MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mmcnl | 2026-01-11 13:59:35+00:00
Personally I think this is an extreme waste of time. Every week you're learning something new that is already outdated the next week. You're telling me AI can write complex code but isn't able to figure out how to properly guide the user into writing usable prompts?

A somewhat intelligent junior will dive deep for one week and be on the same knowledge level as you in roughly 3 years.
Show HN: A mini paged-KV and prefix-cache scheduler (learning inference engine)
by bofeng1997 | 2026-01-11 13:59:48+00:00
Hi HN — I built Tailor, a small teaching/learning repo that’s basically a “mini inference engine” prototype for LLM decoding.

It includes:

1. Paged KV cache (block_size=1) + page-table semantics
Trie/radix prefix cache with reference-counted KV blocks (safe prefix reuse)
2. Attention metadata builder (page_table / cu_seqlens / positions / out_loc)
3. A simple KV-capacity-bounded scheduler (admission control + continue-batching)

It’s inspired by nano-vllm and mini-sglang, but not a direct copy — I re-implemented components step-by-step to understand how the pieces fit, with help from GPT-5.2. The scheduler policy is intentionally simple (learning-first).

Performance note: with 80,000 blocks allocated, I measured ~1990 tokens/s on Llama 3.2 1B on a laptop RTX 4070.

Repo: https://github.com/tyfeng1997/tailor
by weedhopper | 2026-01-11 14:00:41+00:00
Attention! The tech overlords demand that we give them our all natural human-made content so that they can continue feeding us the spam and slop we know and love!

Reminds me of that instagram caption: “No problem! Here's the information about the Mercedes CLR GTR:[…]”. Wouldn’t be surprised if every other website returned that too nowadays.

I’m excitingly awaiting what the next SEO exploit of the exploit of the exploit will be
by ajross | 2026-01-11 14:00:41+00:00
Again, no such thing. There's no antitrust regulatory framework that recognizes the ability of "small" brands to constrain their downstream markets in ways "big" ones can't.

People are getting bent out of shape here, again, based on the specific player. But seriously what do you really think the solution is supposed to look like? I just don't see a fix here that won't make things worse, and I absolutely don't see one available under current law.
by fried-gluttony | 2026-01-11 14:00:54+00:00
Excuse me to hijack this comment adinisom.

I wanted to reach you regarding your comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44547866 Would you be willing to maybe elaborate on the problems caused - I've planned to adopt Miro Sameks for an application?
DM me via my about me, if interested. Would be very thankful.
by otoolep | 2026-01-11 14:01:53+00:00
Yes, fast networks matter.

I did introduce Queued Writes[1] since that talk, allowing you to trade off performance versus immediate durability. It may interest you -- network is much less of a factor then, and you should get a 10-100x increase in throughput.

[1] https://rqlite.io/docs/api/queued-writes/
by xolve | 2026-01-11 14:01:57+00:00
The title of the blog doesn't do justice to the content. Its not the ad-blockers but predatory ads that harmed the open web more. People still post content and often the monetary benefit is taken up by the hosting platform.

Consider this: If I go to an electronics store and they try to sell me a new soundbar I won't mind. But if I want to buy noodles and they still want to sell me a TV I checked out I definitely would freak out.
by daikikadowaki | 2026-01-11 14:02:26+00:00
I appreciate the skepticism—it’s a valid concern these days. To be completely honest: I did use AI as a 'Chief Engineer' to help formalize the mathematical notation, handle the LaTeX formatting, and polish the English (as it's not my first language).

However, the core logic—the 'State Discrepancy' metric and the control loop architecture—is original work born from long nights of frustration with current AI safety debates. I’m not just 'prompting' papers into existence; I’m trying to solve a specific technical problem I’ve been obsessing over.

I’d love for you to judge the paper by the robustness of the logic itself rather than the tools used to refine the presentation.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2026-01-11 14:02:26+00:00
I think what he means is that on a 64-bit system you have a massive virtual address space (typically only 48-bit, but that's still 256TB), and since malloc allocates from virtual address space, not limited by physical memory, it is unlikely you will get a malloc failure (unless you are trying to allocate more than 256TB per process, maybe due to a memory leak).
by jsdchenye | 2026-01-11 14:02:27+00:00
I've been working on Workbench for the past few months – an AI-powered work management platform that combines the proven four-quadrant task management method with a unique "breakthrough system" for capturing impulses and turning them into structured projects.

