MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lbreakjai | 2026-01-29 20:24:06+00:00
Robots that specialise in one thing already exist. In big factories, where they'll peel and dice tons of onions per hour, being fed via unsexy conveyor belts into massive dicers.

That's the problem with robots like Optimus. The "specialized" part (Cutting the onions) is 1% of the skills. You'd still need to other hard 99% (Prehensility, vision, precise 3D movement, etc.).

And if you sorted the hard 99%, what's the point in specialising in cutting onions, when the same exact skills are needed to fold and put away laundry?
by IAmBroom | 2026-01-29 20:24:09+00:00
> A human brain automatically thinks of all the scenarios, ...

Patently, obviously false. A human brain will automatically think of SOME scenarios. For instance, if a collision seems imminent, and the driver is holding a cup of coffee, these ideas are likely to occur to the driver:

IF I GRAB THE STEERING WHEEL AND BRAKE HARD, I MIGHT NOT HIT THAT PEDESTRIAN IN FRONT OF ME.

IF I DON'T CONTINUE HOLDING THE COFFEE CAREFULLY, I MIGHT GET SCALDED.

THIS SONG ON MY RADIO IS REALLY ROCKING!

IF I YANK MY WHEEL TO THE LEFT, I MIGHT HIT A CAR INSTEAD OF A HUMAN.

IF I BRAKE HARD OR SWERVE AT ANY TIME IN TRAFFIC, I CAN CAUSE AN ACCIDENT.

Experiments with callosal patients (who have damaged the connective bridge between the halves of their brains) demonstrate that this is a realistic picture of how the brain makes decisions. It offers up a set of possible actions, and attempts to choose the optimal one and discard all others.

A computer program would do likewise, EXCEPT it won't care about the coffee cup nor the radio (remove two bad choices from consideration).

It still has one bad choice (do nothing), but the SNR is much improved.

I'm not being hyperbolic; self-preservation (focusing on keeping that coffee in my hand) is a vital factor in decision-making for a human.

> ...where Waymo has pre-programmed ones (and some NN based ones).

Yes. And as time goes on, more and better-refined scenarios will be added to its programming. Eventually, it's reasonable to believe the car software will constantly reassess how many humans are within HUMAN_RUN_DISTANCE + CAR_TRAVEL_DISTANCE in the next block, and begin tracking any that in an unsafe margin. No human on Earth does that, continually, without fail.

> Does a human brain carry some worry that they suddenly decide to run and try to cross the street after the dumpster? Does Waymo carry that worry or just continue to drive at the exact same speed.

You continue to imply that Waymo cannot ever improve on its current programming. Does it currently consider this situation? Probably not. Will it? Probably.
by yelabbassi | 2026-01-29 20:25:08+00:00
This is not a product or an agent proposal. It’s an attempt to reframe deployed AI systems (feeds, copilots, assistants) as cybernetic systems embedded in human attention and behavior loops.

I’m interested in feedback from people working in ML, control theory, alignment, or platform governance on whether this framing is useful, flawed, or already well-covered elsewhere.
by chrisjj | 2026-01-29 20:25:16+00:00
> As you may have heard, over the last few weeks X and Grok have made it possible for child sexual abuse material (CSAM) to be generated and widely distributed on their apps.

Though not a fan of X and Grok, someone has to call out this bull. There has been not one credible report of X/Grok generating CSAM. Nor even of any mechanism by which such is possible, given what CSAM actually is. https://rainn.org/get-informed/get-the-facts-about-sexual-vi...
by pixl97 | 2026-01-29 20:25:17+00:00
>often where nearly every anti-depressant had been tried, where getting treatment for ADHD

This is actually a somewhat difficult diagnosis to make, especially when diagnosing adult ADHD without the user documenting and bringing in a well defined log of their behavior (and possibly another person to point out things they don't know about themselves).

>ADHD is a highly heterogeneous disorder with a significant comorbidity rate.

Is thing that you read about in literature around it. And even more common than that is the comorbidity of all the above symptoms, that is ADHD and depression + more in autism.
by Natsu | 2026-01-29 20:25:45+00:00
> But most humans would have been aware of the big picture scenario much earlier. Are there muliple kids milling around on the sidewalk? Near a school? Is there a big truck/SUV parked there?

