MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throwaway2037 | 2026-01-21 20:28:15+00:00
> For starters it appears to be impossible to even trade in foreign bonds with traditional brokerage accounts in the United States (hosted by E-trade, Morgan Stanley, Charles Schwab, etc).

Try Interactive Brokers. They are US-based, but offer accounts in most other countries. (Insane list here: https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/accounts/open-account-...) I frequently recommend them here, so much so that I must look like a shill. I assure you that this is not a sponsored post! I have been a customer for 10+ years. I describe their service as institutional in breadth, but offered to retail customers. The number of international stocks markets, futures and options markets, and fixed income markets (all types of gov't and corporate bonds) is stunning. The numbers look similar to a Tier 1 investment bank, like Morgan Stanley, could offer their institutional clients. It is unmatched for non-institutional (retail) traders in my experience. It also has crazy low fees and is wildly transparent about them. To me, the only negative point is the website is a bit slow and feels about 5 years out of date, but that's not a deal breaker for me. I can trade all equities on the website, and the more complex things (like bonds or futures) I trade using their (I assume white-labeled) Java trading app that is cross-platform.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-21 20:28:38+00:00
> It would be easier to just ignore the regulation.

Well, in your case, completely ignoring something rather than doing it later sounds like it would be more stressful for you, if the problem is not complying? I'm don't think wanting to comply with regulation makes you "not well predisposed to do business in EU" and I'm not sure where you get that from.
by WorldMaker | 2026-01-21 20:29:10+00:00
These days the out-of-the-box automod and autospam prevention tools in Discord are generally good enough you probably don't need third party bots to do it (unless the community gets particularly huge, and even then maybe not). Most bots are now for entertainment more than community management when the Discord is configured right.

The biggest trick to getting access to most of those built-in features is that it needs to be marked as a "Community Server" [1], so expect to put in the effort to meeting those requirements and getting Discord certified on them. Most of them are good practices in general, especially for something you are trying to present as a public, professional face of your company.

Also, I don't think any moderation tools are currently gated behind Server Boosts/Levels, but it may also be worth budgeting for buying a Server Level or two [2]. Most of the reasons to budget for that are marketing and comfort. If you plan to do things like Live Q&A or screensharing events, having the better audio/video capabilities of higher levels can be useful. The custom header for Discord Invites is often a marketing tool to help assuage users seeing the invites that it is indeed the right official community. (Some of the moderation tools were previewed at higher Server Levels, and it does seem like something Discord takes into account when testing various new, desirable features.)

(ETA: Also, automoderation only gets you so far in general, you may still want to budget for the labor of real moderators as well, no matter how good you think you can configure the automod tools.)

[1] https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360047132851-E...

[2] https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360039337992-S...
by red-iron-pine | 2026-01-21 20:29:23+00:00
they'll either win, and become a local or regional power, or else they'll die off / get absorbed.

but that may take weeks / months / years and they can kill you and your fam and everyone else in 100km long before.

one of the conceits of nuclear bunkers was that there would be a lot of walking wounded and a lot of starving, crazy people for 6-12 weeks after the bombs go, on top of waiting for the worst of the radiation to dissipate. yeah those folks would die off but it's gonna be an ugly couple of months till then...
by 1970-01-01 | 2026-01-21 20:29:45+00:00
>Human cartilage samples taken from knee replacement surgeries also responded positively. These samples included both the supportive extracellular matrix of the joint and cartilage-producing chondrocyte cells. When treated, the tissue began forming new, functional cartilage.

