skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If you show the model values for y, but they are 2 in 99% of all cases, it’s likely going to yield 2 when asked about the value of y

That's not overfitting. That's either just correct or underfitting (if we say it's never returning anything but 2)!

Overfitting is where the model matches the training data too closely and has inferred a complex relationship using too many variables where there is really just noise.
Thats just half the story.

What the US has traditionally done is make these countries then take Dollar loans from the IMF and World Bank to buy American defense and high tech products. When they naturally then default (right now there are more than 50 countries that cant pay back these dollar loans cause where the fuck are they going to get dollars from) their only option is to sell off their natural resources to Wall St/build a US mil base/hand over port etc.

This game has been going on so long (google super imperialism) the US with 5% of the worlds population has accumulated more than 50% of the worlds market cap value.

So the US starts overdosing on leisure/luxury and pace of innovation starts slowing cause they dont even need to be innovative. Try to build a ship in the US and its not possible anymore cause the experience is all gone. There is no great magic solution. When you talk about British history look at the 60s and 70s. There was major turmoil economically and socially post the Ww2 rebuild cause the entire system dependent on colonies had to restructure itself.
> inspiration was Sydney Opera House

wha...??

> ... reminiscent of a luxury ocean-liner

ah ok, so it is crap after all

Architects are like politicians, don't take their word of mouth.
As a European this whole debate i sickening.

Trade deficit is a blunt and ineffective way to model international trade on this level, but it is easy to point at and say "look at this large bad number!" which is exactly what is going on. People are primed to interact with that through social media, etc.

The American trend currently is that any trade deficit is bad. It simply isnt. It is idiotic to state so.

The whole point of unequal import and export is that every single country should not strive for importing as much as it exports across all sectors. It is extremely inefficient for every country to specialize in everything equally. What then is the point of international trade? I produce steel, you produce tractors, your neighbor produces wheat. We have mutual dependence across our specializations in the market.

What is missing from the debate is that import/export equilibrium should be achieved on a global level, not on a national level. This is taking something that is a healthy driver for international trade and framing it as if trade partners are forcing others to sell out cheaply.

They aren't. They have found their niche. Find yours or step back.
That’s not true.

Apple has internal transfer pricing which is dictated by accounting regulations and tax law.

Companies try and set transfer prices to minimize local taxes, but need to follow regulations.

A phone made in China is “purchased” by say Apple Canada for some fraction the price it sells for - regulation usually require the Value to reflect the cost of inputs.

So Apple Canada might purchase a phone from Apple China for $600 CAD then turn around and sell it for $1200 CAD in Canada.

It’s the $600 that counts as a Chinese export to Canada.
Not only China but let us assume iPhones are made in China only.

China gets a modest share of the profits, because Apple pockets the rest. Reinvesting a fraction in US and stashing most of the profits in banks across the world that use this money as leverage to buy US bonds, among other things.
The physical phone is a "good" that is exported from china. But the majority of the value for an iPhone is in the "services" rendered to that phone, which may be sold/exported from the US but can likely be shifted to other countries in order to avoided taxation/tariffs.
We ARE hired to write code, but it's our job to know how to write less of it.

Sometimes I go into the weeds and create a monstrocity bowl of spaghetti around a feature. Then I pull back, simplify it, and get amazed at how I missed that.

The trick is to STOP and think. Not everything is a "needful".
>no good GUI editors really emerged.

In those good old times both Oxygen and XML Spy were good enough, so I even purchased a license of Oxygen for myself and never felt the money were wasted.

>And some developers didn't understand the format and shoved stuff into attributes that should've been elements and vice versa.

This happened at such scale where we can say that it was UX problem of XML itself.
Well, in the end actually nothing else than the trade differences were considered, anyhow: https://xcancel.com/JamesSurowiecki/status/19075591892341969...
Another popular book "An introduction to microcomputers"
by Osborne, Adam, 1980 also has great detail on this topic..... Its on the internet archive https://archive.org/details/introductiontomi00adam/mode/2up
There is liberally licensed content like creative commons.
But what if I want a faster horse?
When you see the damages 13 first-gen Caesars and a couple of month of training did to Russian artillery, you wonder what 90 of updated ones can do with people who operated them for 5 years. The Russian can't fight the EU in the air, and even if S400 and S800 were as good as advertised and managed an air interdiction area, Excalibur missiles are a thing.
(Funny story, I seem to have a bout of visual migraine at the moment and misread your comment until just now and had to remove what I wrote).

I didn't mean to give the impression that I'm putting down Zig. It's more that I've noticed that people tend to frame problems differently with Zig than with Odin.