Waymos constantly track pedestrians nearby, you can see it on the status screen if you ride in one. So it would be both better able to find pedestrians and react as soon as one was on a collision course. They have a bit more visibility than humans do due to the sensor placement, so they also can see things that aren't that visible to a person inside the car, not to mention being constantly aware of all 360 degrees.

While I suppose that in theory, a sufficiently paranoid human might outdo the robot, it looks to me like it's already well above the median here.
by NetMageSCW | 2026-01-29 20:26:05+00:00
Well, there are the permanently dark crater bottoms that might contain water ice and are definitely very cold. Turn the water ice into thermal transfer fluid and drill (The Boring Company) cooling loops underneath and the try to heat sink into the very cold ground. I’m sure you could run the Data Center for months before you exceed the radiative heat dispersal available to the ground.
by tillvz | 2026-01-29 20:26:32+00:00
Yes, every SQL query Veezoo runs is logged and visible to admins.

The fundamental artifact is VQL (Veezoo Query Language), which queries against a Knowledge Graph containing your business data model, things like your "Revenue" measure.

A query might look like this:

var order from kb.Order

date_in(order.Order_Date, date("#today"))

var retRevenue = kb.Order.Revenue(order)

select(retRevenue)

If the business decides to change how revenue is computed, the VQL stays valid but compiles to different SQL. At the same time Veezoo can test that with your knowledge graph change that you are not breaking anyones dashboard and even apply evolutions if needed

VQL: https://docs.veezoo.com/vkl/kb-layer/vql/

Evolutions: https://docs.veezoo.com/vkl/evolutions/

The Knowledge Graph itself is version controlled, so the data team can trace every change.
by sidrag22 | 2026-01-29 20:26:33+00:00
I always thought I would kinda be immune to this issue, so I avoided social media for my entire adult life.

I think I am still in the emotional phase about it, as its really impacting me lately, but once my thoughts really settle i wanna write some sorta article about modern social media as an induced demand.

I still very much would prefer to not engage at all with any of the major platforms in the standard way. Ideally I'd just post an article I wrote, or some goofy project i made, and it wouldn't be subject to 0 views because I don't interact with social media correctly.
by simonw | 2026-01-29 20:26:39+00:00
That thing where law enforcement officers can be elected is such a weird American oddity.

Most countries appoint law enforcement officers who are qualified for the job.

We had a problem last year here in San Mateo County, California where our sheriff was corrupt but we had to pass a ballot measure because we couldn't just fire them: https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/10/san-mateo-sheriff-rem...
by laser | 2026-01-29 20:26:51+00:00
Their first example [1] is a complete non-sequitur and I’m trying to comprehend how this passed human review and must assume it’s AI, which doesn’t bode well for the supposed usefulness of their system.

[1] https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/2tMhL5Www2vA6I62DV...

“What was ChatGPT Image Gen logged-in DAU for the last 30 days?
Worked for 1m 22s >
ChatGPT WAU on October 6, 2025
(rounded to nearest 100M): = 800M
ChatGPT WAU on the last DevDay 2023 (Nov 6, 2023; rounded to nearest 100M): =
100M
Mini comparison (using the rounded figures only):
• Change: = +700M WAU
• Multiple: = 8x higher on 2025-10-06 vs 2023-11-06
(WAU here is the standard ChatGPT
WAU as-of the reporting date; I'm only sharing the values rounded to the nearest 100M, per your request.)”
by cal_dent | 2026-01-29 20:27:01+00:00
I’ve heard many people say the same (specifically about ppl being better than doctors because they listen) and I find it odd and wonder if this is a specific country thing?

I’ve been lucky enough to not need much beyond relative minor medical help but in the places I’ve lived always found that when I do see a GP they’re generally helpful.

