all2

I have not. As above, I just find the article humorous.

I just thought it was funny. But ok.

This is one of my favorite articles. I refer back to it whenever the subject of PHP comes up.

Generally, I find that skirting these requirements is a matter of framing and word choice.

For example: 'source recovery' instead of 'reverse engineering' is one I've used successfully. You may also lean into a libertarian 'right to repair' framing. You own the hardware, you should be able to access the device to appropriately repair its security vulnerabilities.

We're not breaking into a bank here, this is a camera you own.

You could even go so far as to cite local laws to support your case.

---

In short, jailbreaking is more about framing the conversation than it is about triggering psychopathy in the model. :D

Those are all conspiracy theories. ;)

Other names that occur to me: Orchard, Forest, Stand (of trees).

This is probably correct. But also par for the course. I bet there are coffee shops that give skill bonuses or something like that, but I'm betting most don't.

Most folks who do stuff like this just assume it's part of the job and carry on.

Mine was always accompanied by the sensation of being watched. I could 'see' where the watching was happening, but not the actual thing watching me.

Also always accompanied by fear.

For those who don't know (like me): https://instances.vantage.sh/aws/ec2/m6i.16xlarge?currency=U...

This is a VM with 64 vCPUs running at 3.5GHz, with 256GB RAM.

It presently costs about ~3USD per hour to run.

They have an API endpoint you can use.

https://github.com/HackerNews/API

This definitely would have been me.

I burned 100s of hours into my 400 level classes, some of those hours were completely wasted on things that I could never figure out how to get them to work.

If its helpful, that would be great!

The matching algo is very raw at this point, so if you find posts that _should_ have matched but didn't, please reach out (email is in my profile) and I'll see what I can do.

> But the optimal for those isn't to post a generic who wants to be hired but have a LLM rewrite your resume to match the job description isn't it?

If anyone was depending on this to actually make interview decisions, yes, that would be something a candidate might do. Fortunately there's not that pressure on this project. :D

This is something I'm considering. I was thinking we could probably hum it in with plain old vector embeddings, maybe?

I suppose I could look backwards instead of forwards.

Tbf, at this hour, it hadn't even occurred to me.

I left an incomplete section in the post body, then went shopping.

So here it is:

---

Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:

- individuals looking for jobs have extremely general postings

- companies looking to hire have extremely specific postings

- generally, match scores are very low (<50%) because of this mismatch

- individuals don't typically mention domain knowledge in any specific way

- individuals don't typically mention prior work history beyond time-in-industry (this makes sense on a public forum)

- individuals typically list technologies used

I don't have any conclusions to make right now, no advice for job posters or job seekers. It'll take two or three more of these before I've seen enough to start gelling the domain problems in my head.

I'm confused. How do you figure this is a thing that needs to be done?

I guess this boils down to the Copyright of posts on HN, and what is considered to be fair use.

No, I'm not paying anyone. The compute is on my own dime and I'm not making any money off of this.

"quality" here is such an abstract thing.

There's a few metrics: seniority, salary range, enumerated skills (as requirements or as a person's skill set), and domain specific knowledge.

These are far from perfect, and I think in the future I will probably tweak how matches are scored, because how job postings are written and how 'Who Wants to Be Hired?" posts are at odds.

The former is one-to-many, where the job posting enumerates very specific requirements in order to filter that 'many' down to as few eligible candidates as possible.

The latter is one-to-many, where the 'I'm for hire' posting seeks to match as many of the 'many's as possible. This means down playing domain experience or specific technologies in order to appeal to as many possible viewers as possible.

Trying to pair 'precise and specific' with 'as general as humanly possible' is ... hard. Here we use 'tags' extracted from postings to match the domains and skills together. It isn't perfect. From what I've seen in this first run there aren't any matches that make it over 50% -- where 50% is a heuristic for the metrics mentioned above. This just means there's room for improvement.

The other side is the old game of 'tailor your resume to the job', which isn't in the spirit of 'Who Wants to Be Hired?' posts. You could very easily game this by just dumping a bunch of keywords into your post.

> I'm sure you mean well but as someone who has considered posting on who wants to be hired in the past.... this is creepy AF and feels like a giant invasion of privacy. If you did it privately, or authenticated people in some way, sure, but as is it feels like you're putting people on blast.

It's public information on a public forum. I'm not sure what the big deal is. There are lots of tools that do essentially what I've done here for various purposes.

> Also this sounds way more like an advertisement for "abacus.ai" than a side project announcement.

