MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ratorx | 2026-01-08 21:30:48+00:00
Wha do you mean by “fixing this” or it being a design flaw?

I agree with the point about sequential allocation, but that can also be solved by something like a linter. How do you achieve compatibility with old clients without allowing something similar to reserved field numbers to deal with version skew ambiguity?

I view an enum more as an abstraction to create subtypes, especially named ones. “Enumerability” is not necessarily required and in some cases is detrimental (if you design software in the way proto wants you to). Whether an enum is “open” or “closed” is a similar decision to something like required vs optional fields enforced by the proto itself (“hard” required being something that was later deprecated).

One option would be to have enums be “closed” and call it a day - but then that means you can never add new values to a public enum without breaking all downstream software. Sometimes this may be justified, but other times it’s not something that is strictly required (basically it comes down to whether an API of static enumerability for the enum is required or not).

IMO the Go way is the most flexible and sane default. Putting aside dedicated keywords etc, the “open by default” design means you can add enum values when necessary. You can still do dynamic closed enums with extra code. Static ones are still not possible though without codegen. However if the default was closed enums, you wouldn’t be able to use it when you wanted an open one, and would have it set it up the way it does now anyway.
by sdenton4 | 2026-01-08 21:31:00+00:00
I like the high level idea! (how do we test intelligence in a non functional way?)

I'm effect, the different response types are measuring how the models respond to a context-free novel environment. I imagine humans would also respond on a variety of ways to this test, none of which are necessarily incorrect from the perspective of intelligence testing .

Many tests of human behavior (eg, n behavioral economics) create some pretense context to avoid boarding the response that is actually being measured. For example, we may invite a participant to a study of color preference, but actually measure how fast they complete the task when the scientist has/hasn't bathed in a week (or whatever).

Likewise, for llm intelligence testing, you could create pretext tasks and context, and perhaps measure what the model considered along the way, instead of the actual task outcome.
by MaulingMonkey | 2026-01-08 21:31:05+00:00
> perhaps the downvoters can tell me why they are downvoting?

Not one of the actual downvoters, but:

Lack of proper indenting means your code as posted doesn't even compile. e.g. I presume there was a `char* p;` that had `*` removed as markdown.

Untested AI slop code is gross. You've got two snippets doing more or less the same thing in two different styles...

First one hand-copies strings character by character, has an incoherent explaination about what `pwbuf` actually is (comment says "root::", code actually has "root:k.:\n", but neither empty nor "k." are likely to be the hash that actually matches a password of 100 spaces plus `pwbuf` itself, which is presumably what `crypt(password)` would try to hash.)

Second one is a little less gross, but the hardcoded `known_hash` is again almost certainly incorrect... and if by some miracle it was accurate, the random unicode embedded would cause source file encoding to suddenly become critical to compiling as intended, plus the `\0`s written to `*p` mean su.c would hit the `return;` here before even attempting to check the hash, assuming you're piping the output of these programs to su:

while((*q = getchar()) != '\n')
if(*q++ == '\0')
return;

A preferrable alternative to random nonsensical system specific hardcoded hashes would be to simply call `crypt` yourself, although you might need a brute force loop as e.g. `crypt(password);` in the original would presumably overflow and need to self-referentially include the `pwbuf` and thus the hash. That gets messy...
by shellwizard | 2026-01-08 21:31:32+00:00
Don't forget about Doom (1993) and Doom 2 (1994), 30 years old and still have a large community of users and mappers, even John Romero released episodes 5 and 6 for the original Doom.
On the other hand I used to play some single player maps for Q1 some years ago, the site [quaddicted](https://www.quaddicted.com/) was wonderful
by keybored | 2026-01-08 21:32:28+00:00
All correct. But something needs to be frontloaded.

1. Even if removing <bad government> would be good for that country, that doesn’t give some other state the right to do it. We let these entities get away with murder because they are our friends and they have the biggest guns, that’s it.

2. Always interrogate the real reasons why a state is doing it.

Now only after that we get to the facts like all those times it ended horribly for the people that <state> was supposed to help.
by _wire_ | 2026-01-08 21:32:35+00:00
Scrapy?

"I engineer like I spell!"

//I watch a lot of youtube. I watch people doing extraordinary stuff at home by being - what I call - scrapy engineers. They create very advance stuff, but being like a monkey. Hammering things, trying to figure it out and finally reaching the goal. They make mistakes, they miss a lot of things, but they have one thing in common - being curious.//

Good god...
by vessenes | 2026-01-08 21:32:46+00:00
Re Jeff and Sanjay - they recently were on Dwarkesh together I believe - so it looks like the partnership is still going strong. Regarding Dean over Ghemawat facts, the vibe from the convo is that Sanjay is the (very slightly) junior partner of the two, or at least he lets Jeff do more of the talking. Very, very nice vibes hearing them talk, and their war stories are clearly nuts.
by lmeyerov | 2026-01-08 21:32:47+00:00
Something I would add is planning. A big "aha" for effective use of these tools is realizing they run on dynamic TODO lists. Ex: Plan mode is basically bootstrapping how that TODO list gets seeded and how todos ground themselves when they get reached, and user interactions are how you realign the todo lists. The todolist is subtle but was a big shift in coding tools, and many seem to be surprised when we discuss it -- most seem to focus on whether to use plan mode or not, but todo lists will still be active. I ran a fun experiment last month on how well claude code solves CTFs, and disabling the TodoList tool and planning is 1-2 grade jumps: https://media.ccc.de/v/39c3-breaking-bots-cheating-at-blue-t... .

Fwiw, I found it funny how the article stuffs "smarter context management" into a breeze-y TODO bullet point at the end for going production-grade. I've been noticing a lot of NIH/DIY types believing they can do a good job of this and then, when forced to have results/evals that don't suck in production, losing the rest of the year on that step. (And even worse when they decide to fine-tune too.)
by CuriouslyC | 2026-01-08 21:32:53+00:00
Skills don't make any difference above having markdown files to point an agent to with instructions as needed. Context7 isn't any better than telling your agent to use trafilatura to scrape web docs for your libs, and having a linting/static analysis suite isn't a harness thing.

3.7 was kinda dumb, it was good at vibe UIs but really bad at a lot of things and it would lie and hack rewards a LOT. The difference with Opus 4.5 is that when you go off the Claude happy path, it holds together pretty well. With Sonnet (particularly <=4) if you went off the happy path things got bad in a hurry.
by TheCraiggers | 2026-01-08 21:33:11+00:00
> being a lawyer means more responsibility...

I'm not so sure. People often trivialize the kinetic energy involved with driving. Yes, a bad lawyer can potentially cause an innocent to be punished if enough other checks and balances fail.

But being behind the wheel of a car is something else. Even a small passenger car is over a ton of metal moving at oftentimes high speeds. Most people don't seem to appreciate the sheer destructive capability driving gives someone.
by slwvx | 2026-01-08 21:33:32+00:00
Jensen Huang (Nvidia CEO) says he is "perfectly fine" [WSJ, Fortune] with the Cali wealth tax. I am no billionaire, but if I hade made it big in CA, I hope I'd be thinking about economic inequality and would be more in line with Warren Buffet (who doesn't like paying a lower tax rate than his secretary).

[WSJ] https://www.wsj.com/business/nvidia-jensen-huang-california-...

[Fortune] https://archive.ph/km5IP
by dragonwriter | 2026-01-08 21:33:45+00:00
> This market will resolve to "Yes" if the United States commences a military offensive intended to establish control over any portion of Venezuela between November 3, 2025, and January 31, 2026,

There are two conditions:

(1) A military offensive: obviously satisfied, and

(2) That military offensive being intended to establish control over any portion of Venezuela: The President explicitly stated that the intended outcome was that US would run the country, and that, if it was necessary to use additional military force beyond the original act to secure that because of the lack of cooperation of the remnants of the regime left in Venezuela, that additional force would be applied. So, that part is also satisfied.

Any denial that the conditions were satisfied is pure sophistry.
by freetime2 | 2026-01-08 21:34:20+00:00
That's part of the reason I want to sell it - and hopefully get it into the hands of someone who can give it a second life before it becomes e-waste. I feel a bit guilty every time I think about it sitting and collecting dust.

The specs are still more than enough for any of the development I do. My main issue is just the form factor - a laptop is so much better for my current situation. The power consumption also kind of bugs me - things have improved a LOT in that regard since 2019 - although it's kind of nice for heating my office in winter. It also doesn't help that I built it with a full ATX motherboard and a giant case (Fractal Design Define R6), which is kind of ugly and takes up a ton of space.
by th0ma5 | 2026-01-08 21:34:27+00:00
I don't know if you're right or not, but a lot of people who would otherwise be fans of meatheaded thugs are laughing at these people. I do worry the spectre of some unstoppable idiocy is myth. People at the time weren't used to mass media at all, and there were many other dynamics that may not sum up to a succinct conclusion. Perhaps people saying they were like the new Hun or whatever made people less likely to laugh at them, but, I know these people today are also pretty hilariously inept. Like for instance they all think facial recognition doesn't work with your lower face covered, and they don't realize that they actually don't have good discipline on their mask usage, and the tools they use on their phones to try to id people aren't nearly as good as the tools regular people use to track them.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2026-01-08 21:34:32+00:00
I fundamentally disagree that ICE deserves that presumption. They have repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be unreasonable people who want to hurt others. I'm sure there's a story they'll tell about why it was totally legal to shoot her, but they're murderers and you're supporting murderers until they prove that there was she was doing something so terrible they had no choice.
by Tajnymag | 2026-01-08 21:35:42+00:00
I thought they actually dumbed down the model names. Basically the more adjactives the laptop has, the higher the model is. Now the machines can have pronounciable names and just add generation number every year or so.

Sure, the original numbering system did make sense, but you had to Google what the system meant. Now, it's kind of intuitive, even though the it's just a different permutation of the same words?
by 5upplied_demand | 2026-01-08 21:35:45+00:00
As the article clearly explains, the ABA had the formal status that the Texas Supreme Curt granted them in 1983. What we have now is a change of that policy, giving that power to a political body (an elected Supreme Court) without providing a reason. Doesn't feel like "small government" to me.

> The all-Republican court hasn't given a reason for initiating the change, but it came after months of conflict between President Donald Trump, the ABA and the broader legal community.
by jperaino | 2026-01-08 21:35:45+00:00
Norm is building AI that understands regulations for regulatory compliance. Our AI currently automates compliance determinations for federally regulated financial content, though our vision is to build a platform that can handle any regulation in any industry. As AI begins to permeate our society, Norm aims to become a critical building block for other AI systems that need regulatory intelligence. You can read more about our vision here: https://www.norm.ai/post/building-regulatory-ai-agents

We've raised $137m from top-tier investors to pursue this vision. We're growing very quickly and have major, household-name financial institutions as clients and investors. We're working on hard, interesting problems and want to push the boundaries of what's possible for AI-driven products. We're hiring for many engineering roles in NYC, including:

- Full Stack Engineer, Senior + Staff ($190k-270k)

- Applied AI Engineer ($200k-275k)

- Cloud Infrastructure Engineer ($175k-250k)

- Forward Deployed Engineer ($190k-250k)

We're also hiring for many non-technical roles. The best way to apply is online on our website (we review every application!). Full list here: https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/norm-ai?utm_source=7ow8wN5o3g.
by derefr | 2026-01-08 21:36:08+00:00
You could prompt the LLM to define styling using inline `style` attributes; and then, once you've got a page that looks good, prompt it to go back and factor those out into a stylesheet with semantic styles, trading the style attributes for sets of class attributes.

Or you could tell the LLM that while prototyping, it should define the CSS "just in time" before/after each part of the HTML, by generating inline <script>s that embed CSS stanzas as string literals, and which immediately inject those into the document using CSSStyleSheet.insertRule(). (This can, again, be cleaned up afterward.)

Or, you can keep your CSS and your HTML separate, but also keep an internal documentation file (a "style guide") that describes how and when to use the CSS classes defined in the stylesheet. This is your in-context equivalent to the knowledge the LLM already has burned-in from training on the Tailwind docs site. Then, in your coding agent's instructions, you can tell it that when writing HTML, it should refer to the "style guide", rather than trying to reverse-engineer the usage of the styles from their implementation in CSS.
by CalChris | 2026-01-08 21:36:42+00:00
If the ABA had no formal status then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. In fact, the Department of Education formally recognizes the ABA as the accrediting body since 1923. In fairness, conservatives are trying to get rid of the Department of Education as well.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170427221010/https://www2.ed.g...

I notice the ed.gov page has gone missing. I wonder why.
by palmotea | 2026-01-08 21:36:49+00:00
> Many would have said the same thing about the USSR.

What do you mean, exactly?

China isn't the USSR: they're not wedded to central planning. They've figured out how to use capitalism while keeping it squarely under their control. Arguably, they're playing the "capitalism" game more successfully than "capitalist" countries like the US.

When you compare the US to China, it's the US that looks sclerotic, like the USSR once did.

Once of America's big weaknesses is a common lazy assumption we'll always be at the top, so we don't respond to challenges until its too late. Then we tell ourselves some reassuring story and comfort ourselves by gazing at one of the few remaining industries where we're still ahead. I'm pretty sure if the US and China got into a conflict, the US would get its ass kicked like the Nazis and Japanese did during WWII, and for similar reasons.
by derektank | 2026-01-08 21:37:00+00:00
My favorite story about the Fourier Transform is that Carl Friedrich Gauss stumbled upon the algorithm for the Fast Fourier Algorthim over a century before Cooley and Tukey’s publication in 1965 (which itself revolutionized digital signal processing).[1] He was apparently studying the motion of the asteroids Pallas and Juno and wrote the algorithm down in his notes but it never made it into public knowledge.

[1] https://www.cis.rit.edu/class/simg716/Gauss_History_FFT.pdf
by metalman | 2026-01-08 21:37:01+00:00
yes the roads, which in some municipalities, are paved in a manner acording to who voted for who on some country roads, with perfect asphalt extending the whole way in front of one big farm, exactly between property markers.
But that, and other things are what you get from a constitutional monarchy that has some if the oddest legal provisions on the planet.
I wont say we like it, but we are good at it.
by aldebaran1 | 2026-01-08 21:38:15+00:00
Very interesting paper, thank you. It makes me wonder what other game substrates could form the basis for adversarial/evolutionary strategy optimization for LLMs, and whether these observations replicate across games.

Since LLMs are text based, a text-based game might be interesting. Something like Nomic?

Or a "meme warfare" game where each agent tries to prompt-inject its adversaries into saying a forbidden codeword, and can modify its own system prompt to attempt to prevent that from happening to itself.
by keybored | 2026-01-08 21:39:04+00:00
Counter-intuitive? The primary motivation for fretting about Brain Drain (whether it is true or not is secondary) is because the people who fret about it are educated professionals, precisely the people who are prone to build their identity around the idea that society thrives and succumbs based on their own existence.

The same people who who have unironically latched onto the idea of Meritocracy. A concept/idea that was literally conceived as a parody.
by lossolo | 2026-01-08 21:39:15+00:00
They're also shadow banning/silently disabling your votes, and they will not inform you about this. You think you're voting on stories or comments, but you aren't if they perceive your behavior as "upvote too many flamewar comments, culture-war/ideological battle comments, or otherwise low-quality comments for HN" and "if a user has a track record of upvoting comments that break the guidelines and/or downvoting good comments, or voting in ways that seem unfair – e.g., voting based on political side or personal acrimony, rather than on the objective merits of the comment itself".
by Analemma_ | 2026-01-08 21:39:16+00:00
I'm also not sure if I fully get what the author is going on about, but at least part of it seems to be "don't over-taxonomize and over-architect your note-taking and knowledge management systems, locking yourself into an inflexible format/schema too early just kills it in the long run."

If I'm correct that that's part of the thrust of the article (and I may not be), then I definitely agree with the author. The first time I tried to use Obsidian I burned out because I went all-in on the bi-di linking, tagging, knowledge graph, etc., and it quickly killed my motivation. Now I just dump text in and rely on search to find what I need, only adding links in retrospect once they are needed, and now I actually use it and get value from it.
by FrontierProject | 2026-01-08 21:39:18+00:00
This site has gone full Tower of Babel. I've seen at least a thousand "AI comment" callouts on this site in the last month and at this point I'm pretty sure 99% of them are wrong.

In fact, can someone link me to a disputed comment that the consensus ends up being it's actually AI? I don't think I've seen one.
by afrafgf | 2026-01-08 21:40:28+00:00
Most SEO content fails not because of writing quality, but because the wrong topics are chosen upfront.

This post is about a tool built to solve that specific problem.

The SEO Content Strategist inside Vect AI is designed for people who want to decide what to create before investing time or money into writing. Instead of guessing keywords or copying competitors, the tool focuses on identifying content opportunities that align with real demand and strategic intent.

At a high level, it helps with:

identifying content themes worth pursuing,

structuring topic clusters before writing,

prioritizing pages that compound over time,

avoiding content that looks good but doesn’t move the needle.

The goal isn’t to generate articles automatically, but to reduce wasted effort by making better decisions before content creation begins.

You can go directly into the SEO Content Strategist here:
https://vect.pro/#/signup?continue=%2Fapp%2Ftools%3Ftool%3DS...

For transparency, all public pages are visible here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site:vect.pro

The broader system and reasoning behind Vect AI are documented here:
https://blog.vect.pro/vect-ai-bible-guide

Curious how others here approach SEO strategy:

How do you decide what’s worth writing?

What signals actually matter?

Where do SEO tools help vs distract?

Happy to discuss edge cases or trade-offs.
by mapontosevenths | 2026-01-08 21:40:29+00:00
This is likely the correct answer. The ABA really leads (somewhat indirectly) to three things:

1) A common moral and professional code

2) Credential portability through standards

3) A "minimum threshold" of competence

I suspect that it is the first thing that Texas objects to. There's probably a specific flavor of *-ism they want to allow their lawyers to practice. That said, you can already get into law via apprenticeship or reading in CA, VA, VT, WA. It's not the end of the world.
by cyanydeez | 2026-01-08 21:40:36+00:00
There's no way the human mind converges with current tech because there's a huge gap in wattage.

Human brain is about 12 watts: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/thinking-hard-cal...

Obviously you could argue something about breadth of knowledge but there's no way setting up the current models can be processing the same as the human brain.
by bell-cot | 2026-01-08 21:42:09+00:00
> Their financial incentive is negative. They were hoping to force...

Maybe?

People stuck with Bose bricks might show a preference for non-Bose replacements.

People who though Bose speakers would stay useful longer might prefer Bose, or be willing to pay for a more expensive Bose speaker model.

(Yes, I agree that some PHB's at Bose were almost certainly imagining that their customers would be forced to re-purchase Bose speakers. I'm questioning the validity of their initial assumptions.)