To explain what I mean by framing, consider OO vs procedural and the way OO will frame the problem as objects with behaviour that interact, and procedural will frame the problem as functions being invoked mutating data.

The difference isn't at all that stark between Odin and Zig, but it's present nonetheless. And clearly Zig is doing something which a lot of people like enjoy. It's just that the person using Zig seems to enjoy different aspects of programming (and it seems to me be in the spirit of "the challenge of finding an optimal solution") than the person using Odin.
A lot of people don't have internal monologues. But chain of thought is about expanding capacity by externalising what you're understood so far so you can work on ideas that exceeds what you're capable of getting in one go.

That people seem to think it reflects internal state is a problem, because we have no reason to think that even with internal monologue that the internal monologue accurately reflects our internal thought processes fuly.

There are some famous experiments with patients whose brainstem have been severed. Because the brain halves control different parts of the body, you can use this to "trick" on half of the brain into thinking that "the brain" has made a decision about something, such as choosing an object - while the researchers change the object. The "tricked" half of the brain will happily explain why "it" chose the object in question, expanding on thought processes that never happened.

In other words, our own verbalisation of our thought processes is woefully unreliable. It represents an idea of our thought processes that may or may not have any relation to the real ones at all, but that we have no basis for assuming is correct.
Novelty in one medium arises from novelty in others, shifts to the external environment.

We got brass bands with brass instruments, synth music from synths.

We know therefore, necessarily, that they can be nothing novel from an LLM -- it has no live access to novel developments in the broader environment. If synths were invented after its training, it could never produce synth music (and so on).

The claim here is trivially falsifiable, and so obviously so that credulous fans of this technology bake it in to their misunderstanding of novelty itself: have an LLM produce content on developments which had yet to take place at the time of its training. It obviously cannot do this.

Yet an artist which paints with a new kind of black pigment can, trivially so.
yeah classical, British, understatement, clear lines, formal restriction—a piece of Art!
It's Rails!
Are Pre-Emptive Technologies the Key to Reliable AI-Generated Code?
thanks for your concern

i'm looking for people to support me building this for other "open-source IDEs" as i alone would not be able to do that, because it's totally free and open source and i want it to stay like that.

open source is built upon communities supporting each other and that is what i'm aiming for. hope you understand :)
It's a good language, you should try it out as well.
I love CC but culturally it's a nonfactor.
Surely one can find ways to fight the irrational, inconsequential leftists (which there are many) without bullying institutions by cutting their funding, or kidnapping people in broad daylight in the street?

Civilized western countries do it all the time.
The relative numbers says nothing about the impact on US trade.
The study also explains that one feels less lonely when listening to their favourite music, which is kinda new to me. I mean, feeling better makes sense and is quite obvious, as you sarcastically say, but I wouldn't think that listening to music makes one feel less alone.
Well, that wasn't in your comment. :P

If you hadn't told me that I would also not have bothered optimizing syscalls.

Did you tell the AI the profiler results and ask for ways to make it faster?
It launched right here on HN 14 years ago.

https://x.com/shl/status/1908090697984426227/photo/1
However compute power will get significantly more expensive due to tariffs on components. So your argument is somewhat contradictory.
Which are paid by the country's citizens
Show HN: I'm Building a Micro SaaS – My First Time Sharing a Product Publicly
After years of building (and failing) quiet side projects, I’ve finally decided to try something different: talk about what I’m building before it’s finished.

I just launched a landing page for a micro SaaS product I’m developing. The app is still in progress, but I want to build with user feedback in mind — not just ship something in silence and hope for the best (been there, done that, failed at it).

This is my first time trying to collect early feedback without running ads or doing any kind of paid promotion. In the past, my approach was always: build → run ads → tweak ads → hope for results. That method burned time, money, and energy — with little learning in return.

Now I’m focused on:
• Validating the idea by getting people genuinely interested early on
• Improving the landing page to make sure the message is clear
• Gathering initial users for product feedback once the app launches

Here’s the landing page: https://www.tasksiftai.com/

If you’ve got a minute:
• I’d really appreciate feedback on the product idea itself
• Suggestions on how to improve the landing page (especially around clarity and conversion)
• And if the idea resonates with you, I’d love it if you signed up to get early access when it’s ready

Thanks for reading. Open to all thoughts — positive or brutally honest.
Exactly. It should start with education. You guys don’t have nearly enough qualified people to take back these industries.

That’s why the logical thing to do is invest heavily in education.

