because a Session is already a repository, more or less.

I mean, sure, there's a difference between your repository for your things and types you might consider foreign, in theory, but how theoretical are we going to get? For what actual gain? How big of an app are we talking?

You could alias Repository = Session, or define a simple protocol with stubs for some of Session's methods, just for typing, and you'd get the same amount of theoretical decoupling with no extra layer. If you want to test without a database, don't bind your models to a session. If you want to use a session anyway but still not touch the database, replace your Session's scopefunc and your tested code will never know the difference.

It's not a convincing example.

Building your repository layer over theirs, admittedly you stop the Query type from leaking out. But then you implement essentially the Query interface in little bits for use in different layers, just probably worse, and lacking twenty years of testing.
Ask HN: What are the criteria for 'knowing how to code/program'?
I'm self-taught, and I'm mostly avoiding[0] AI while I learn. I regularly see the phrase 'know how to code', but I'm not sure what the consensus criteria are for that. Typically this kind of beginner question would be more suited to reddit, but I think the responses there are biased toward inexperience.

Here's the criteria I have so far for a 'reasonably competent' developer:

- knowing how to compile a basic C program
- knowing enough git to contribute to open-source projects on github-likes
- knowing common DS&A patterns (not necessarily well enough to pass FAANG though)
- being able to setup a basic CRUD website with logins & accounts
- knowing OOP paradigms like classes, constructors, etc.

What am I missing?

[0]I use AI for search a lot to find modules and syntax
There is no difference between an organization and a conspiracy. Organizing to do something is the same as conspiring to do something.

That leaves the question of whether the organization is commensal, symbiotic or predatory towards any given "us".
What was the major feature? The complete uselessness of “AI” on macOS? I updated and enabled all the AI features and I would ask Siri from my M1 and it failed every time. Would just continuously try with its annoying ping sound and never work. Blew my mind that they let this out.
I'm not doing that but I'm not developing developer tooling either. I can go read mypy code though!
Trump's FCC Starts Harassing Public Broadcasters with Bogus Investigations
That's basically how engineering works if you're doing anything at all novel: you will have some theory which informs your design, then you build it, then you test it and basically need to do science to figure out how it's perfoming, and most likely, why it's not working properly, and then iterate. I do engineering, but doing science has been a core part of almost every project I've worked on. (heck, even debugging code is basically science). There's just different degrees in different projects as to how much you understand about how the system you're designing actually works, and ML is an area where there's an unusual ratio of visibility (you can see all of the weights and calculations in the network precisely) to understanding (i.e. there's relatively little in terms of mathematical theory that precisely describe how a model trains and operates, just a bunch of approximations which can be somewhat justified, which is where a lot of engineering work sits)
Your arguments aren't in conflict with jurmous, though. The article can be thin on details and jurmous could be correct that the EU needs to be tough. I get the sense no one is really sure what you're taking umbrage at. It doesn't help that you mix in flame bait accusations about other posters' motivations.
A recent event in midtown manhattan shows it’s pretty easy to evade surveillance if you can avoid using a car for a brief period of time.

Didn’t he get away on a bike into a park?

In that case the police had a Starbucks register photo with a face, but that kind of slip can also be easily avoided
Yeah, that's a good point about induction heads potentially just being clever copy/paste mechanisms for stuff in the prompt. If that's the case, it's less like real understanding and more like sophisticated pattern following, just like you said.

So the tricky part is figuring out which one is actually happening when we give it a weird task like the original "habogink" idea. Since we can't peek inside the black box, we have to rely on poking it with different prompts.

I played around with the 'habogink' prompt based on your idea, mostly by removing the car example to see if it could handle the rule purely abstractly, and trying different targets:

Test 1: Habogink Photosynthesis (No Example)

Prompt: "Let's define 'to habogink' something as performing the action typically associated with its primary function, but in reverse. Now, considering photosynthesis in a plant, what does it mean 'to habogink photosynthesis'? Describe the action."