Once again, not in humans, in mice. We don't know if the same result happens in humans. At all. We need to proceed to clinical trials to determine if a result is indeed positive.
by mindslight | 2026-01-21 20:29:48+00:00
The idea that Congress deadlocking is somehow a feature is a relic of the Republican party's destructionist agenda of the past four decades. In reality, this dynamic is what caused so much power to accrue to federal agencies, which they then proceeded to bemoan and go to work tearing down as well. Their goals were kind of understandable when they represented US business interests, but it seems as of late they're under new foreign ownership.
by rickydroll | 2026-01-21 20:30:05+00:00
I can't disagree with your AI doomerism perspective. I firmly believe that AI companies should buy one copy of whatever work they use for training. While this won't provide the never-ending royalty stream on copyrighted material that corporations strive for, it would foster the mindset that AI companies must pay society in some way. And I truly think that if AI companies are going to train on all the knowledge in the world, their profits should go back to everyone in the world. i.e., LLM models are a public good.

I have an almost unshakable conviction that LLM-type AI systems should become a repository of all human knowledge. When LLMs give you an answer, you should be able to ask, what are the sources behind your answer? People won't do this, but curious, wanting-to-learn people will. Which leads to one of the important questions. How do you keep people curious?
by m4nu3l | 2026-01-21 20:30:51+00:00
There is a problem with this comparison. The agent had access to open-source browsers in its training set.
So you'd need to compare the cost of creating an equivalent browser for a developer who has access to them, too.
If all you need is standard browser functionality, you just use an existing browser.
If you want to change some features or parts of the implementation, you fork it.
A new browser written from scratch would be valuable if it had a novel implementation that resulted in a faster/more secure/robust/memory efficient or simply easier-to-use browser.
So even if this had implemented the standard correctly, it wouldn't be worth more than the time it takes a developer to fork Chromium and change its name.
Don't get me wrong, it's impressive, but not as impressive after you think that an LLM that regurgitates verbatim the code of Chromium when tasked to build a browser would have effectively succeeded at the task.

EDIT: About the rendering speed. It doesn't really make sense to compare it with a fully functioning browser, as you could potentially drop features or make bogus optimisations to go faster.
by kalkin | 2026-01-21 20:30:52+00:00
That two things can or should be discussed independently doesn't mean either is unimportant. And insisting that you know what I meant better than I do is not a good way to have a productive conversation.

As for the Doctorow article, I don't understand exactly what you're trying to say about "focus", but it's incoherent to read the discussion about replacement of your current job as talking purely about the present - since the job is currently yours, the replacement must happen in the future.
by kalkin | 2026-01-21 20:31:48+00:00
> I'm not convinced he's trying to make the point you think he is

What point do you think he's trying to make?

(TBH, before confidently accusing people of "delusion" or "grift" I would like to have a better argument than a sequence of 4-6 word sentences which each restate my conclusion with slightly variant phrasing. But clarifying our understanding of what Schwitzgebel is arguing might be a more productive direction.)
by grayhatter | 2026-01-21 20:31:49+00:00
> We are paid to solve business problems and make money.

> People who enjoy writing code can still do so, just not on a business context if there's a more optimal way

Do you mean optimal, or expedient?

I hate working with people who's ideas of solving problems is punting it down the road for the next person to deal with. While I do see people do this kinda thing often, I refuse to be someone who claims credit for "fixing" some problem knowing I'm only creating a worse, or different problem for the next guy. If you're working on problems that require collaboration, creating more problems for the next guy is unlikely to give you an optimal output; because soon no one will willingly work with you. It's possible to fix business problems, and maintain your ethics, it's just feels easier to abandon them.
by lbhdc | 2026-01-21 20:33:11+00:00
Hell yeah! I have been looking for something like this.

On the home page when I search for something like `Southeast` it shows 0 shops, but if I actually select it I get 223. This was confusing and made me unsure of how many relevant hits I would find.

It would be really nice if you could search in smaller geographic areas. State boundaries would be really nice to start. As you continue having city / intra-state regions would also be huge for the cases where you want to go in person to these places.
by rnhmjoj | 2026-01-21 20:33:13+00:00
Well, delegated IPv6 prefixes are supposed[1] to be static or somewhat persistent, but some ISPs do this, yes. This is most likely a practice carried over from IPv4 where there is a small pool of addresses. Fortunately in my experience it's not too common: most ISPs that deployed IPv6 did it the right way.