Oh, wait.
Time Travel Fictions Part 2 – Writer's Fight
Yep - this is also the official recommended method by Hatchet, also sometimes called payload thinning.
Happens with R as well where everything gets dumped into a global namespace. It's a huge mess.

If you're lucky all functions will have a common prefix str_* or fct_*. If you're unlucky then you have to figure out which package has clobbered a standard library function, or the exact ordering of your package import statements you need for your code to run.
What are you able to build with your blocks?

Castles and palaces, temples and docks.

Rain may keep raining, and others go roam,

But I can be happy and building at home.

Let the sofa be mountains, the carpet be sea,

There I'll establish a city for me:

A kirk and a mill and a palace beside,

And a harbor as well where my vessels may ride...
The irony of all this is that unlike humans - which we have no evidence to suggest can directly introspect lower level reasoning processes - LLMs could be given direct access to introspect their own internal state, via tooling. So if we want to, we can make them able to understand and reason about their own thought processes at a level no human can.

But current LLM's chain of thought is not it.
If a graphics design company was using human artists to do the same thing that OpenAI is, they'd be sued out of existence.

But because a computer, and not a human does it, they get to launder their responsibility.
I looked for a blog post announcing this, and couldn't find it. But Antiwork's Github profile mentions:

> Antiwork emerged from Gumroad's mission to automate repetitive tasks. In 2025, we're taking a bold step by open-sourcing our entire suite of tools that helped run and scale Gumroad. We believe in making powerful automation accessible to everyone.

That's pretty wild! I've always loved Gumroad's simplicity for creators and buyers. Now I guess people will have a pretty compelling option when searching "Gumroad open source alternative"
Worked for china
Making compilers are not that hard. Sure, it grows in complexity as you make it more feature-complete. But writing compilers is actually a lot of fun. If you're interested in compilers you should definitely try making a simple one. This book is free and a great starting point: https://craftinginterpreters.com/. I'm not associates with the book author in any way, I just found incredible value in it.
Carefully tuned adjustments designed to improve font rendering on Linux
Ah, I'd guess the Latam Spanish has more traits in common with the American English. Similar to Iberian Spanish novels being compared to the British English ones since Cervantes/Hamlet.

On these conjugations, compound verbs are not hard at all.
I'd have expected better from Warren Buffett. It's not a zero-sum game, the developed countries running chronic trade surpluses like Germany and Sweden (my home country) are fooling themselves, because the only way they can do that is by putting a brake on domestic consumption by keeping wages low.

Everybody in the EU would be better off if those countries actually let their consumers spend the money that they're hoarding. All of that spending wouldn't go on foreign goods, so it would even benefit their own producers as well. Yet German politicians indoctrinated in stupid frugality (that once had a point, but is completely outdated) continue to scold countries that run trade deficits in order to buy German goods instead of suffocating their economy and making it even worse for everybody, especially Germany.
Your last paragraph is evidence how nobody in the smartphone sector, including Huawei, has innovated in the last 6 years.
> The simple reality is that the USA consumes more than it produces.

Indeed, and the US can afford this because it has concentrated a lot of the world's wealth within its borders. So it is not really clear what they want to fix.
> free of corruption.

There are just plenty examples of corruption among the people we elect, everywhere.
China to impose tariffs of 34% on all US goods from April 10
> Sure, India was a colony and not a mere trading partner, so no need to argue about that. But the US is also an empire that has bases around the world and has many countries in an economic chokehold.

That seems to resolve the question you put. Britain and India weren't independent, so talking about a trade balance between the two doesn't really mean anything. If it favoured India, that was good for the British Empire. If it favoured Britain, that was also good for the British Empire. It didn't matter who was favoured or by how much because the British capitalists and Imperial officers were in control of both sides of the trade.

I personally think the US trade deficit is a huge problem ... for the US's trading partners who just gave it real stuff for paper. But your argument for why Britain-India experience was relevant doesn't hold together.
In the hope of improving this forecast, here is what I find implausible:

- 1 lab constantly racing ahead and increasing the margin to other; the last 2 years are filled with ever-closer model capabilities and constantly new leaders (openai, anthropic, google, some would include xai).

- Most of the compute budget on R&D. As model capabilities increase and cost goes down, demand will increase and if the leading lab doesn't provide, another lab will capture that and have more total dollars to back channel into R&D.
>After some back and forth they restored it for a day and let me buy one item for personal use.

I used Spreadshirt to print a panel from the Tintin comic on a T-shirt, and I had no problem ordering it (it shows Captain Haddock moving through the jungle, swatting away the mosquitoes harassing him, giving himself a big slap on the face, and saying, 'Take that, you filthy beasts!').
> Britain had a massive trade deficit with India.

