Feed aggregator

I don't know why but I have the feeling that a huge amount of money (NVIDIA worth trillions, billions dumped into LLM-based companies) is supported by a single idea that might eventually be replaced by a completely different paradigm or by a new approach to LLMs that could make all of this worth nothing in a matter of months.

To be clear, I’m not saying this isn’t a super impactful idea and I actually think it's a revolution. Since Attention Is All You Need came out in 2017, everything has changed fast but it’s just that I also feel that another breakthrough from research could appear in a similar way.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202671

Points: 2

# Comments: 1

Article URL: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/jun/05/breakthrough-in-search-for-hiv-cure-leaves-researchers-overwhelmed

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202664

Points: 7

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44271-025-00250-5

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202659

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v47/n10/laleh-khalili/collective-property-private-control

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202652

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

Article URL: https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2025/06/06/odd-couple-gas-giants-and-red-dwarfs/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202638

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/06/pro_russia_wiper_ukraine/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202635

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Utah cannot stifle young people’s First Amendment rights to use social media to speak about politics, create art, discuss religion, or to hear from other users discussing those topics, EFF argued in a brief filed this week.

EFF filed the brief in NetChoice v. Brown, a constitutional challenge to the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act. The law prohibits young people from speaking to anyone on social media outside of the users with whom they are connected or those users’ connections. It also requires social media services to make young people’s accounts invisible to anyone outside of that same subgroup of users. The law requires parents to consent before minors can change those default restrictions.

To implement these restrictions, the law requires a social media service to verify every user’s age so that it knows whether to apply those speech-restricting settings.

The law therefore burdens the First Amendment rights of both young people and adults, the friend-of-the-court brief argued. The ACLU, Freedom to Read Foundation, LGBT Technology Institute, TechFreedom, and Woodhull Freedom Foundation joined EFF on the brief.

Utah, like many states across the country, has sought to significantly restrict young people’s ability to use social media. But “Minors enjoy the same First Amendment right as adults to access and engage in protected speech on social media,” the brief argues. As the brief details, minors use social media for to express political opinions, create art, practice religion, and find community.

Utah cannot impose such a severe restriction on minors’ ability to speak and to hear from others on social media without violating the First Amendment. “Utah has effectively blocked minors from being able to speak to their communities and the larger world, frustrating the full exercise of their First Amendment rights,” the brief argues.

Moreover, the law “also violates the First Amendment rights of all social media users—minors and adults alike—because it requires every user to prove their age, and compromise their anonymity and privacy, before using social media.”

Requiring internet users to provide their ID or other proof of their age could block people from accessing lawful speech if they don’t have the right form of ID, the brief argues. And requiring users to identify themselves infringes on people’s right to be anonymous online. That may deter people from joining certain social media services or speaking on certain topics, as people often rely on anonymity to avoid retaliation for their speech.

Finally, requiring users to provide sensitive personal information increases their risk of future privacy and security invasions, the brief argues.

As people get their hands on new Switch 2 consoles, a few are running into issues before they start playing.

While Windows Hello is easy to set up on the user level, Windows Hello for Business needs a bit more back-end legwork to meet the infrastructure and licensing requirements.

Russia’s war with Ukraine has created a whole host of problems for the growth of the country’s datacentre market

Article URL: https://blog.jacobscript.dev/private-llm-google-cloud

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202222

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWBzeF1aFgA

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202189

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://bibleatlas.app/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202188

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://github.com/microsoft/injectorppforrust

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202185

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://argentineasado.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Argentine-Asado_-DIY-Argentine-Parrilla-1-1.pdf

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202182

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://news.mit.edu/2025/animation-technique-simulates-squishy-objects-motion-0606

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202167

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

OpenAI has protested a court order that forces it to retain its users’ conversations. The creator of the ChatGPT AI model objected to the order, which is part of a copyright infringement case against it by The New York Times and other publishers.

The news organizations argued that ChatGPT was presenting their content in its responses to the point where users were reading this material instead of accessing their paid content directly.

The publishers said that deleted ChatGPT conversations might show users obtaining this proprietary published content via the service.

The issue was up for debate in a January, where Judge Ona T. Wang suggested that users who heard about the legal case might delete those conversations to cover their tracks. She denied the publishers’ request for a preservation order at the time, but also asked why OpenAI couldn’t segregate and make anonymous data from users who had requested deletion. OpenAI failed to address this, Wang said, leading to her order, granted May 13.

OpenAI served with court order

Wang’s order last month said:

“OpenAI is NOW DIRECTED to preserve and segregate all output log data that would otherwise be deleted on a going forward basis until further order of the Court (in essence, the output log data that OpenAI has been destroying), whether such data might be deleted at a user’s request or because of ‘numerous privacy laws and regulations’ that might require OpenAI to do so.”

ChatGPT already retains user conversations by default, using them to train its AI model for future conversations. However, it provides an option to turn off that setting, causing all conversations with a user to be forgotten. The service also has an ad hoc temporary chat feature, which deletes a chat as soon as it’s concluded.

In a letter objecting to the order, ChatGPT said that was being forced to compromise users’ privacy.

“OpenAI is forced to jettison its commitment to allow users to control when and how their ChatGPT conversation data is used, and whether it is retained,” it said. “Every day the Preservation Order remains in place is another day OpenAI’s users are forced to forgo the privacy protections OpenAI has painstakingly put in place.”

Read OpenAI’s full response here:

OpenAI objection letterDownload

The publishers have no evidence that the deleted conversations contain more of their content, OpenAI added. It warned that users frequently share sensitive details in conversations that they expect to be deleted, including everything from financial information to intimate discussions about wedding vows.

Engineering the retention of data would take months, the AI giant added.

The background to the case

Three publishers (The New York Times, the New York Daily News and the Center for Investigative Reporting) had been suing OpenAI separately for copyright infringement. In January this year, the publishers joined their cases into a single lawsuit.

OpenAI argued that it could use the content under fair use rules because its AI model transformed the content, breaking it into tokens that it then blends with other information to serve its users.

ChatGPT has a memory

Even when it does delete chats, ChatGPT retains a separate memory of details shared in conversations that it can use to understand you better. These might include details you enter about your friends and family, or about how you like your conversations formatted. The service allows users to turn off references to these memories, or to delete them altogether.

Caution is key when giving information to any online service, especially AI services, where conversations are often fluid and free-flowing. It’s also a good idea to think twice before sharing anything you’d rather others didn’t see.

Article URL: https://serpapi.com/blog/building-an-ai-travel-agent-with-serpapi-and-n8n/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44202160

Points: 1

# Comments: 0