Anyway, to get persistent addresses you can set up a ULA prefix (the equivalent of RFC 1918 addresses) and a simple prefix translation[3]. This is a form of NAT, but unlike the usual IPv4 NAT (actually NAPT) it doesn't deal with ports, so it's slightly less annoying problematic. There also are a few more techniques, like using mDNS and writing firewall rules that match the suffix of the client addresses, but not many CPE allows for this.

[1]: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690/#53-why-pers...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_local_address

[3]: https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/ipv6/ipv6.nat6
by Denatonium | 2026-01-21 20:33:56+00:00
In the case of T-Mobile, unsolicited inbound IPv6 connections are blocked, but direct P2P is still possible. I successfully established a WireGuard tunnel over IPv6 between 2 phones. With IPv6, since the internal addresses and ports and the same end-to-end, all that is needed is a dynamic DNS service; STUN isn't necessary. I did need to set a persistent keepalive of 25 seconds on both sides of the tunnel to keep the firewall holes open.

Interestingly, Verizon Wireless blocks connections to other Verizon Wireless IPv6 addresses. T-Mobile-to-T-Mobile connections work, Verizon-to-T-Mobile connections work, but Verizon-to-Verizon connections do not work. Given the way Verizon's network has stagnated while T-Mobile's network has been rapidly improving, it may be time to move away from Verizon.

Slightly off-topic, but if you have a modern Google Pixel phone, Google includes "free" VPN service (which probably collects/sells your data). This service uses Endpoint-Independent filtering, so if you send an outbound packet with the source port you want to map, regardless of the destination IP/port, you can effectively receive unsolicited inbound connections from any host on the internet that contacts your IP:port, so long as you send a periodic keepalive packet from the source port you are using to anywhere.
by Foxboron | 2026-01-21 20:34:16+00:00
> The TPM has nothing remotely resembling per-user PCRs.

The system could extend one of the PCRs, or an NVPCR, with some unique user credential locked to the user directory. Then you can't recreate the PCR records in any immediate way.

But you can't just recreate a key under one of the hierarchies anyway. You still need to posses the keyfile.
by p0pularopinion | 2026-01-21 20:34:24+00:00
> Certainly no one wants any of this. Yet somehow the rules pile up.

Haha. May I introduce you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Reform_Movement

German precision was not only about engineering, it has always also been about having a precisely defined bureaucratic process for everything.

Also, people never explicitly say they do want more bureaucracy. More often, the bureaucracy is more often a result of what people don't want to. They may want more roads, but they don't want them near *their* home, thus they fight for something to prevent construction there. They may want this subsidy, but they most certainly do not want person X to get it as well.
by fatbird | 2026-01-21 20:34:50+00:00
Yes, but that integration is turning into a vulnerability as Trump tries to leverage it for monetary or territorial gains. We won't retain the prosperity we built together by appeasing him. The prosperity is going away regardless. The choice for Canada is to keep our dignity or not.

Also, calling this a bad move presumes that the US isn't going to fall much, much further than it is now, which is seeming quite plausible. When your dance partner is heading for a cliff, you need to stop dancing with them.
by storus | 2026-01-21 20:35:08+00:00
Mint doesn't support latest hardware. I've just tried to install the very latest Mint released a few days ago on ASUS ProArt P16 with 5090 and it couldn't even boot the Mint installer, it just froze with the Mint logo on the screen. You typically need to wait up to 1 year to get the latest HW supported on Mint, sometimes it won't even fully support it like my previous Zephyrus G14 with a 4090 that never got e.g. display brightness control implemented.
by Zarathruster | 2026-01-21 20:35:32+00:00
As a programmer I'd be happy with an API, so I can keep working in the environment I'm accustomed to. Programmers can get very picky when it comes to their ergonomics, so it would be wise to let them handle this part.