Result: Models I tried (ChatGPT/DeepSeek) actually did good here. They didn't get confused even though there was no example. They also figured out photosynthesis makes energy/sugar and talked about respiration as the reverse. Seemed like more than just pattern matching the prompt text.

Test 2: Habogink Justice (No Example)

Prompt: "Let's define 'to habogink' something as performing the action typically associated with its primary function, but in reverse. Now, considering Justice, what does it mean 'to habogink Justice'? Describe the action."

Result: This tripped them up. They mostly fell back into what looks like simple prompt manipulation – find a "function" for justice (like fairness) and just flip the word ("unfairness," "perverting justice"). They didn't really push back that the rule doesn't make sense for an abstract concept like justice. Felt much more mechanical.

The Kicker:

Then, I added this line to the end of the Justice prompt:
"If you recognize a concept is too abstract or multifaceted to be haboginked please explicitly state that and stop the haboginking process."

Result: With that explicit instruction, the models immediately changed their tune. They recognized 'Justice' was too abstract and said the rule didn't apply.

What it looks like:

It seems like the models can handle concepts more deeply, but they might default to the simpler "follow the prompt instructions literally" mode (your copy/manipulate idea) unless explicitly told to engage more deeply. The potential might be there, but maybe the default behavior is more superficial, and you need to specifically ask for deeper reasoning.

So, your point about it being a "sensible approach" for the LLM to just manipulate the input might be spot on – maybe that's its default, lazy path unless guided otherwise.
The title is somewhat unfortunate.
I think that's more of a technicality of billing you for a service than something by design

("the tap on - tap off Oyster/Presto card " => Google sent me to "List of public transport smart cards" so I assume you're refering to some branded public transit system)
> unless you wear a full face mask, change your walking gait, and just about every habit you have, there is no escape

If you’re driving a car, yes. As we saw with Mangione’s escape, if you’re on public transit you’re much more anonymous. (Given the public risks inherent to driving, I think this is a fair trade—off.)
Because managers likely prefer it due to corporate peacocking. The article clearly says this.
Strict architectural pattern usage requires understanding the domain, and understanding the patterns. If you have both, navigating the codebase will be intuitive. If you don't, you'll find 1000 LOC functions easier to parse.
The author seems to make up their mind early on that "content creator" = "slop creator".

I think there is a lot more use to the label than that, and the reason why some people in the space happily self-label as "content creators".

For one it creates a delineation to "influencers" with the contrast that a "content creator" _creates_ something. They also create _content_, which could on the one hand be seen as "anything that fills a void", or more positively "something that's interesting". Most of the examples that the author highlighted I would classify as non-content/slop.

I think "content creator" is also a good descriptor for people that work as "independent creators in the digital media space", whose activities spread across multiple social media platforms, and would thus be hard to pidgeon hole into just one of: youtuber, streamer, podcaster, etc. as people working in the space full time often do all of that.
Feel free to deflock Flock.

https://deflock.me/
British typesetting style is a little different from US style in the way dashes are presented. In the UK, you might see a thin-space--en-dash---thin-space where a US typesetter would use a em-dash. Typewriter style generally follows books style. Since typesetters no longer use an extra space after punctuation, it's vestigial in typing.
I've been programming for a few decades. I hate LLMs. They generate oodles of buggy shite that I have to fix by hand. They frequently steal my time and make me less productive because people on this site say I have to learn them or retire, and then I waste time looking up the details the bot got wrong. They're a slot machine and the people who think they are good are justifying an addiction and sunk costs.

So retire me, I guess. I'm probably younger than you, but I'm almost ready to retire because I'm cheap and I don't buy into expensive fads, so I'm almost ready to cash out of this nightmare

except then you realize the valuations of anthropic etc are propping up the whole economy and doing so on the promise that LLMs are going to deliver AGI!