There’s also something here about medical stuff making people feel vulnerable as a default so feeling heard can overcompensate the relationship? Not sure I’m articulating this last point well but it comes up so frequent (it listened, guided me through it step by step etc.) that I wonder if that has an effect. Feeling more in control than a doctor who has other patients and time constraint just say it’s x or do this
by jacobr1 | 2026-01-29 20:27:36+00:00
All the hard work is always chasing down edge cases, scaling, operational issues and other things that don't show up the user-exposed features. And talking about features, the innovation in coming up with them, or iterating on making them work with real customer experience is a ton of value, even if copying the ideas that work later is much easier - which is why I generally prefer betting on an innovator with just of enough traction to show they can stick with it. The best category leaders both innovate and steal/copy/buy all the innovation they aren't producing in house to maintain their lead.
by galsapir | 2026-01-29 20:27:38+00:00
we spent a few months building evals for a health agent (and the agent itself!). tried to apply anthropic's framework to a real system looking at CGM data + diet.
some of it worked. we got decent at checking form — citations exist, tools were called, numbers trace back. the harder part was essence — is this clinically appropriate? actually helpful? we didn't really solve that.
curious if others building health/bio agents have found ways around this, or if everyone's just accepting fuzzy metrics for the stuff that matters.
by chasd00 | 2026-01-29 20:27:39+00:00
> Waymos should use the same rationale. If you can avoid going past a school zone when kids are likely to be there, do it!

I can see that, prioritize obstacle predictability over transit time. A school zone at certain times of day is very unpredictable with respect to obstacles but a more car congested area would be easier to navigate but slower. Same goes for residential areas during Halloween.
by petcat | 2026-01-29 20:27:49+00:00
I might be mistaken, but it sounds like these guys showed up at a facility and did the classical "breaking and entering" thing. The onsite (terrified) staff called 911, the police showed up and arrested them. The perps said that they were hired to do this (they were), but nobody told the Sheriffs office or the staff about it.

So yeah, it sucks for these guys' reputations and criminal histories, but... what? The onsite staff didn't know what was going on, the Sheriffs didn't know what was going on.

The county basically said: "We want you to go try to break into this government building. We aren't going to tell the staff or the local police about it. Tell us what you find."
by pixl97 | 2026-01-29 20:27:59+00:00
No, he did not trust his cabinet at all, which is why he put a bunch of yes men in place to ensure they fucked up and did the dumbest thing.

DT has had a long history of operating like a mafia boss where the design of the people he chooses around him is to put scapegoats on when the criminal activities he's involved in is caught.
by vimda | 2026-01-29 20:28:07+00:00
It's a bit vague, but the idea is right. If your SaaS is built with AI, then any customer you have can also build it with AI, and whatever they build is going to be better suited to their needs and will run cheaper because they aren't paying your margin. AI skews the build vs buy curve massively, because it makes building so much easier
by onion2k | 2026-01-29 20:28:17+00:00
In my opinion, data and documents are the real AI benefit, or threat, to developer jobs.

Specifically, how good a company's data is will determine how effectively it can leverage AI in the future. The public data is pretty much mined to exhaustion, and the next big data source will be in-house documentation, code repos, data lakes, etc. If you work for a company where that's been built, maintained, and organised then the effectiveness of AI is going to be mind-blowing. Companies that have maintained good docs be able to build new things, maintain old things, and migrate things to cheaper modern stacks easily. That will lead to being able to move fast and deploy new AI-driven services easily and cheaply. Revenue will follow.

Conversely, at companies where documentation and code organisation have been historically poor, AI will struggle. Leaders will see it as a benefit, and be baffled at why their company can't realise the value of it. They'll quickly blame developers for not being able to use it, and that'll lead to people's growth stagnating or possibly layoffs. Eventually competitors will eat the company's lunch because they'll just be able to move on opportunities much faster.

I've resolved that in any future job hunt I'm going to make asking about docs, data, and repos a priority...
by vel0city | 2026-01-29 20:28:40+00:00
Yeah but with a teleoperated worker you can have them work remote from a place with poor labor regulations and extremely low pay.

The future with this as a reality is a really dark place, where the uber wealthy live entirely disconnected from the working class except through telepresent machines half a planet away. That way the wealthy don't have to be inconvenienced by the humanity of the poors.
by jimbo808 | 2026-01-29 20:28:58+00:00
Internal tools do suck as far as usability, but you can bet your ass they work if they're doing things that matter to the business, which is most of them. Almost every enterprise system hooks into the finance/accounting pipeline to varying degrees. If these systems do not work at your company I'd like to know which company you work at and whether they're publicly traded.
by qwertyuiop_ | 2026-01-29 20:29:35+00:00
Couldn’t be anymore callous and clinical. This press release alone makes me want not to use their service.

