> If you have enough density to support a bus lane, you have enough density to support a subway.
Not at all. Building a subway in most US cities right now is very expensive. Raising the tax revenue alone is probably a non-starter.
Moreover you're going to have to close the road down anyway to do any form of cut-and-cover or even deep bore construction, which means every business on the corridor and every person who lives on it is going to get angry for as long as the subway is being built.
There's no painless way to do infill public transport. The problem is that nobody in the US is willing to compromise.
> Building a subway in most US cities right now is very expensive.
This is true but seems like a problem worth solving. It's also true of more than subways; we have the same problem with bridges, housing and many other things. Better to get on with fixing it than use it as an excuse for doing something worse.
> Moreover you're going to have to close the road down anyway
That's a one-time cost, and you're not required to close a 500 mile stretch of road for years on end. Dig one block, install the tunnel, cover it, dig the next block.
I agree with you (and importantly you can't make a subway political football the way you can make a bus lane), but my experience doing transit advocacy points otherwise. Americans in dense areas are feeling the HCOL pinch and are not very willing to float extra taxes to fund transit expansion.
IMO it comes back to the fact that Americans are just not willing to accept change of any kind right now. The economy feels too shaky, the electorate too divided (even within states and municipalities), and there's too little faith in government to architect the kind of change you'd need to build subways, underground metros, or even BRT. We need a larger feeling of unity even at a state level to make the changes necessary, which is why municipalities continue to do bare minimum maintenance of roadways and pretty much nothing else. The last big set of constriction in dense urban areas was funded by the Obama stimulus from the GFC which was passed 17 years ago.
It's a chicken and egg problem. The way to make buses competitive is to build bus only lanes. But to do that you end up removing a lane for drivers and dedicating enforcement resources to keeping bus lanes free of private vehicle traffic.
The usual pattern is when a bus only lane is proposed, drivers complain because they view the bus as a social program. Local legislators often take the drivers' side because they also view the bus as a social program. Even if you get the political capital to push a bus only lane, traffic enforcement will routinely ignore bus lane violations. LA is making waves on the latter problem by attaching cameras to buses which automatically write tickets for cars blocking the bus lane.
Ultimately it's a politics problem. If nobody wants to spend political capital on running a bus system as a transport program, it ends up as a social program.
According to the OpenASR Leaderboard [1], looks like Parakeet V2/V3 and Canary-Qwen (a Qwen finetune) handily beat Moonshine. All 3 models are open, but Parakeet is the smallest of the 3. I use Parakeet V3 with Handy and it works great locally for me.
That was my experience when I tried Moonshine against Parakeet v3 via Handy. Moonshine was noticeably slower on my 2018-era Intel i7 PC, and didn't seem as accurate either. I'm glad it exists, and I like the smaller size on disk (and presumably RAM too). But for my purposes with Handy I think I need the extra speed and accuracy Parakeet v3 is giving me.
It is about the parameter numbers if what you care about is edge devices with limited RAM. Beyond a certain size your model just doesn't fit, it doesn't matter how good it is - you still can't run it.
So I'm kinda new to this whole parakeet and moonshine stuff, and I'm able to run parakeet on a low end CPU without issues, so I'm curious as to how much that extra savings on parameters is actually gonna translate.
Oh and I type this in handy with just my voice and parakeet version three, which is absolutely crazy.
> I tried this out but the brew command errors out saying it only works on macOS versions older than Sequoia.
Newer than Sequoia, you mean?
The brew recipe [1] says macOS >= 15.
Anyway, I'm on Sequoia — it's mostly better than Ventura, which was what my M2 MacBook Pro came with. I'm holding off upgrading to Tahoe (macOS 26), hoping they fix liquid glAss.
By the way, I've been using a Whisper model, specifically WhisperX, to do all my work, and for whatever reason I just simply was not familiar with the Handy app. I've now downloaded and used it, and what a great suggestion. Thank you for putting it here, along with the direct link to the leaderboard.
I can tell that this is now definitely going to be my go-to model and app on all my clients.
I'm building a local-first transcription iOS app and have been on Whisper Medium, switching to Parakeet V3 based on this.
One note for anyone using Handy with codex-cli on macOS: the default "Option + Space" shortcut inserts spaces mid-speech. "Left Ctrl + Fn" works cleanly instead. I'm curious to know which shortcuts you're using.