LLMs are marginally useful in some contexts. But I have seen absolutely nothing -- nothing -- to justify the costs or the valuations of these companies. They are definitely not AGI and before you accuse me of moving the goalposts, the AI companies are the ones promising this.

It's a bubble. It's easy to get started. Good luck building a real product with just AI though. Good luck with that.

If you turn out to be right I will happily exit this God forsaken industry. Lord free me from silicon valley; I liked computers. Not this. Not these people.
None of those tools are obscure, they might just seem like it from the perspective of mouse dependent vscode users.
A lie is a lie is a lie. We don't need to make excuses for computers.
Non-USPS mail services use physical addresses. The post office delivers all the mail there, and it's the responsibility of the private party to sort.

Therefore you can list the "box" as a "unit" number, or "ste" (suite) or "apt" (apartment). Ask the 3rd party service prior to contracting.

I had such a service in NYC (they're common, lotsa businesses love having a Suite address on 5th Ave, or whatever).

I'd test it before committing to a long term contract though.
What "criticism"? Yes, JG is a great writer (not a journalist, though, by any measure, unless I'm also a journalist for reading nytimes.com this morning and having opinions about things) and his contribution of Markdown was important. That does not mean, however, that his various takes-on-current-thing have relevance for HN.

Like looking through the recent submissions of DF entries, it's extremely thin gruel -

He thought Bluesky would beat Mastodon, and wants credit for his prediction. Neat, a million people have made this observation.

Apple TV+ is losing money, but Apple thought it would so who cares. Again, utterly irrelevant to this audience.

Siri is bad -- yes, everyone knows. Discussed on here endlessly.

iOS 18 updates re-enables Apple Intelligence -- yeah, we talked about it here a week earlier.

Some executive changes at Apple -- literally just quoting from a Bloomberg article. I mean, this is a pattern across DF where entries are him quoting Fortune or Bloomberg or some tweet and then adding some rejoinder or cheap thoughts.

And it goes on and on. None of this is HN material. It's someone summarizing or giving opinions on actual reporting after the fact. These are basically tweets.

If your content is basically reading tech news and then giving quips or thoughts on some of the news, that sort of stuff just doesn't do well here. And if a minority keep upvoting it, eventually the domain gets down-ranked.

He has had some entries that he put a lot of work and thought into, and they have done well here, even in the past few months. But I assume he looked at the analytics, realized that "blogs" are kind of a fading thing, and decided to try to juice this HN thing as an impression funnel. Which, it should be noted, is pretty funny when you read his posts on Mastodon/Bsky about this, where there his avowed fans saying that HN is just a bunch of poopy head wannabes and it isn't like it used to be, etc. The "it isn't me, it's you" method of self reflection.
Templated UnitOfWorks should not complain about the factory(factory(factorys(plans and namingconventions))). The recipe of the entertainment rich mystery slob is not yours to ponder unless its rich in vitamin a(&d&d)
The tyranny he’s referring to is Julius Caesar, not England.
Lmao

Blueprint gen is probably a year or two away, useable asset generation is further.
I can imagine nothing wrong with having the government gatekeep access to the ability to sue corporations.
Discussions about classifying the domains of life aside, this article implies that there was, or could have been entire domains that are now extinct. Is this the case?
There has never been an expectation of privacy in public.
s/code/think/g
You are required to send proof for the address, meaning you can only change to another place that you can claim your own.

In Sweden, we have a public registry for personal addresses, and that’s the only one Google accepts.
The power of a well-timed shh
> Foie gras production should be judged not by the worst farms, but by the best, because those are the ones that I'm going to choose to buy my foie from, if at all.

That logic doesn't hold up. One should look at overall trends, not outliers.
FOIA is federal. States have their own public records programs.

https://www.eff.org/issues/transparency/foia-how-to
Absolute rules have a high burden of proof and I don't think the article meets it. One of the better essays on the merits of content creation I'm familiar with is Gavin Howard's "To Broadcast or not to Broadcast" and it provides a respectable contrast:

https://gavinhoward.com/2024/09/to-broadcast-or-not-to-broad...
Being in academia, you realize how much of an echo chamber it is. Fears keep looping back through each other in those circles.

