<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: unjuno</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=unjuno</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 02:22:19 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=unjuno" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by unjuno in "Ask HN: Does AI research need "world models" more than bigger LLMs?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>By “world model,” I mean a model continuously updated from experimental or sensor data, not just an LLM trained on text.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 23:59:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162894</link><dc:creator>unjuno</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162894</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162894</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[Ask HN: Does AI research need "world models" more than bigger LLMs?]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It seems that generating hypotheses is no longer the main problem.
The harder problem may be continuously collecting real-world data, building accurate world models, and using them to guide experiments.
Is this where automated research is heading?</p>
<hr>
<p>Comments URL: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162887">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162887</a></p>
<p>Points: 3</p>
<p># Comments: 2</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 23:59:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162887</link><dc:creator>unjuno</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162887</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162887</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by unjuno in "Commodification of Intelligence: Good, Bad, and Ugly Circular AI Deals"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The problem with circular transactions is that they can make companies look healthier than they really are, distort investment decisions, and cause widespread damage when the cycle breaks.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 22:28:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49103924</link><dc:creator>unjuno</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49103924</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49103924</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by unjuno in "crustc: entirety of `rustc`, translated to C"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The most interesting part of this to me is not “Rust to C” by itself, but the fact that it widens the pool of people who can help debug portability problems.<p>There are relatively few people who understand Rust’s compiler internals, LLVM backends, and obscure target support deeply. But there are many engineers who understand C compilers, ABIs, linkers, makefiles, cross-compilation, old operating systems, and weird platform-specific compiler behavior.<p>If Rust can be lowered into target-specific C, then some problems stop being exclusively “Rust compiler problems” and also become C toolchain problems. That means more people can inspect the generated C, build failures, linker errors, ABI mismatches, and compiler-specific behavior.<p>C is obviously not a magic portability layer. ABI details, integer widths, alignment, TLS, aliasing, and undefined behavior still matter. But as an ecosystem boundary, C gives many more engineers a way to participate in debugging and porting work.<p>I think that social/maintenance aspect may be more important than the language translation itself.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 04:17:56 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48770655</link><dc:creator>unjuno</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48770655</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48770655</guid></item></channel></rss>