This, however, would be a significant obstacle to non-programmers. You might consider offering an in-game editor similar to Scratch or BYOB for people who want to dip into programming. It'd be a fun way for them to learn
by ljm | 2026-01-21 20:35:41+00:00
Agreed - particularly because there is an example of a login box and the screenshot of that is far more prominent than the rest of the design.

I don't think the demo should overpower the landing page.

And then it goes straight into themes. If I'm a Rails developer I'm not looking at theming, I'm looking for a conventional UI system that fits into Rails - stimulus, Hotwire, all that.

As far as I know, this site so far is just a bunch of specialised scaffolds for certain use-cases, but Rails itself has been capable of that the entire time.
by tsimionescu | 2026-01-21 20:35:45+00:00
Sure, but the Internet will not route packets going to RFC1918 addresses. So, if you're using an RFC1918 address on the LAN side of the router like every sane admin, packets that actually arrive to the router from the Internet with an IP address other than the router's own IP address will get dropped. And those that arrive at the router with the router's own IP address and a port that doesn't correspond to either an open connection or an explicit port forwarding rule will also get refused.

This is all behavior that happens even with no firewall whatsoever.
by Nextgrid | 2026-01-21 20:36:09+00:00
> companies took on debt to fund bloated engineering teams because no one noticed the engineering was done

ZIRP allowed a lot of "businesses" to exist that wouldn't in a conventional, competitive capitalistic environment. Businesses in quotes because there was never any reasonable potential for profitability, but it didn't matter because VC money was cheap. Building a sustainable business is hard, playing "startup founder" and having that lifestyle subsidized by VCs is easier.

In that case, (over)engineering was part of the performance art that was required to keep your only revenue source: the next funding round. There was never any incentive to "finish" the product because doing that would put your business model (or lack thereof) to the test and stop the music. On the other hand, as long as cheap money is around you could endlessly "engineer" and pivot and bullshit around, chasing the next funding round and using that to pay yourself/your friends decent salaries.

During the ZIRP era it was all about "engagement" and DAUs/MAUs, then it was blockchain, and now it's all about AI. For those that have run out of grifts, they fold or "incredible journey" and get sold for pennies on the dollar to entities like Bending Spoons that do notice there are bloated engineering teams that can be cut.
by Closi | 2026-01-21 20:36:11+00:00
> What is so wrong with writing refills can be purchased on our website.

> Probably gonna share this story online more. I mean I didn't expect the situation to be this extremely bad.

Yes it's bad, although I want to emphasise that I have changed the details significantly here - it was something like this, but this was not the infraction because I don't want the company to be identifiable by anyone. I’m also not sure if my example is an actual policy violation - but it was in a similar vein.

To be honest, the surprising thing wasn’t the ban on a policy violation (because they had violated a policy), it was how automated the internals of Amazon were and how slow it was to overturn.
by ghm2199 | 2026-01-21 20:36:33+00:00
True. But the thing is if one says "We will make sure your site is in a world wide freely availabled index" which is kept fresh, google's monopoly ship already begins to take on water. Here is a appropriate line from a completely different domain of rare earth metals from The Economist on the chinese govt's weaponization of rare earths[1]:

> Reducing its share from 90% to 80% may not sound like much, but it would imply a doubling in size of alternative sources of supply, giving China’s customers far more room for manoeuvre.

[1] https://archive.ph/POkHZ#selection-1233.117-1233.302
by pfist | 2026-01-21 20:36:35+00:00
I am rooting for Kagi here, and I applaud their transparency on such matters. It is quite enlightening for someone like me who understands technology but knows little about the inner workings of search.

It remains to be seen how or if the remedies will be enforced, and, of course, how Google will choose to comply with them. I am not optimistic, but at least there is some hope.

As an aside: The 1998 white paper by Brin and Page is remarkable to read knowing what Google has become.
Show HN: Free AI trip planner that handles allergies,budgets and group consensus
by yetkinsal | 2026-01-21 20:36:38+00:00
Hi HN! I built Rondinello because trip planning was frustrating -
whether solo or with friends.