* “Following contact, the pedestrian stood up immediately, walked to the sidewalk, and we called 911. The vehicle remained stopped, moved to the side of the road, and stayed there until law enforcement cleared the vehicle to leave the scene,” Waymo wrote in the post.*
by bulatb | 2026-01-29 20:29:38+00:00
There's nothing to prove. Responsibility means you accept the consequences for its actions, whatever they are. You own the benefit? You own the risk.

If you don't want to be responsible for what a tool that might do anything at all might do, don't use the tool.

The other option is admitting that you don't accept responsibility, not looking for a way to be "responsible" but not accountable.
by 6stringmerc | 2026-01-29 20:29:58+00:00
When I saw mention it was in context of a “contracting” type set of info / document I actually chuckled - I spent a decade in procurement and sales for high stakes contracts. Incompetent person has no idea how to manage a procurement and goes online. Basically this is a 2026 version of an inept executive bashing “what is an RFP” into a search engine from 2007.
by tialaramex | 2026-01-29 20:30:00+00:00
In principle, attentive drivers, who have either somehow come independently to the appropriate understanding or have been trained in how to react to hazards ahead...

https://www.gov.uk/theory-test/hazard-perception-test

... could in some circumstances know that there's a likelihood that a child will emerge suddenly and reduce their speed in anticipation where circumstances allow.

Note that: If you cut speed but other drivers can't see why they may overtake, even unsafely, because you are a nuisance to them. Slowing in anticipation that a child will run out from behind the SUV, only for a car behind you to accelerate around you and smack straight into the child at even higher speed, is not the desired outcome even though you didn't hurt anybody...

And yes, we'd need to see the video to know. It's like that Sully scenario. In a prepared test skilled pilots were indeed able to divert and land, but Sully wasn't prepared for a test. You're trained to expect engine failure in an aeroplane - it will happen sometimes so you must assume that, but for a jet liner you don't anticipate losing both engines, that doesn't happen. There's "Obviously that child is going in the road" and "Where the fuck did they come from?" and a lot in between and we're unlikely to ever know for sure.
by a99p | 2026-01-29 20:30:06+00:00
You can use many obfuscation techniques and sleight of hand tricks (like those stated below) to make it very hard to superficially analyze. If you over obfuscate, you run the risk of making it unintelligible to humans. The problem becomes that conventional programming languages follow a 'predictable' structure and are created so that they can be replicated by other humans.

If that pattern is figured out, im sure it can be used to train an LLM to 'comprehend' that programming language. Think of it like designing a cipher or a puzzle; you can create a very complex cipher that is understood only by you or those you choose to share it with. But if the 'trick' is revealed, then the entire cipher is broken.
by accidc | 2026-01-29 20:30:07+00:00
It depends. A driver may have seen a child dart behind a car and expect them to emerge on the other side.

Does Waymo have the same object permanence and trajectory prediction (combined) to that of a human?

Once the video evidence it out, it might become evident.

Generally Waymo seems to be a responsible actor so maybe that is the case and this can help demonstrate potential benefits of autonomous vehicles.

Alternatively, if even they can't get this right then it may cast doubts about the maturity of the entire ecosystem
by heisenbit | 2026-01-29 20:30:09+00:00
For major medical issues it may well be best practice to use the four eyes principle like we do for all safety related systems. Access is key and at this time getting a second pair of eyes in close timely proximity is a luxury few have and even fewer will have looking at the demographics in the developed world. Human doctors are failable as is AI. For the time being having a multitude of perspectives may well be the best in most cases.
by IAmBroom | 2026-01-29 20:30:44+00:00
The statistically relevant question is: How many human drivers have hit children near elementary schools, since Waymo's last accident?

If Waymo has fewer accidents where a pedestrian is hit than humans do, Waymo is safer. Period.

A lot of people are conjecturing how safe a human is in certain complicated scenarios (pedestrian emerging from behind a bus, driver holds cup of coffee, the sun is in their eyes, blah blah blah). These scenarios are distractions from the actual facts.