*Tech Stack:*
- Next.js 16 (App Router) with TypeScript
- Tailwind CSS 4
- Supabase for auth and database
- Prisma ORM
- Claude AI for intelligent analysis
- Server-side rendering with React Server Components

*What it does:*
- Four-quadrant task management (Important & Urgent matrix)
- "Breakthrough System": Capture work impulses → Weekly reflection → Foundation projects
- AI-powered insights on your work patterns
- Daily review with global view across dates
- Identity & North Star tracking

*Why I built it:*
As a knowledge worker, I found existing task management tools either too rigid or too unstructured. Workbench bridges that gap by combining proven methodologies (four-quadrant) with modern AI and a flexible workflow for capturing and developing ideas.

*What makes it different:*
- Not just another todo app – it's a complete workflow from daily tasks to long-term projects
- AI integration that actually provides actionable insights
- Unique "breakthrough system" for transforming impulses into structured work
- Built with modern web tech (Next.js 16, RSC, TypeScript)

*Try it:*
https://workbench.jsdchenye.online

Free plan available with all core features. I'd love to hear your feedback, especially on:
- The AI analysis quality
- The workflow design
- Technical implementation choices
- What features you'd find useful

Happy to answer any questions!
by keyshapegeo99 | 2026-01-11 14:02:44+00:00
People can have different preferred input devices to others. It doesn't make them amateurs.

My gripes with the trackpad are less to do with window management and are more to do with the graphical components of my job.

Please explain to me how I'm supposed to design graphics in Inkscape using only the keyboard? Or create presentations in LibreOffice Impress using only the keyboard? I don't spend the entirety of my time in a text editor.

Consider these "amateur" tasks all you like, most organisations value them and I need to be able to undertake them without frustration. MacOS won't fight me in these contexts. Linux will.
by tialaramex | 2026-01-11 14:03:05+00:00
Yeah no.

In Rust if you pass say a Box<Goose> (not a reference, the actual object) into a function foo, it's gone, function foo might do something with that boxed goose or it might not, but it's gone anyway. If a Rust function foo wanted to give you it back they'd have to return the Box<Goose>

But C++ doesn't work that way, after calling foo my_unique_ptr is guaranteed to still exist, although for an actual unique_ptr it'll now be "disengaged" if foo moved from it. It has to still exist because C++ 98 (when C++ didn't have move semantics) says my_unique_ptr always gets destroyed at the end of its scope, so newer C++ versions also destroy my_unique_ptr for consistency, and so it must still exist or that can't work.

Creating that "hollowed out" state during a "move" operation is one of the many small leaks that cost C++ performance compared to Rust.
by bathtub365 | 2026-01-11 14:04:43+00:00
The average person already automates a lot of things in their day to day lives. They spend far less time doing the dishes, laundry, and cleaning because parts of those tasks have been mechanized and automated. I think LLMs probably automate the wrong thing for the average person (i.e., I still have to load the laundry machine and fold the laundry after) but automation has saved the average person a lot of time
by Fiveplus | 2026-01-11 14:04:55+00:00
That is a fantastic historical parallel. The early amd64 days were arguably Gentoo's killer app moment. While the binary distributions were wrestling with the logistical nightmare of splitting repositories and figuring out the /lib64 vs /lib standard, Gentoo users just changed their CHOST, bootstrapped and were running 64-bit native. You nailed the psychology of it, too. The speed marketing was always a bit of a red herring. The ability to say "I do not want LDAP support in my mail client" and have the package manager actually respect that is cool. It respects the user's intelligence rather than abstracting it away.

Since you've been on the ride since '04, I'm curious to hear your thoughts. How do you feel the maintenance burden compares today versus the GCC 3.x era? With the modern binhost fallback and the improvements in portage, I feel like we now spend less time fighting rebuild loops than back then? But I wonder if long time users feel the same.
by crvdgc | 2026-01-11 14:05:42+00:00
This specific example to me is less likely a consequence of model collapsing, but the "personality" adjustment about how aggressively it should read into the user's intention.