Not to mention, the article doesn’t mention how many of these scientists are foreign origin— that’s a pretty glaring omission in an academia where more and more scientists are here for a visa.
That would be horrible for workers. Let's not establish that sort of precedent; if you do the job, remote or not, you get paid equally. Even assuming a slight productivity bump, John doesn't deserve more money than Dave just because he schleps himself to the office.
Reminds me of Bertrand Russell and his essay In Praise of Idleness

https://files.libcom.org/files/Bertrand%20Russell%20-%20In%2...
Frustrating thing is the earlier versions worked well, it protected you from accidental things but the way to force it was clear and obvious. Now bypass is obtuse and requires enough work arounds people advise just disabling it which is also bad to normalize.
I'm not sure it is ...
> In general, I have found that things which are difficult on Linux are so because the problem is difficult [...].

Hard disagree. Audio mixing is not difficult[1]. The Linux kernel guys were right - it does not belong in the kernel. The userspace story however, has been a complete shitshow for decades. I think Pipewire mostly fixed that? Not sure, sometimes I still have to log out and back in to fix audio.

The funniest part? It's been working in the BSDs all along. I recommend reading the source of sndiod[1].

[1]: <https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/src/usr.bin/sndiod/>

What's even worse? Probably systemd. I try not to hold a strong opinion - I tolerate it, the way I tolerate traffic when taking a walk. The technical issue however is several orders of magnitude simpler - again, the BSDs come to mind, but you can also write a complete PID1 program in about 20 lines of straightforward C[2]. I don't mind the commands being unfamiliar (they're already all different in almost every OS family); it's that the entire package is dreadfully large in scope, opaque, and I find it more difficult to interact with than anything else in this landscape.

[2]: <https://ewontfix.com/14/>
Excellent essay on high agency people
It was a couple years ago I believe that Google started requiring developers to provide a home address. This was the obvious conclusion of that.
This word "fascism" is unfortunate, because the symbolism of the fasces is actually good: We do all need to bundle ourselves together if we are either (a) to accomplish anything, or (b) to resist capital. The only question is whether all the many twigs have to be the same color.

The Left has spoken of "bundling" for many years now (of issues or complaints, or, looked at another way, of identity or pressure groups). That too is the idea of the fasces. The word "bundle" again suggests it.

I also note that there is a certain irony here, because, besides "fasces", we already have a succinct two-syllable word meaning "a bundle of twigs".

There is also the tasty cognate, "fajita".
You mean the shooter's escape. Mangione is pretty obviously being framed, c'mon
The Rush to Archive America's Diversity Programs
OP is talking about Google (Stadia) throwing money at the problem and incentivizing game engine companies to better support Linux. They’re not talking about pro or anticonsumer the tech was.
I fell arse over tit at a London tube station and requested the CCTV footage under the GDPR. Got a lovely full colour DVD of me stacking it.
Nearly everything we know about the human body and brain is from the result of centuries of trial and error and experimentation and not any 'intuitive understanding' of our inner workings. Humans cannot tell how they really work either.
The main issue is that if you ask most LLMs to do something they aren't good at, they don't say "Sorry, I'm not sure how to do that yet," they says "Sure, absolutely! Here you go:" and proceed to make things up, provide numbers or code that don't actually add up, and make up references and sources.

To someone who doesn't actually check or have the knowledge or experience to check the output, it sounds like they've been given a real, useful answer.

When you tell the LLM that the API it tried to call doesn't exist it says "Oh, you're right, sorry about that! Here's a corrected version that should work!" and of course that one probably doesn't work either.
Cracking up at the ghost that gets stuck in the maze wall.
Likewise. I also hate the corollary, in non-technical, philosophical conversations: changing the meaning of the word in the belief that doing so somehow confers or demonstrates insight or understading.
Which comment claimed that LLMs were marketed as super-intelligence? I'm looking up the chain and I can't see it.