To this comment and all the other comments talking about handy below this comment. I tried handy right now and it's super amazing. I'm speaking this from Handy. This is so cool, man.
And handy even takes care of all the punctuation, which is really nice.
Thanks a lot for suggesting it to me. I actually wanted something like this, and I was using something like Google Docs, and it required me to use Chrome to get the speech to text version, and I actually ended up using Orion for that because Orion can actually work as a Chrome for some reason while still having both Firefox and Chrome extension support. So and I had it installed, but yeah.
This is really amazing and actually a sort of lifesaver actually, so thanks a lot, man.
Now I can actually just speak and this can convert this to text without having to go through any non-local model or Google Docs or whatever anything else.
Why is this so good man? It's so good
man, I actually now am thinking that I had like fully maxed out my typing speed to like hundred-120. But like this can actually write it faster. you know it's pretty amazing actually.
Have a nice day, or as I abbreviate it, HAND, smiley face. :D
This is actually pretty impressive. What kinda phone are you using? Are you noticing any drain on battery heat?Do you think it's possible to get this working with Flutter on iOS?
2-3 years old Android flagship phone with 8 GB RAM. When I looked for an app for parakeet, I think I also came across iOS apps. Don't recall it since I use Android.
Seems light on the phone/battery. Don't observe any drain but I also only record shorter transcripts at once.
Side note: Parakeet is actually pretty nice to do meetings with oneself. Did that on a computer while driving for an hour (split in several transcript chunks). Processed the raw meeting notes afterwards with an LLM. Effective use of the time in the car...
Unfortunately, Parakeet doesn't support streaming like Moonshot does (as much as I know). Would be perfect to have sth of the size of Parakeet but supporting streaming. Still hope Nvidia releases a V4 with that feature :)
Otherwise, I think STT is basically a solved problem running locally on edge devices.
I'm looking to switch from feeding the default android "recorder" app's .WAV into Gemini 3 Pro (via the app) with (usually just) a `Transcribe this please:` prompt; content is usually German voice instructions/explanation for how to do/approach some sysadmin stuff; there does tend to be some amount of interjecting (primarily for clarifications(-posing/-requesting)) by me to resolve ambiguity as early as possible/practical.
If e.g. parakeet can be run on my phone in real time showing the transcript live:
- with latency low enough to be "comfortable enough" for the instructor to keep an eye on and approve the transcribed instructions
[not necessarily every word of the transcript, i.e., a commanded "edit" doesn't need to be applied in the outcome as long as it's nature is otherwise clear enough to not add meaningful amounts of ambiguity to the final "written" instructions]
by glancing at the screen while dictating the explanation (and blurting out any transcription complaints as soon as that's possible without breaking one's own string-of-thought or spoken grammar too much)
, I'd very happily switch to that approach instead of what I was doing.
Bonus if there's a no-bulky-or-expensive-hardware way to accommodate us both speaking over each other so I won't have to _interrupt_ his speaking just to put a clarifying comment (on what he just said) in the transcript for him to see and sign off, where the at least "only" briefly interrupts his thoughts right while he actually reads my transcribed words (he doesn't have to hear them, and it's better if he won't; I can probably get him to put on earmuffs to not hear me louder than he hears his thoughts, and a sufficiently-smoothed SNR meter for specifically his voice should take care him regulating his volume while the earmuffs mute it and I occasionally talk over him)...
Isn't plugging Wolfram algorithms into LLMs basically their current solution for the DX problem?
As far as society funding research, while I'm quite sympathetic to this view, Wolfram also puts in a significant amount of private dollars into the operationalization of their systems. My guess is there's a whole range of algorithms that aren't prominent enough to publish a paper on nor economically lucrative enough to build a company on that Wolfram products sell.
That said I do think LLM coding agents offer a great way forward to implement more papers on a FOSS manner.
I saw the original tweet before it got lampooned everywhere, looked at the author's bio, and it felt obviously like engagement bait to me. Why would someone actually post about how "humbled" they are that their LLM assistant deleted their emails, and this person is a VP at Meta? I may be wrong but it feels obviously written to go viral. All it would have taken is for the author to not post and nothing would have happened. I was originally tempted to make fun of the author myself but decided not to feed what I thought was obvious engagement bait.
Moral outrage about how everything is in decline is absolutely the viral currency of social media and HN is no exception. I find it amazing how few people doubt the sincerity of the original post. Probably hundreds of thousands of aggregate words spent on how everything is going downhill, but not one on the intentions of the original post.