From time to time, I enjoy the model guessing what I meant rather than what I wrote. For example, "Find the backend.py" can be auto-corrected into "find the app.py".
by mnls | 2026-01-11 14:05:46+00:00
Every now and then a new article "Why you should go Linux". I get it, I like Linux too but every case is different. I want to use Linux but I have to use Digital Audio Workstation. So in my case, I shouldn't dump Windows (and thousand of $$ I've spent on audio software).

I know people desperately want to believe that Linux is "there", but it really isn't. And will probably never be. It’s still too confusing for the average user (many distros, many desktop environments, Wayland vs X, systemd vs init, snap vs flatpak).
by yowlingcat | 2026-01-11 14:05:46+00:00
It isn't that simple. One of the implicit tradeoffs you make buying SaaS is that the overall cost of evolution (development and ongoing maintenance) is subsidized across all of the investment resources and customer base of the vendor. With CRM in particular, ecosystem integration is one of the heaviest buildouts there is because each point solution integration can very significantly in complexity and is also where the combinatoric explosion of misbehavior sets in.

When you decide to pull that in house, you are implicitly burdening yourself with the cost of the buildout as well as ongoing maintenance. True, you could probably knock together an okay v1 of CRM yourself inhouse. But are you really going to get it to and maintain production level quality over time at a lower total cost of ownership? I'm skeptical.

The theoretical party you are describing would probably be better served by simply avoiding Salesforce in favor of a next gen CRM that is both more cost effective and easier to customize. In enterprise contexts, even HubSpot is effectively next gen, but there are also products like Attio et al that have a ton of adoption and strong integration ecosystems (albeit not at the Salesforce level).

When you buy enterprise software from a vendor you are buying more than "just software" you are also hiring a company's services. And the inverse is correct as well, when you choose to build it in house, you are implicitly choosing to hire a team internally to resource all of the services you would've expected that vendor to provide.

Certainly, this tradeoff can still make a lot of sense for some companies. The acid test for that, in my opinion, is whether said company could (and would) actually successfully sell the product they build internally on the open market. If the answer to that is "yes", the prospect of turning a cost center into a profit center can potentially bear significant long term ROI to the company.
by MaxBarraclough | 2026-01-11 14:05:48+00:00
I'm not convinced that lowering the barrier to entry to software changes will result in this kind of change of norms. The reasons for closed-source commercial software not supporting customisation largely remain the same. Here are the ones that spring to mind:

• Increased upfront software complexity

• Increased maintenance burden (to not break officially supported plugins/customizations)

• Increased support burden

• Possible security/regulatory/liability issues

• The company may want to deliberately block functionality that users want (e.g. data migration, integration with competing services, or removing ads and content recommendations)

> That was a genuine blocker for me because it prevented me from answering my question.

It's always been this way. From the user's point of view there has always been value in having access to the source, especially under the terms of a proper Free and Open Source licence.
by sarchertech | 2026-01-11 14:05:55+00:00
> They are held less accountable compared to other professions.

I have no idea what other professions you’re talking about. Doctors are the only professionals where it’s common for multi million dollar judgements to be awarded against individuals. In may cases, judgements larger than their malpractice insurance limits.

Take a doctor working alone overnight in the ER. They are responsible for every single thing that happens. One of the 4 NPs that they are supposed to have time to supervise while they are stuck sedating a kid for ortho to work on makes a mistake—the doctor is the one that’s getting sued. A nurse misinterprets an order and gives too much of something, doctor is getting sued. Doesn’t matter if it’s their fault or not. Literally ever single one of the dozens of patients that comes in with a runny nose or a tummy ache, or a headache is their responsibility and could cost them their house. And there are far too many patients for them to actually supervise fully. They have to trust and delegate, but in practice they are still 100% on the hook for mistakes. For accepting this responsibility they might get $10 per NP patient that they supervise.

Healthcare professionals also occasionally face criminal prosecution for mistakes at a level that wouldn’t even be me a career in other professions.