I have an account with them. I figured it was fair to say "I used this tool for vibe coding the idea". I suppose I could have left that out.

> Your post also starts a list of "things" ("Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:") with no list.

Yup. I got distracted before I finished writing the post. I'll enumerate those things in another comment here in a minute. Life prevails.

> Actually, nothing about this really feels good faith, or real.

I'm not sure what you mean. I made a thing, I shared it. I dunno what else you want from me.

This depends largely on your expectation for what a 'game' should be.

Puzzle boxes, for example, have zero on ramp, and yet many many people enjoy them, enjoy the struggle of discovery.

Arguably the edges of mathematics and science are inhabited by similar people, living where the rules are ill defined, where there is much to be discovered rather than pre-digested and spoon fed.

I have little patience for games that don't spoon feed, so I get where you're coming from. I watched my brother play DF and decided I didn't want to spend my time like that, trying to parse ascii, trying to figure out how all the things interacted.

I also don't like puzzle boxes that much.

To each their own.

Bode learing, for my EEs that do RF work.

As fellow CEO of HTMX, I approve of this statement and concur. I think our next major moves will be to monetize our assets [0].

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyV_UG60dD4

I'd be curious to pick your brain about the process you went through for this. My mental gap here is not even knowing what to ask for a process like this.

I've been using GPT-5.6 Luna for everything at this point. It is more than enough to do all the work I need to do. You have to lead it by the nose, but if you know where you're going it works really, really well.

The prices are card prices. Specifically, Walmart is typically the cheapest place around here.

It's not true where I live. Costco is on average 5-10c more expensive than the cheaper places near me.

I also made a clone. I haven't touched it in months. I was going to put it on one of my domains and decided not to until I can sort out moderation and all that. I'm not sure I want to be on the hook for moderating a forum full time.

Not one flock was given.

(The joke was just there!)

They say release early and often, so here's my micro BOM manager. The core data model is complete, and I'm scaffolding my way to an API for the server. UI comes next.

My development process is pretty tight, as I'm opinionated on how all the core pieces fit together. GPT-5.6 Luna has been integral to the scaffolding, but I've been in the driver's seat for how all the little pieces fit together.

From the README:

    # ubom-v4

    The fourth draft of my mini BOM manager, which encapsulates my very opionated way of thinking about how parts, bills of materials, and revisions relate to one another.

    Unique ideas here are

    1. sequences
    2. taxonomy trees

    where a sequence is a user generated grammar definition for arbitrary string sequences. It supports 'choice', for selectable literals within a string, 'branch' for a grammar that requires more than one definition, 'range' for values that span ranges such as 0-99 -- as well as padding out those ranges, 'rangeradix' for ranges that require position dependent radices (not radishes :D), and so on.

    A sequence definition can parse a value OR generate a new value, something like `mySeq.Parse("a123")` or `mySeq.Next('a123') -> "a124"`.

    A taxonomy tree applies labels to a sequence, so we can give some degree of meaning to each segment of a sequence.

    This all builds up to `PartNumber`, which possesses a part number literal, and the accompanying taxonomy tree so you can see what categories a given part number occupies.

    From `PartNumber`, we jump to the recursive DAG that is a BOM: `PartNumber + Revision -> BOM -> []LineItem(PartNumber, Revision)`, and the cycle continues.

    # Roadmap

    - strongly typed attributes, can be applied to any node in a taxonomy tree, to a part number, or to a bill of materials -- this allows you to do things like add resistor values to a specific branch of the taxonomy tree. It also enables things like querying parts by attribute, requirements satisfaction (maybe), and so on.
    - A user interface. :D McMaster has the right idea here, though I'll also be barrowing ideas from Inventree.
    - CRUD ops for the user facing stuff (part numbers, sequence grammars, taxonomy trees, etc.)
    - A minimal change control workflow; all quality systems subsist on their change control workflows. To build a quality system from scratch, and have traceability, one needs at least an atomic change control workflow.
    - Part number artifacts and artifact sources; I want to be able to point a part number at a git repo and have the revision bump with new release tags, ingest bills of materials (the git repo is the source of truth in this case), and so on.
    - Multi BOM, where a part number can have a number of BOMs, one for each unit of responsibility: mech, elec, docs, production flows (depends on workflows, I think), and so on.
    - Solidworks integration.
    - Altium integration.
    - KiCAD integration.
    - Others? Is this giving you ideas? Drop an issue and lets discuss!

This sounds amazing. I might give this a go!