frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

Audacity 4.0

https://github.com/audacity/audacity/releases/tag/Audacity-4.0.0
128•ClydeN•1h ago•19 comments

Pre-Release of Polars 2.0

https://pola.rs/posts/announcing-polars-2/
228•komape•5h ago•67 comments

The Browser's Main Thread Is Expensive

https://kciter.so/posts/the-expensive-main-thread/en/
166•kciter•1d ago•49 comments

Invisible Companies

https://colossus.com/article/invisible-companies/
16•ltononro•1d ago•2 comments

Muse Spark 1.3

https://developer.meta.com/ai/models/muse-spark/
615•bvaldivielso•16h ago•402 comments

Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/gemini-models/3-8-flash-and-3-8-flash-c...
1060•bratao•21h ago•598 comments

9 Mothers (YC P26) Is Hiring in Austin, TX

https://9mothers.com/careers
1•ukd1•26m ago

What I Learned from My Mom (1941-2026)

https://experimentalliving.substack.com/p/what-i-learned-from-my-mom-1941-2026
56•NaOH•4d ago•4 comments

Fish Bad, Sugar Good and Other Medieval Ideas About Food

https://lithub.com/fish-bad-sugar-good-and-other-medieval-ideas-about-food/
29•mooreds•2d ago•14 comments

Three schoolgirls in Kinsale pulled up a pea plant covered in warts (2016)

https://scienceblog.com/b-three-schoolgirls-in-kinsale-pulled-up-a-pea-plant-covered-in-warts-and...
90•DamonHD•5h ago•35 comments

Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/02/technology/google-ad-tech-remedies.html
416•donohoe•21h ago•293 comments

Three sites made 215,128 “best software” pages for AI. Perplexity cites them

https://trellner.com/reports/manufactured-sources-behind-ai-recommendations/
448•jakobgreenfeld•22h ago•216 comments

4.5B Posts Scraped from TikTok

https://tiktok-api.seeksocial.io/
37•TheOnlyWayUp•1h ago•23 comments

The Computer Museum of America reclamation project

https://computer-museum.org/wp/
59•rbanffy•2d ago•27 comments

Holden's Lightning Flight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden%27s_Lightning_flight
175•ColinWright•3d ago•39 comments

Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

https://help.mistral.ai/en/articles/455207-can-i-opt-out-of-my-input-or-output-data-being-used-fo...
465•teekert•23h ago•214 comments

Fable 5.1 World Modeling

https://github.com/PhiloLabs/fable51-worlds
282•surreal_•16h ago•81 comments

A dark horse enters China's AI race: StartLux

https://chinaonchina.com/article/chen-dawei-returns-enters-the-large-model-sector
14•try-working•1h ago•2 comments

Reverse Engineering Unknown File Formats with ImHex

https://werwolv.net/posts/file_format_reverse_engineering/
219•carlos-menezes•3d ago•41 comments

Higher Multipoles of the Cow

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.00506
92•MrOrelliOReilly•2d ago•24 comments

Launch HN: RonanRX (YC S26) – Personalized Peptides and GLP-1s

71•lloydarmbrust•13h ago•74 comments

Biggest dark matter detector spots a single weird particle

https://www.science.org/content/article/world-s-biggest-dark-matter-detector-spots-single-weird-p...
311•randycupertino•22h ago•111 comments

Aging brains blend memories together instead of just forgetting them

https://studyfinds.com/aging-brains-blend-memories-together-instead-of-forgetting-them-study-finds/
301•mdp2021•23h ago•121 comments

Google Antigravity TOS: 3rd party usage can get Google account suspended

https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/2095453567955968398
13•tosh•1h ago•2 comments

Wendell Berry has died

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/31/us/wendell-berry-dead.html
203•Curiositry•2d ago•99 comments

Mark Cuban: Why US hospitals "don't know their costs"

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/mark-cuban-why-us-hospitals-dont-know-their-costs/
13•elo2000•1h ago•26 comments

Qantas Airbus A380 engine failure in 2010 (2023)

https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/a-matter-of-millimeters-the-story-of-qantas-flight-32-bdaa62d...
157•gumby•17h ago•92 comments

Engineering of the fastest WebAssembly interpreters

https://wasmi-labs.github.io/blog/posts/wasmi-v2.0/
114•herobird•2d ago•10 comments

Exit the Cave

https://turtlespace.blog/p/exit-the-cave
283•akkartik•22h ago•95 comments

A Selection of Los Alamos Rolodex Business Cards

https://clui.org/collections/los-alamos-business-cards/selection-cards
188•1970-01-01•2d ago•50 comments
Open in hackernews