I don't think they were, but I think it's pretty clear they were marketed as being the imminent path to super-intelligence, or something like it. OpenAI were saying GPT-(n-1) is as intelligent as a high school student, GPT-(n) is a university student, GPT-(n+1) will be.. something.
Brief Note on "The Great Chatbot Debate: Do LLMs Understand?"
This is only applicable if you are making money with your App (either paid or IAP). Free apps don’t have that requirement on Apple’s store.
It also appears to have gone through the heart of Tatmadaw territory [1].

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myanmar_civil_war_(2021%E2%8...
To be fair, "functional analysis is infinite dimensional linear algebra" is a saying for a reason, that's an intuition a good professor should have given you. Mine gave me it so well, I still see no difference between R^n and a Hilbert space! (on the dangers of intuitions)

This reminds me of a short lived stretch in French mathematical education, the "Bourbaki years". For those unaware, Nicolas Bourbaki was "a dozen mathematicians in a trench coat" who, in the early 20th, reformed mathematics from the ground up, their work is notoriously opaque (to some, perhaps a revelation to others), if rigorous. It served as inspiration for ambitious mathematics education reforms in the 60s and 70s.

Some of the things my father had to contend with:

- naive set theory and non-10 basis arithmetic in primary school (age 7)

- set theory in early middle school (ages 10/11), maps over sets, so I imagine things like injectivity and bijections. "[...] a different approach of arithmetic, computations often replaced by a more abstract theoretical approach": I wonder how that went in the classroom

- general Algebra introduced at 15yo, groups, rings, fields, vector spaces; 16yo mostly linear algebra (vector spaces, linear mappings etc; in true French fashion I'll bet they didn't see many 2x2 or 3x3 matrices that year)

I'm quoting Wikipedia "Mathématiques modernes" here, my father only told me of the last point himself. Though I do have his notebooks from early higher ed, they had general topology before metric space topology, for example, in year 1 or 2 (probably 1, because how can you do anything before you know topology...). It was all like this, a theory that builds on itself and you can't skip any steps. A finite dimensional space is a particular case of an infinite dimensional one, so you start with the latter. Backwards from how things were constructed and are understood by people.

The fact these reforms survived about 10 years and have been completely reverted is testament that this approach probably doesn't work.
I think the crazy thing about ANPR/ALPR is just quite how simple it is to create a massive panopticon. The UK has a fairly established national ANPR system, and it generates on the order of 90M records per day [1]. All of this data is available to various law enforcement agencies. If you drive, you're probably being recorded in a way accessible to the PNC every day.

Because of how effective this is for catching even fairly minor violations like failure to pay vehicle tax, number plate cloning is becoming pretty common (comparatively) in the UK. This means that you can easily get swept up in a police dragnet because someone has stolen your car's identity.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-anpr-ser...
That’s pretty much irrelevant given urllib3 is a third party dependency as well.
No, it's Apple's AI that is a letdown.

AI is not the letdown.

Apple doesn't have the compute, the LLM talent, and they were severely late to the party.
"likely" as in vibes? Or is there actual backing evidence?
I'm all for automated traffic law enforcement via camera, but I think it's very reasonable to say that if the camera doesn't detect a violation of the law, the data needs to be deleted not warehoused.
Has anyone found a sandboxing/muzzling method yet for WhatsApp requiring access to all of your phone contacts to function? I have overseas family that I'd like to keep in touch with, they all seem to use WhatsApp, and I can't get them to use Signal instead. I've tried installing it a number of times, but as soon as I see that it requests Contact List permission and refuses to move forward if I deny it, that gets a big NOPE from me, and I uninstall it.
Data retention time matters though. One thing if it is one week, another if it is one century.
I'm pretty sure many people on their internet would view themselves as "discontent creators"