> Lawsuits against medical professionals are difficult in many cases impossible for the average person to win

Malpractice attorneys operate on contingency, so they’re more accessible to the average person than most kinds of attorneys. It’s one of the many reasons healthcare is so expensive in the US.

It’s harder for a doctor to get fired for saying showing up late to work than it is for a cook at McDonald’s I guess, but compared to other professionals? I’ve seen software engineers regularly skip through companies leaving disasters in their wake for their entire careers. MBAs regularly destroy companies, lawyers and finance bros get away with murder, and police officers literally get away with murder.

The only profession that faces anywhere near the accountability that doctors do that I can think of might be civil engineers.
by kevin061 | 2026-01-11 14:06:14+00:00
I can agree with that.

Unlimited free speech could have been positive maybe 100 years ago. Strikes, protest, writing angry letters to your Mayor demanding change are all great forms of speech.

Posting some unhinged xenophobic conspiracy theory on Twitter for everyone to see and to get retweeted by the President of the US or the most powerful CEOs are toxic and corrosive forms of speech.
by robot-wrangler | 2026-01-11 14:06:20+00:00
So extrapolating from here and assuming applications are as easy as libraries, operating systems are as easy as applications.. at this rate with a few people in a weekend you can convert anything to anything else, and the differences between different programming languages are very nearly effectively erased. Nice!

And yet it doesn't feel true yet, otherwise we'd see it. Why do you think that is?
by nerdponx | 2026-01-11 14:07:24+00:00
It certainly looks AI generated. Huge amount of academic "boilerplate" and not much content besides. It's broken up into chapters like a thesis but the actual novel content of each is about a page of material at most.

The Ghost UI is a nice idea and the control feedback mechanism is probably worth exploring.

But those are more "good ideas" rather than complete finished pieces of research. Do we even have an agreed-upon standard technique to quantify discrepancy between a prompt and an output? That might be a much more meaningful contribution than just saying that you could hypothetically use one, if it existed. Also how do you actually propose that the "modulation" be applied to the model output? It's so full of conceptual gaps.

This looks like an AI-assisted attempt to dress up some interesting ideas as novel discoveries and to present them as a complete solution, rather than as a starting point for a serious research program.
by jqpabc123 | 2026-01-11 14:08:00+00:00
Have you read the article?

Ms Ritter alleged that the billionaire raped her on a yacht in November 2021.

So it only took 4 years for her to decide she was raped?

In the meantime, she had an ongoing relationship with her rapist.

Sorry, it doesn't add up as being totally credible to me.
by mcintyre1994 | 2026-01-11 14:08:00+00:00
You can deploy from XCode to your iPhone, and it seems to behave like any other app when you do that. I do have a paid Apple developer account, and I think I read that if you don't then you have to re-sign the app every 7 days. If you wanted a small number of users then I don't think this would work. I think you could use TestFlight, which is Apple's method for distributing an unreleased version of an app, but I'm not sure what the review process would look like for that. Android would be much easier as long as you can still sideload APKs, you could just build the APK and send it to everyone to install. I read that there were some changes to sideloading APKs but I don't know the details.

In terms of actually making the app, I don't know Swift or iOS at all so it's all generated. Usual caveats, and I'm only running them on my own phone. I ask Claude (not code) to help me with the spec, I give it some bullet points and it asks a bunch of clarifying questions then gives me a spec. I put that in a new directory, fire up Claude and use the ralph-loop plugin (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/tree/main/plugins/...):

> /ralph-loop:ralph-loop "Implement the iOS app described in app-spec.md. You have access to xcode CLI tools. You should write tests and use them to verify your work. The task will be complete when the app is fully implemented, with all tests passing. Output <promise>COMPLETE</promise> when finished." --max-iterations 50 --completion-promise "COMPLETE"

Once it's done you can open the app in XCode, test it in a simulator, play with it and iterate a bit and then send it to your phone!

