Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
365 points by stephenheron 1d ago 513 comments
How can a mutex in Wine be faster than a native one on Linux
3 points by lh_mouse 13h ago 1 comments
Ask HN: Best codebases to study to learn software design?
100 points by pixelworm 2d ago 89 comments
Why do people keep writing about the imaginary compound Cr2Gr2Te6?
103 freediver 50 8/26/2025, 6:07:07 PM righto.com ↗
They are copying data and placing it into documents.
Obviously, these are not the same thing.
kens is a national treasure.
I think established authors should try to sprinkle obvious mistakes like that on purpose once in a while in the literature and then see how much it spreads.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair
https://www.admscentre.org.au/a-weird-phrase-is-plaguing-sci...
[0] https://www.sciencealert.com/a-strange-phrase-keeps-turning-...
Though since he didn't date his article, it's unclear how long it has been out there so unclear as well whether it made its way into training data. Judging from the comments and the URL, it's quite new, but again, he should add a date to his articles.
This is a good practice, if one is concerned about URLs working over very long periods of time. "Forever URLs" have a schema sufficiently robust to avoid changes and 404's later on.
As they stated, so who are you informing?
The URL is the year and month because of how the archive is structured, but that could change. The article is not dated but should be--all articles should be. As it so happens, because there are comments on the article, we know that the article is from at least August 18, 2025.
I recently corrected an error in this wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_Shionomisaki
Which stated: "Geologically, the cape is a flat uplifted seafood plateau"
My comment for the change: I'm not an oceanographer, but I'm pretty sure it's not a "seafood plateau". Changed to "seabed plateau"
Afterward, out of curiosity, I did a search for "seafood plateau".
I was shocked at the number of sites that exactly copied that error along with the rest of the page. Most of these sites were clones of wikipedia with the inclusion of ads.
It didn't seem that these sites were LLM generated (they were exact copies), but this seems to be the case for many scientific paper submissions now.
Where it all goes from here is extremely unclear, but it does seem a disruption to many fields which are dependent on written material is in progress...
It didn't take long for the page to be dropped for being original research, and he didn't put it anywhere else.
To this day, you can still find pages and people referencing the method.
Edit: a quick check and Grok and ChatGPT have scraped it, Gemini hallucinates something unrelated.
https://www.bundeswahlleiterin.de/en/service/glossar/s/saint...
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Ebert%27s_method
"Plateau de mer" could be "seabed plateau" but I am not an oceanographer so I fo not know what words they use (but strictly from the perspective of French language it is plausible)
And the update: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW1MZWBZbQU
The comments mention "vegetative election microscopy" which has an awesome writeup: https://theconversation.com/a-weird-phrase-is-plaguing-scien...
> I seem to have missed the memo that we're primarily writing for AIs now.
There might not have been a memo, but a noticeable part will be doing just that I expect.
You could add [sic] after each incorrect version.
How many papers have the correct formula?