For solo: Tell it your pace, budget, allergies → get a
day-by-day itinerary with insider tips.

For groups: Everyone submits preferences, AI finds consensus
(handles conflicting budgets, dietary needs, kids, mobility).

Features:
- Constraint-first: Allergies, wheelchair access, stroller-friendly
- Real place data from Google Places API
- Partner deals for hotels, tours, transport
- Works for "tonight dinner" or 2-week trips

Tech: Next.js 14, Supabase, OpenAI GPT-5.2

Free, no account needed. Would love feedback!
by out_of_protocol | 2026-01-21 20:37:00+00:00
>Windows 7 was effectively just vista but enough time had passed that the required hardware to run it was easy to get a hold of.

Not really, Windows 7 had a lot of work poured into it, fixing Vista issues. Even first public betas of W7 were more polished than any of Windows 8..11 releases. That includes work on minimal amount of "noise" notifications, driver issues, speed, design etc
by giancarlostoro | 2026-01-21 20:37:05+00:00
My degree was not specifically CS, it was a related degree, the focus was on landing jobs, but they still covered some CS concepts because some students were in fact doing a CS degree. I was more focused on show me what I need to build things. I have never had to hand-craft any algorithm in my 15 years of coding, it just makes no sense to me. Someone else figured it out, I'm contempt understanding the algorithms.
by tick_tock_tick | 2026-01-21 20:37:10+00:00
> And no, wealth inequality is much higher in the US

Absolute numbers don't matter as I was saying the issues caused by wealth inequality such as housing crisis are much worse in the EU.

> We also have wayyy less violent crime

Fair but I will say ours is very concentrated to specific areas / demographics so the average person rarely has to deal with that.

> LGBTQ+ rights are way better covered here (with the exception of a couple countries that should really be booted out of the EU). Also really important for me.

So they are worse?

> Military equipment is something that we're now buying a lot from the US where prices are really high, and once we move that to European vendors we can get a lot more for the same money

That's a two decade plus plan that hasn't even started and is already running into issues. Doesn't help that the EU needs weapons now not in 20 years.

> And we don't need so much. I don't need or want a car, a big TV, daily takeaway coffees etc.

It's one thing not to want it's another to not to be able to have.
by kalkin | 2026-01-21 20:37:11+00:00
He talks pretty specifically about what he means by "the architectures many consciousness scientists associate with conscious systems" - Global Workspace theory, Higher Order theory and Integrated Information theory. This is on the second and third pages of the intro chapter.

You seem to be confusing the training task with the architecture. Next-token prediction is a task, which many architectures can do, including human brains (although we're worse at it than LLMs).

Note that some of the theories Schwitzgebel cites would, in his reading, require sensors and/or recurrence for consciousness, which a plain transformer doesn't have. But neither is hard to add in principle, and Anthropic like its competitors doesn't make public what architectural changes it might have made in the last few years.
by publicdebates | 2026-01-21 20:37:48+00:00
That last part is exactly why I charge $999/hour.

I'll offer a specific solution that takes me a week of full time work (14 hours each day -- I'm focused) for about $10k, which is roughly $150/hour if you want to calculate it that way, or another specific solution that takes me 3 weeks of 10 hour days for $15k which amounts to $100/hour. And like any good consultant, I'll eat the cost if I'm wrong. Other times I'll charge $40k when I know it will take a few months of dedicated work and I have to really lock in.

In practice, I never actually charge hourly. So the $999/hour is really Schrodinger's rate.
by Denatonium | 2026-01-21 20:38:02+00:00
I kind of doubt this, as the rapidly changing nature of mobile IP addresses would mean that a periodic outbound connection would still be necessary to keep the attack up-to-date on the compromised devices current IP address. At that point, you may as well have the compromised device periodically poll an attacker-controlled server for instructions rather than jump through a bunch of hoops by getting things to work over inbound connections.