Is Waymo statistically safer? (spoiler: yes)
by al_borland | 2026-01-29 20:30:52+00:00
Do you at least give yourself a warning, so you can find a natural stopping point? Maybe flashing the screen 2 minutes before the time is up, and then fade to black over those 2 minutes.

How easy a timer can be ignored depends on how annoying the timer is. If it's loud and doesn't stop, it would be hard to miss.
by trhway | 2026-01-29 20:30:52+00:00
the human driver would usually drive more closely to the centerline of such a residential road. If the road is clear ahead i'd drive almost over the centerline of the road having enough clearance between my path and the parked cars for any such "jumper" to be visible long enough for me to react. If there is an opposite traffic i get back strictly into my lane and slow down much more if the parked cars are close and they block sidewalk view, etc.

The autonomous cars have really got more aggressive recently as i mentioned before:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46199294

Also Waymo handling road visibility issue:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39298290
by jcranmer | 2026-01-29 20:30:55+00:00
> If you tools are not updated that isn't the fault of C++.

It kinda is. The C++ committee has been getting into a bad habit of dumping lots of not-entirely-working features into the standard and ignoring implementer feedback along the way. See https://wg21.link/p3962r0 for the incipient implementer revolt going on.
by plqbfbv | 2026-01-29 20:30:57+00:00
Other brands force you into doing yearly/x-1000-km inspections to keep your warranty, even for EVs. If you were to skip their inspection cycle, they may decide not to cover the issue, even if it's clearly a warranty case.

You go to the garage for a Tesla only if it's broken.

In my experience with my M3 2019, I think many people don't even realize they have issues, because the cars are generally silent and decently insulated (the Highland even more so). Also, lots of people pay no attention to sounds and general driving feeling their cars make (e.g. steering wheel shaking, clicks doing certain actions, ...). The main/biggest issues with well-kept Teslas are basically suspensions, for which there is no monitoring/sensors, so the car cannot report to you that something's off.

Example #1: I asked the Tesla service center in Dec 2024 for an inspection, because I was leaving for a country with no service centers. Everything was fine after 6y and ~60'000km, they told me to just break every now and then because otherwise the brake rotors will rust. So it'd have likely failed the TUV inspection only for having a little rust on the rotors, otherwise perfectly fine and driveable.

Example #2: last year (after changing country) my rear axle nuts came a bit loose, not enough to be dangerous but enough that the axle/wheel hub interface would have some play (which could potentially become dangerous if you leave it alone for a few thousand kms). You'd hear a clunk from the back when applying torque from a standstill. My wife and mother in law kept insisting everything was fine, that they couldn't hear anything, that it was all in my head. Took it to the mechanic: rear axle nuts were loose, right more than the left one (and I heard the clunk from rear-right). Fixed with 30min labor. Different people, different reactions.

Now I have the front-right wheel clicking at times that is likely the same issue or may have something to do with suspensions, but again, if you ask my wife, everything's fine. And without mandated inspection cycles, you only learn of issues at the mandatory state inspection.
by avree | 2026-01-29 20:31:05+00:00
No, no, no. You can change your doctor, and get one that listens to you - you can't change the fact that ChatGPT has no skin in the game - no reputation, no hippocratic oath, no fiscal/legal responsibility. Some people have had miracles with Facebook groups, or WebMD, but that doesn't change where the role of a doctor is or mean that you should be using those things for medical advice as opposed to something that allows you to have an informed conversation with a doctor.
by TeMPOraL | 2026-01-29 20:31:07+00:00
The question of responsibility, while philosophically interesting wrt. increasingly autonomous machines, is not going to be an issue in practice. We'll end up dealing with it like we always do with multi-party responsibility in complex systems: regulators setting safety standards and outlining types and structures of liabiliy, contracts shifting the liability around, and lots and lots of insurance.

In fact, if you substitute "company providing self-driving solution (integrated software + hardware)" for "company renting out commercial drivers" (or machine operators), then self-driving cars already fit well into existing legal framework. The way I see it, the only change self-driving cars introduce here is that there is no individual operator we could blame for the accident, no specific human we could heavily fine or jail, and then feel good about ourselves because we've issued retributive justice and everything is whole now. Everything else has already long been worked out.