FWIW I also just don't think there's a point to discussing AI/ML usage here. The community is too crabby and cynical, looking too hard at how to tear people and things down, trying to react with the most negative thing they can. Every discussion on AI here eventually devolves into "AI can turn water to gold!" "no you idiot, AI uses so much water we won't have enough water left oh and AI is what ICE and Palantir use"
As the (dubiously attributed) Picasso quote goes: "When art critics get together they talk about Form and Structure and Meaning. When artists get together they talk about where you can buy cheap turpentine." Most of HN is the former, constantly theorizing, philosophizing, often (but not always) in a negative and cynical way. This isn't conducive to discussion of methods of art. Sadly I just speak with friends working on other AI things instead.
Someone like simonw can probably get better reactions from this community but I don't bother.
I think it's doable with a heavy dose of LLM moderation. If you do something like this, I'd be happy to help get things started. The quality of discussion here is just... bleh these days. I don't need AI positivity, just something that sounds more intellectual than people shouting "nuh uh" "uh huh" at each other.
Just use a stablecoin, don't float a "utility token" those things are stupid. Have a smart contract receive a USDC deposit. If the maintainer "times out" reviewing your PR, the contract returns all the deposit. If the maintainer does not accept your PR, the contract burns 0.5x of the deposit and returns the rest. Maintainers can decide to turn off the time-out for very popular projects where you probably would have devs trying to spam PRs for fame/recognition, but hopefully the deposit price can accurately reflect the amount of spam the project gets.
Utility tokens are fundamentally equities and you need to firewall equity from an organization the same way companies in most market economies are regulated.
Not sure which circles you run in but in mine HN has long lost its cache of "brilliant minds in IT". I've mostly stopped commenting here but am a bit of a message board addict so I haven't completely left.
My network largely thinks of HN as "a great link aggregator with a terrible comments section". Now obviously this is just my bubble but we include some fairy storied careers at both Big Tech and hip startups.
From my view the community here is just mean reverting to any other tech internet comments section.
> From my view the community here is just mean reverting to any other tech internet comments section.
As someone deeply familiar with tech internet comments sections, I would have to disagree with you here. Dang et al have done a pretty stellar job of preventing HN from devolving like most other forums do.
Sure you have your complainers and zealots, but I still find surprising insights here there I don't find anywhere else.
Mean reverting is a time based process I fear. I think dang, tomhow, et al are fantastic mods but they can ultimately only stem the inevitable. HN may be a few years behind the other open tech forums but it's a time shifted version of the same process with the same destination, just IMO.
I've stopped engaging much here because I need a higher ROI from my time. Endless squabbling, flamewars, and jokes just isn't enough signal for me. FWIW I've loved reading your comments over the years and think you've done a great job of living up to what I've loved in this community.
I don't think this is an HN problem at all. The dynamics of attention on open forums are what they are.
I've largely stopped commenting here because I feel the community is broken. There's definitely truth to what you say, that an educated audience can have a consensus. But one thing makes the HN community (and many Reddit communities) particularly bad: A lot of these threads have repetitive comments with insults or silly name calling get upvoted. Even if consensus is around the earth being round, there's no need to pettily insult flat earthers. We just ignore them and move on leaving their content to languish at the bottom. On the other hand these threads bring a lot of childish insults that get upvoted just because they hit the right buttons.
This to me is one (of many) sign that the community here cannot healthily discuss these topics. IMO the community here isn't healthy at all. That's why I don't post here much anymore. It's a sign to me that too many discussions in this community are about seeking emotional catharsis. And I'm sorry but for my own mental health, I'm not going to listen to someone else's panic attack resulting from political uncertainty.
I feel for dang and tomhow. It seems that most of their work is doing emotional labor. And emotional labor can grind a person down quickly.
Some topics can't be ignored. Vaccine effectiveness, for example, require a consensus from a large fraction of the population. That larger societal consensus begins with discussion in smaller subsets, of which HN is one.
Not at all. Building a subway in most US cities right now is very expensive. Raising the tax revenue alone is probably a non-starter.
Moreover you're going to have to close the road down anyway to do any form of cut-and-cover or even deep bore construction, which means every business on the corridor and every person who lives on it is going to get angry for as long as the subway is being built.
There's no painless way to do infill public transport. The problem is that nobody in the US is willing to compromise.
reply