Google tells this isn’t true.

The UK actually had a massive trade surplus because it received cheap resources from India, then sold back high value items.

All of this was controlled by strict trade rules.
I am from EU and the only physical idem proudly wearing "Made in USA" label I saw over the years is the Urimat pad in public toilets.

P.S. Upon inspecting my memory, I think the other one was an HP cesium clock, but that was many years ago.
Get rid of the caste system and the Hindi nationalism first and we'll talk.

When Buddhism did what Hinduism did but better, giving options to anyone and not just for an upper class, it's time to either reform, or die. The same happened on Judaism with Christianism, when it has rehashed to be a universal religion and not a tribalistic one.
> In western tradition governments exist to protect rights, such as the freedom of expression, not to grant them.

You may be overgeneralizing here, only the US has enshrined freedom of expression in their constitution. Pretty much in any other western government such protections do not exist and freedom of expression has been under attack for a long time
My personal experience (mostly TF2) is that a lot of players just don't pay attention to chat and votes.
Probably the majority of people in the world already "accept pirated movies". It's just that, as ever, nobody asks people what they actually want. Much easier to tell them what to want, anyway.

To a viewer, a human-made work and an AI-generated one both amount to a series of stimuli that someone else made and you have no control over; and when people pay to see a movie, generally they don't do it with the intent to finance the movie company to make more movies -- they do it because they're offered the option to spend a couple hours watching something enjoyable. Who cares where it comes from -- if it reached us, it must be good, right?

The "special status" you speak of is due to AI's constrained ability to recombine familiar elements in novel ways. 64k MP3 artifacts aren't interesting to listen to; while a high-novelty experience such as learning a new culture or a new discipline isn't accessible (and also comes with expectations that passive consumption doesn't have.)

Either way, I wish the world gave people more interesting things to do with their brains than make a money, watch a movies, or some mix of the two with more steps. (But there isn't much of that left -- hence the concept of a "personal life" as reduced to breaking one's own and others' cognitive functioning then spending lifetimes routing around the damage. Positively fascinating /s)
Why should the AI be made to emulate a person naive to extant human society, tropes and customs? That would only make it harder for most people to use.

Maybe it would have some point if you are targetting users in a substantially different social context. In the case, you would design the model to be familiar with their tropes instead. So when they describe a character iconic in their culture, by a few distinguishing characteristics, it would produce that character for them. That's no different at all.
Most cybersecurity is just a smoke show anyways, presentation matters more than content. AI is just good at security theather as humans are.
> My main gripe with this is how do you charge users? They can just put the browser in offline mode and continue to use the app forever.

Let users pay a price to download the application, do some magic key activation (that could work offline too) like countless of professional software? Ableton, Spine2D and Cascadeur are some recent software I've purchased that works just like that.

> Syncing means that you probably have to have a complicated logic, especially if the data you are seeing can be modified by others.

Yeah, I think if you have an existing application/architecture/design and you try to shoehorn in local-first with sync in there, there will be some additional work. But if you design your data structures with that in mind, it gets a lot easier. So as always, way easier for greenfield projects than migrating existing ones.

> How do you solve merge conflicts?

Depends on your application. In many cases, CRDTs (just one example) can automatically resolve things based on however you set it up. And for when that doesn't work and you need manual solving, that gets easier too as you can easily see exactly where it doesn't merge, and it gets a lot easier to build the tooling you'd expose to the user to resolve it.
> It's natural that if you don't optimise for GDP then GDP will probably not be maximised.

They're not unrelated though.

Suppose that at a 30% tax rate you long-term end up with a GDP per capita of $50,000, whereas at 20% it would be $80,000. Then in the first case you get $15,000 per capita to provide healthcare and things, whereas in the second case it's $16,000.

There is a point where that stops working. If a 15% tax rate would get you a GDP per capita of $100,000, 15% of $100k isn't more than 20% of $80k. Then whether the extra GDP is worth having lower government revenue becomes a more complicated question. But if the tax rate is too high, it isn't even a trade off, the higher rate is just a net loss to everyone.
it's basicly free development
> The t-shirt metaphor is completely unjust - there is no value there for national security nor strategic autonomy.

Buffet's article and Trump's tariffs reflected antipathy to net trade deficits. Not specific strategic concerns.
And these people in positions of 'responsibility' always need someone or something to point to when shit goes sideways so they might as well.
That sounds like a forerunner to Ricardian comparative advantage which is a major (really the major) reason for thinking international trade makes everyone better off.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage