MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by state_less | 2026-01-30 15:25:13+00:00
Obviously data center bidders would prefer their activity to be kept in the dark, but does that make for good outcomes for anyone else except the bidders. First, the community would like to weigh in on whether they want a data center or not, often they don't. Then if they do, they'd rather have a bidding war than some NDA backroom deal with a single entity. All this does is serve Big Tech and Big Capital, and they don't need to run on easy mode, sponging off the small guy at this stage.
by InfinityByTen | 2026-01-30 15:25:19+00:00
Well, claude at least was successful in getting me to pay. It became utterly annoying that I would hit the limit just with a couple of follow ups to my long running discussion and made me wait for a few hours.

So it worked, but I didn't happily pay. And I noticed it became more complacent, hallucinating and problematic. I might consider trying out ChatGPTs newer models again. Coding and technical projects didn't feel like its stronghold. Maybe things have changed.
by epistasis | 2026-01-30 15:25:45+00:00
That is an overly optimistic way to phrase an apparent decrease in crashes, when Tesla is not being upfront about data that at best looks like it's worse than human crash rates.

Unless one was a Tesla insider, or had a huge interest in Tesla over other people on the road, such spin would not be a normal thing to propose saying.

Media outlets, even ones devoted to EVs, should not adopt the very biased framing you propose.
by Shorel | 2026-01-30 15:25:48+00:00
The most stable Linux API is Wine/Win32.

There are many older games I can't install on Linux anymore, because they used an older SDL1 or some particular X11 version or some GPU driver that's no longer available for the current kernel.

The exact same game, Windows version, can be installed and runs flawlessly on both Linux and Windows.

So, native Vulkan executables? Sure, if they can continue to run in 20 years.
by nmstoker | 2026-01-30 15:25:48+00:00
Even with tooling isn't this kind of effort going to be enormously complicated, because, as I understand it, so many aspects of the behaviour of 8-bit and console games relied on all sorts of clever techniques, timing quirks and other side effects.

Won't it be very difficult for the recompilation process or the dev to recognise when these are being relied on and to match the key behaviour?

Or is the idea to pull out the basics of the game structure in a form that runs on modern hardware, then the dev fleshes out the missing parts.
by raincole | 2026-01-30 15:27:20+00:00
Talk is never cheap. Communicating your thoughts to people without the exact same kind of expertise as you is the most important skill.

This quote is from Torvalds, and I'm quite sure that if he weren't able to write eloquent English no one would know Linux today.

Code is important when it's the best medium to express the essence of your thoughts. Just like a composer cannot express the music in his head with English words.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-30 15:28:23+00:00
An aside, personally I quite like TDES for the purpose of generating secure handles and the like. The larger block sizes of pretty much every other common algorithm yield URLs and integers that are more difficult to work with. 64 bits is a manageable enough length and you don't have to implement the algorithm yourself (at which point you'd have rolled your own crypto).
by lo_zamoyski | 2026-01-30 15:28:27+00:00
There's nothing to wonder about. It's obviously marketing.

The whole narrative of "inevitability" is the stock behavior of tech companies who want to push a product onto the public. Why fight the inevitable? All you can do is accept and adapt.

And given how many companies ask vendors whether their product "has AI" without having the slightest inkling of what that even means or whether it even makes sense, as if it were some kind of magical fairy dust - yeah, the stench of hype is thick enough you could cut it with a knife.

Of course, that doesn't mean it lacks all utility.
by epistasis | 2026-01-30 15:28:43+00:00
That's not "feelings" that's reputational data.

Tesla continues to overpromise, about safety, about timelines that slip due to safety.

We should be a bit more hard nosed and data based when dealing with these things rather than dismissing the core question due to "feelings" and due to Tesla not releasing the sort of data tha allows fair analysis b
by tsimionescu | 2026-01-30 15:28:50+00:00
In general, any robot that has servos powerful enough to be any of use is surprisingly dangerous to be around. While it's much easier to apply various limiters, the raw power in those engines will always pose a significant level of risk if anything goes wrong. If you're hovering above a human who sits up suddenly, you might get your nose broken. If it's a robot instead, it will have the strength and mass to easily mutilate you in the same kind of accident.
by instig007 | 2026-01-30 15:28:51+00:00
> This is the "artisanal clothing argument".

> it is easier to 'discipline' the top 5 AI agents in the planet - rather than try to get a million distributed devs ("artisans") to produce high quality results.

Your take essentially is "let's live in a shoe box, packaging pipelines produce them cheaply en masse, who needs slow poke construction engineers and architects anymore"
by watwut | 2026-01-30 15:29:15+00:00
> you vote for Democrats in the mid-term elections (even if it leaves a bad taste in your mouth), then Congress achieves a sufficient majority to not only impeach, but convict Trump, and eject him and his cronies from office.

If those democrats act like forever enablers, none of that will happen. No impeachment will happen if the democratic leadership will be composed of Chuck Schumer "strike a deal, don't confront much and make sure republicans have enough votes for whatever they want" types. It is not just about democrats vs republicans. Plenty of democratic representatives eventually somehow always end up enabling whatever was going on, forgiving everything, voting for conservative heritage fund justices and funding.

Moderates will want to forget, pretend nothing happened, keep the changes and act all submissive.
by grayhatter | 2026-01-30 15:29:31+00:00
> I think that arrest was warranted until thy could independently confirm the phone numbers…

Your premise is correct, you conclusion is stupid. "hey jon, pull out your phone, is this the same number listed on the county webpage for this office?" - "yeah jack sure is" - "hey thanks for your patience guys, and thanks for your help protecting the court house from the baddies"

Even if you couldn't do that, and couldn't hold them on site. Sure, transport them back to hold while you have the person on the phone drive down to the police station with id. There was NO reason to charge and arraign them.
by dfxm12 | 2026-01-30 15:29:46+00:00
It looks like you only use a tiny fraction of Teams' functionality. I agree, it's there's little to complain about when using it for IM/voice/video calls. When you start using it for other things, especially the enterprise features, it is bad. It is a resource hog, handles navigation poorly, has poor default settings, finding installed apps can be tough, etc.
by syrusakbary | 2026-01-30 15:30:06+00:00
Browserpod is great, been following it for a bit. Keep the good work up!

The main issue that I see with Browserpod is very similar to Emscripten: it's designed to work mainly in the browser, and not outside.

In my view, where Wasm really shines, is for enabling containers that work seamlessly in any of this environments: browsers, servers, or even embedded in apps :)
by nkrisc | 2026-01-30 15:30:09+00:00
There must be some physical limit to our cognitive capacity.

We can “store” infinite numbers by using our numeral system as a generator of sorts for whatever the next number must be without actually having to remember infinite numbers, but I do not believe it would be physically possible to literally remember every item in some infinite set.

Sure, maybe we’ve gotten lazy about memorizing things and our true capacity is higher (maybe very much so), but there is still some limit.

Additionally, the practical limit will be very different for different people. Our brains are not all the same.
by SoftTalker | 2026-01-30 15:30:16+00:00
Sounds like a reach. Many people just loved the stuff he was doing and didn't really know much about him as a person. When a more complete picture (specifically his politics) emerged, and people decided they really didn't like the person, they had to resolve their cognitive dissonance by finding reasons they were right then and right now, instead of admitting they projected the person they imagined onto the person they really didn't know. Tech enthusiasts just never imagined that a guy doing so many cool things could turn out to be a right-winger.
by xborns | 2026-01-30 15:30:28+00:00
I live near one of these projects by chance. It seemed like back door deals for land which some happened to be sold by a former Oracle exec then magically the tax district approved unanimously by < 10 council people to put a tiny city of ~11,000 people on the hook for $500 million dollars in tax financing for their infrastructure?

For extra fun today the WI Realtors Association and other groups are suing the city to stop an upcoming vote from an accepted petition that forced approving projects over tax financed projects $10 million dollars get voter approval.

https://biztimes.com/mmac-sues-city-of-port-washington-over-...
by pak9rabid | 2026-01-30 15:30:31+00:00
Here's a fun one that I still haven't figured out:

I recently purchased a Banana Pi 4 with the 802.11be Wi-Fi 7 module to be used as an access point. It generally works well as an AP and I'm getting full speeds. However, for some reason whenever I try to communicate directly with the router/firewall (separate device on the same network) through this AP, it will intermittently drop 3/4 packets. It only happens when communicating with the router/firewall device, and only over the wlan interface on the bpi-r4. I have a similar AP setup on another embedded system (PCEngines APU2) and this has never been an issue.

I suspect there's some sort of bug with the internal 4-port switch of the bpi-r4 not playing well with the wlan interface when they're all bridged together, but digging through the logs hasn't revealed anything obvious.

It's driving me nuts!
by rmrmrm | 2026-01-30 15:30:42+00:00
Built a visual demo where multi-agent AI workflows are expressed as algebraic equations.

Four operators:
→ chain (serial)
+ parallel (aggregate)
÷ filter (constrain)
² iterate (refine)

So instead of 50 lines of orchestration code, you write:

((R + A) → W)² ÷ C → E

Research + Analyze in parallel, synthesize, write, refine twice, critique, summarize.

The equation is the program. A runtime solves it. You watch intelligence flow through the topology.

Not a framework—a notation. Curious what HN thinks about treating agent composition as algebra rather than software engineering.

Attempt to a white paper: agentic-algebra.pages.dev

Mini demo (bigger one in exploration): https://github.com/moldandyeast/agentic-algebra
by z0r | 2026-01-30 15:30:53+00:00
From the article:

Historically, it would take a reasonably long period of consistent effort and many iterations of refinement for a good developer to produce 10,000 lines of quality code that not only delivered meaningful results, but was easily readable and maintainable. While the number of lines of code is not a measure of code quality—it is often the inverse—a codebase with good quality 10,000 lines of code indicated significant time, effort, focus, patience, expertise, and often, skills like project management that went into it. Human traits.

Now, LLMs can not only one-shot generate that in seconds,

Evidence please. Ascribing many qualities to LLM code that I haven't (personally) seen at that scale. I think if you want to get an 'easily readable and maintainable' codebase of 10k lines with an LLM you need somebody to review its contributions very closely, and it probably isn't going to be generated with a 1 shot prompt.
by somenameforme | 2026-01-30 15:30:54+00:00
It was always called the Department of War [1] from 1789 until 1947. At that point it was repackaged as the Department of Defense when we started framing invading countries half-way around the world as 'defense'. Prior to that rhetoric around war was far more honest. We tried to buy a sizable chunk of Texas from Mexico. They rejected our offer so we invaded and took it, because we wanted it.

It's only in 1947 and later that somehow invading countries half-way around the world and shipping weapons to anybody with a buck began being framed as 'defense' or somehow saving the world from whatever - tyrant, terror, communism, burdens of oil, and so on. So in many ways I think it would be far more apt to say that 'Department of Defense' is the cutesy name. They're not defending anything - nukes and geography take care of that, more or less, on their own.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Wa...
by resfirestar | 2026-01-30 15:30:57+00:00
Because the bad title is the point, the author has made it his life’s purpose to troll the Elon sycophants on X. For that reason there’s no reason to take him any more seriously than you would take those guys as he’s just their mirror image. I’m enough of an Elon skeptic to suspect the Austin robotaxis don’t have a real path to operating autonomously for several reasons, doesn’t mean I have to listen to Fred Lambert. He’s peddling clickbait/ragebait and I don’t understand how it’s taken as anything more.
Ask HN: How are you managing secrets with AI agents?
by m-hodges | 2026-01-30 15:31:00+00:00
Secrets management with Agents feels absent today. The agent needs API keys to call external services, but the usual patterns feel broken in this context. You see this clearly when writing Agent Skills.

Environment variables: The agent has shell access. It can run `env` or `echo $API_KEY` and access the secret, either through prompt injection or just by exploring or debugging.

.env files: Same problem. The agent can `cat .env`. The file is right there on the filesystem waiting for curious `print()` statements.

Proxy process / wrapper: You can stand up a separate process that holds the secret and proxies requests. The agent calls localhost, never sees the key. This works, but it's a lot of operational overhead. Now you're running infrastructure just to hide a string from your own tools. It also feels close to reinventing MCP.

What I've been experimenting with:

1. OS keychain with credential helper: The bundled or generated script calls out to the system keychain (macOS Keychain, Windows Credential Manager, etc.) at runtime. The agent can invoke the script, but can't directly query the keychain. Libraries like Python's `keyring` abstract over OS keychains and make it somewhat portable, but this all assumes certain runtime environments and requires user interaction via the OS.

2. Credential command escape hatch: Scripts accept a `--credential-cmd` flag that runs an arbitrary shell command to fetch the secret (`pass show`, `op read`, `vault kv get`, etc.). Flexible, but the agent could potentially inspect what command is being run and iterate to try to access it anyway.

Neither of these feel like a real solution. An agent could probe for credentials.

How are others handling secrets in agent workflows? Is anyone building agent runtimes with proper secrets isolation? Seems like something the official agent harnesses need to figure out and ship with.
by mekdoonggi | 2026-01-30 15:31:20+00:00
I should say, a surprise for anyone who is completely unaware of the developments around the world, which a lot of people in the US are.

I don't this requires the loss of "superpower" status really. Already, if you dropped all EV, solar, battery tariffs in Florida, I think people there would be blindsided by how fast things start to take over.
by tolerance | 2026-01-30 15:31:29+00:00
> Hey, we'd boycott Instagram too if we could, but we need it to get this message to you. Share this message widely on Instagram, encourage your friends to repost, get everyone on board. But while you're on the platform, do not click any ads and do not shop any brands that you see from links on the platform.

Video embedded on the page is also hosted on YouTube.

This isn’t meant to be a snark reduction but I’m wondering how well-coordinated this effort can be if they couldn’t go ‘all in’ on the resistance and spread this message by alternative means all across the board.

Bluesky? Mastodon? I’m sure you can gain traction on IG and then lead people there...but it says a lot on its face. And the demand in general is a lot; to ask of people to cut ties with their digital services, just about every single one you can think of, without offering comprehensive alternatives. And with exception to apparently two.

I get the point behind it but I feel like these are the things I have to consider to not take this as performative and instead as practical. And it’s not totally impractical but I wonder if the people in and adjacent to Scott Galloway’s network are enough for this to leave the desired dent. Because beyond that I’m doubtful.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-01-30 15:32:02+00:00
Okay I was writing a comment to simon (and I have elaborated some there but I wanted this to be something catchy to show how I feel and something people might discuss with too)

Both Code and talk are cheap. Show me the trust. Show me how I can trust you. Show me your authenticity. Show me your passion.

Code used to be the sign of authenticity. This is whats changing. You can no longer guarantee that large amounts of code let's say are now authentic, something which previously used to be the case (for the most part)

I have been shouting into the void many times about it but Trust seems to be the most important factor.

Essentially, I am speaking it from a consumer perspective but suppose that you write AI generated code and deploy it. Suppose you talked to AI or around it. Now I can do the same too and create a project sometimes (mostly?) more customizable to my needs for free/very-cheap.

So you have to justify why you are charging me. I do feel like that's only possible if there is something additional added to value. Trust, I trust the decision that you make and personally I trust people/decisions who feel like they take me or my ideas into account. So, essentially not ripping me off while actively helping. I don't know how to explain this but the most thing which I hate is the feeling of getting ripped off. So justifiable sustainable business who is open/transparent about the whole deal and what he gets and I get just gets my respect and my trust and quite frankly, I am not seeing many people do that but hopefully this changes.

I am curious now what you guys of HN think about this & what trust means to you in this (new?) ever-changing world.

Like y'know I feel like everything changes all the time but at the same time nothing changes at the same time too. We are still humans & we will always be humans & we are driven by our human instincts. Perhaps the community I envision is a more tight knit community online not complete mega-sellers.

Thoughts?
by throw0101a | 2026-01-30 15:32:06+00:00
Warsh's father-in-law is Ron Lauder:

> A long-time friend of President Donald Trump, Lauder has been credited with planting the idea of annexing Greenland in Trump's mind.[5][6]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Lauder

> Kevin Warsh's father-in-law is Ron Lauder, the billionaire behind the Greenland plot who is also doing a Lithium deal with a US govt backed partner in Ukraine. Epstein claimed they were friends in his emails.

* https://x.com/Timodc/status/2017227401445417102
by calibas | 2026-01-30 15:32:08+00:00
Fair enough, so then how fast would a semi-attentive driver stop?

The comment I originally replied to makes the claim a human's brain wouldn't have even responded fast enough to register the child was there. That's going WAY further than how Waymo is claiming a human would have responded.

I don't see how that's a more reasonable assumption that a human driver actually being "fully attentive", and I'm not sure Waymo's definition of that term is the same as what you're using.
by schmuhblaster | 2026-01-30 15:32:10+00:00
Thank you! When I started working on agentvm my original goal was similar to yours, build a kind of Mingw or Cygwin for WASM. However, I quickly learned that this wouldn't really be feasible with reasonable amounts of time/token spend, mostly due to issues like having to find a way to make fork work, etc. I am no expert for WASM or Linux system programming, but it's been a lot of fun working on this stuff. I hope that the WASI standard and runtimes become more mature, as I feel that WASM sandboxes make a lot of sense in environments where containers are not an option.
by culi | 2026-01-30 15:33:20+00:00
We've known for a long time now that their "robotaxi" fleet in Austin is about 30-50 vehicles. It started off much lower and has grown to about 50 today. There's actually a community project to track individual vehicles that has more exact figures.

Currently it's at 58 unique vehicles (based on license plates) with about 22 that haven't been seen in over a month

https://robotaxitracker.com/
by estearum | 2026-01-30 15:33:27+00:00
That... is not really an extraordinary claim. That has been many people's null hypothesis since before this technology was even deployed, and the rationale for it is sufficiently borne out to play a role in vigilance systems across nearly every other industry that relies on automation.

A safety system with blurry performance boundaries is called "a massive risk." That's why responsible system designers first define their ODD, then design their system to perform to a pre-specified standard within that ODD.

Tesla's technology is "works mostly pretty well in many but not all scenarios and we can't tell you which is which"

It is not an extraordinary claim at all that such a system could yield worse outcomes than a human with no asssistance.
by westurner | 2026-01-30 15:33:49+00:00
NewsArticle: "Superfluids are supposed to flow indefinitely. Physicists just watched one stop moving" (2026) https://phys.org/news/2026-01-superfluids-indefinitely-physi...

ScholarlyArticle: "Observation of a superfluid-to-insulator transition of bilayer excitons" (2026)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09986-w
by dogleash | 2026-01-30 15:33:56+00:00
>The cost of just trying things out is so exponentially high that the significant majority of ideas are simply never tried out.

But dumping code into files was never the hard part of it then either. It's understanding the subtitles of the implementation and the problem domain as you work with it and build experience with it.

>codebase with good quality 10,000 lines of code indicated significant time, effort, focus, patience, expertise, and often, skills like project management that went into it. Human traits.

>Now, LLMs can not only one-shot generate that in seconds

It will also one-shot hundreds more without the "good quality" qualifier in the human made example. In either case you're slowly refining an idea about what an implementation might be into one that is appropriate.