The Fastest Way yet to Color Graphs

https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-fastest-way-yet-to-color-graphs-20250512/
62•GavCo•1y ago

Comments

tonyarkles•1y ago
In case you haven't looked at the article, this is looking specifically at the Edge Coloring problem and not the more commonly known Vertex Coloring problem. Vertex Coloring is NP-complete unfortunately.
erikvanoosten•1y ago
You can convert edge coloring problems into vertex coloring problems and vice versa through a simple O(n) procedure.
meindnoch•1y ago
Wrong. You can convert edge-coloring problems into vertex-coloring problems of the so-called line graph: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_graph

But the opposite is not true, because not every graph is a line graph of some other graph.

erikvanoosten•1y ago
Indeed. Thanks, I stand corrected.
tonyarkles•1y ago
Hrm... right. It's been a while. And it looks like both Vertex Coloring and Edge Coloring are both NP-complete (because of the O(n) procedure you're talking about and the ability to reduce both problems down to 3-SAT). I've started looking closer at the actual paper to try to figure out what's going on here. Thanks for the reminder, I miss getting to regularly work on this stuff.

Edit: thanks sibling reply for pointing out that it's not a bidirectional transform.

mauricioc•1y ago
For the edge-coloring problem, the optimal number of colors needed to properly color the edges of G is always either Delta(G) (the maximum degree of G) or Delta(G) + 1, but deciding which one is the true optimum is an NP-complete problem.

Nevertheless, you can always properly edge-color a graph with Delta(G) + 1 colors. Finding such a coloring could in principle be slow, though: the original proof that Delta(G) + 1 colors is always doable amounted to a O(e(G) * v(G)) algorithm, where e(G) and v(G) denote the number of edges and vertices of G, respectively. This is polynomial, but nowhere near linear. What the paper in question shows is how, given any graph G, to find an edge coloring using Delta(G) + 1 colors in O(e(G) * log(Delta(G))) time, which is linear time if the maximum degree is a constant.

Syzygies•1y ago
Yes. The article ran through this point as follows:

"In 1964, a mathematician named Vadim Vizing proved a shocking result: No matter how large a graph is, it’s easy to figure out how many colors you’ll need to color it. Simply look for the maximum number of lines (or edges) connected to a single point (or vertex), and add 1."

I keep wondering why I ever read Quanta Magazine. It takes a pretty generous reading of "need" to make this a correct statement.

JohnKemeny•1y ago
phkahler•1y ago
Is this going to lead to faster compile times? Faster register allocation...
john-h-k•1y ago
Very few compilers actually use vertex coloring for register allocation
isaacimagine•1y ago
Totally. The hard part isn't coloring (you can use simple heuristics to get a decent register assignment), rather, it's figuring out which registers to spill (don't spill registers in hot loops! and a million other things!).
NooneAtAll3•1y ago
and this post isn't even about vertex coloring
DannyBee•1y ago
No.

In SSA, the graphs are chordal, so were already easily colorable (relatively).

Outside of SSA, this is not true, but the coloring is still not the hard part, it's the easy part.

Not really. Coloring a graph is almost always talking about proper coloring, meaning that things that objects that are related receive different colors.

If you read the introduction, you'll also read that the goal is to "color each of your lines and require that for every point, no two lines connected to it have the same color."

Ps. "How many colors a graph needs" is a very well established term in computer science and graph theory.

mockerell•1y ago
I think the comment referred to the phrase „a graph needs X (colors or whatever)“. For me, this can be read two ways: 1. „a graph always needs at least X colors“ or 2. „a graph always needs at most X colors“.

Personally, I would interpret this as option 1 (and so did the comment above I assume). In that case, the statement is wrong. But I’d prefer to specify „at most/ at least“ anyways.

Or even better, use actual vocabulary. „For every graph there exists a coloring with X colors.“ or „any graph can be coloured using X colors“.

PS: I also agree with the sentiment about quanta magazine. It’s hard to get some actual information from their articles if you know the topic.

JohnKemeny•1y ago
What about this statement:

No matter how large a car is, it is easy to figure out how much money you'll need to buy it. Simply look at the price tag.

(From: No matter how large a graph is, it’s easy to figure out how many colors you’ll need to color it. Simply look for the maximum ...)

mauricioc•1y ago
Parent's point is that sometimes (but not always) the store is perfectly fine selling you a car for $1 less than what the "price tag" of Delta(G)+1 dollars asks for, so "need" is a bit inaccurate.