Editing to add because I can't edit the original post: I think the limiting factor here might be the concurrent sprites limit. It seems like if you're on pay-as-you-go then you can only have 3 running concurrently, and have to subscribe to get 10.
by daikikadowaki | 2026-01-11 14:08:28+00:00
Thanks for the direct push. Let me ground those statements in the framework of the paper:

1. On "eroding human agency in a black box":

I am referring to "Agency Misattribution". When Generative AI transitions from a passive tool to an active agent, it silently corrects and optimizes human input without explicit consent. The evidence is observable in the psychological shift where users internalize system-mediated successes as personal mastery. For example, when an LLM silently polishes a draft, the writer claims authorship over nuances they did not actually conceive.

2. On "healthy coexistence":

In this paper, this is defined as "Seamful Agency". It is a state where the human can quantify the "D" (Discrepancy) between their raw intent and the system's output. Coexistence is "healthy" only when the locus of judgment remains visible at the moment of intervention.

For a more rigorous definition of JTP and the underlying problem of "silent delegation," I highly recommend reading Chapter 1 of the white paper.

Does this technical framing of "agency as a measurable gap" make more sense to you?
by theandrewbailey | 2026-01-11 14:08:30+00:00
Almost a year ago, I blogged about the apps I use (or recently did but might be useful to others) and my story of liberating myself from Big Tech. It's mostly in prose form, but ends with a nice list of apps I use on my de-Googled Android (now Pixel with GrapheneOS).

https://theandrewbailey.com/article/286/State-of-the-Andrew-...
by kevin42 | 2026-01-11 14:08:42+00:00
Hi, Author here! I wrote this piece after some conversations with friends and realizing how we all had some levels of cognitive dissonance towards AI, IP, etc. I noticed I was moving my own goalposts both when criticizing AI or defending it.

I have to admit that I'm less of a skeptic than most, but there are some coherent skeptical arguments. I'm especially interested in what people think about their own skepticism on the technical side, as there seems to be a pivot towards the social lately.
by timpera | 2026-01-11 14:09:59+00:00
ChatGPT often provides links to sources in its answers after searching the web. Therefore, some people in the SEO world are saying that you need to split up your content into many small "questions" so that LLMs copy your answer to the question after searching the web and (hopefully) link to your website in the process.

I don't think that it is a good strategy, but it makes sense, especially for content that you want to be scraped (like product pages).
by stereo | 2026-01-11 14:10:41+00:00
Gps is free to use. Running your own gnss service requires an atomic clock and possibly separate transmission hardware, which is possible, but adds cost, volume, and weight.

According to [1], “[o]ne of the current generation of GPS satellites (Block III) weighs over 2,200 kg (4,850 lb), the weight of an average pickup truck. The body of these satellites are 1.8 m x 2.5 m x 3.4 m (5.9’ x 8.2’ x 11.2’) in size”. In comparison, “the current V2 Starlink satellite version weighs approximately 1,760 lbs (800 kilograms) at launch, almost three times heavier than the older generation satellites (weighing in at 573 lbs or 260 kg)” [2]

[1] https://novatel.com/an-introduction-to-gnss/basic-concepts/s...
[2] https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites.html
by daikikadowaki | 2026-01-11 14:11:32+00:00
To be consistent with my own principle:

Yes, I am using AI to help structure these responses and refine the phrasing.

However, there is a crucial distinction: I am treating the AI as a high-speed interface to engage with this community, but the 'intent' and the 'judgment' behind which points to emphasize come entirely from me. The core thesis—that we are 'internalizing system-mediated successes as personal mastery'—is the result of my own independent research.

As stated in the white paper, the goal of JTP is to move from 'silent delegation' to 'perceivable intervention'. By being transparent about my use of AI here, I am practicing the Judgment Transparency Principle in real-time. I am not hiding the 'seams' of this conversation. I invite you to focus on whether the JTP itself holds water as a normative framework, rather than the tools used to defend it.
by durch | 2026-01-11 14:11:39+00:00
This is exciting, I hope you manage to get traction for the idea!

I currently have rely on a sort of supervisor LLM to check and detect if we're drifting, or overcomplicating or similar (https://github.com/open-horizon-labs/superego).

While I still to figure out who watches the watchers, they're are pretty reliable given the constrained mandate they have, and the base model actually (usually) pays attention to the feedback.