MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by frabonacci | 2026-01-27 00:49:44+00:00
The author's differential testing (2.3M random battles) is great as final validation, but the real lesson here is that modular testing should happen during the port, not after.

1. Port tests first - they become your contract
2. Run unit tests per module before moving on - catches issues like the "two different move structures" early
3. Integration tests at boundaries before proceeding
4. E2e/differential testing as final validation

When you can't read the target language, your test suite is your only reliable feedback. The debugging time spent on integration issues would've been caught earlier with progressive testing.
by wellpast | 2026-01-27 00:49:49+00:00
> but the truth is that behind the volatility and public speculation, there has been a smooth, unyielding increase in AI’s cognitive capabilities.

> We are now at the point where AI models are … good enough at coding that some of the strongest engineers I’ve ever met are now handing over almost all their coding to AI.

Really?

All I’ve seen on HN the past few days are how slop prevails.

When I lean into agentic flows myself I’m at once amazed at how quickly it can prototype stuff but also how deficient and how much of a toy it all still seems.

What am I missing?
by frankhsu | 2026-01-27 00:50:48+00:00
Excellent idea. I thought this might be helpful to me, as I often need to switch between different SaaS products to view data.

I tried your AnyPanel, and although it lacked onboarding, I figured out how to use it after a few minutes.

My rough suggestion: Could you provide a faster way, such as using the npm/pnpm SDK, so I can send metrics data with just one line of code, like:

```import Sender from anypanel
`const sender = New Sender()
```sender.record( 'user', users )
```
by Guvante | 2026-01-27 00:50:55+00:00
Do you have six games you are actively playing? That is more than most. And 100gb is not an average to my understanding sure there are AAA games that go over that but it isn't like you need to swap between a bunch of those. (Also they tend to be set piece so not something you go back to)

Again I agree optimization is good just pointing out it tends to not impact people. "My default driver can only handle six full game downloads" isn't actually a blocker to most people playing a PS5.
by insane_dreamer | 2026-01-27 00:51:13+00:00
dang, first thank you for the moderation explanations

Besides those who flag political posts they don't agree with (which is a problem), I see a conflict in the comments between

those who think HN should be "politic-frei" because this is a "tech site" and "if I wanted to read about politics I'd go to reddit",

and those who agree this is a "tech/science/expand-curiosity-about-the-world site", and that's what makes HN a great community, but that it's sometimes, and especially recently, not possible to disentangle politics and tech. Musk/DOGE is a great example. No one asked Musk to drag politics into tech, and I wish I never had to read any articles about it and we could just talk about EVs and SpaceX, but he did, and so it's important to be able to talk about the impact which that has on tech, and on society, because this directly impacts us who are involved in tech/science. Tech/science does not exist in a vacuum.
by AndrewKemendo | 2026-01-27 00:51:14+00:00
> Should it always assume bad data or potentially bad data? If so, that seems like it would defeat the point of having data at all as you could never draw any conclusions from it.

Yes. You, and every other reasoning system, should always challenge the data and assume it’s biased at a minimum.

This is better described as “critical thinking” in its formal form.

You could also call it skepticism.

That impossibility of drawing conclusions assumes there’s a correct answer and is called the “problem of induction.” I promise you a machine is better at avoiding it than a human.

Many people freeze up or fail with too much data - put someone with no experience in front of 500 ppl to give a speech if you want to watch this live.
by philipwhiuk | 2026-01-27 00:51:21+00:00
Currently attempting to get GitLab Duo's review featured enabled as a 'second pair of eyes'. I agree 100% that it's not replacing a human review.

I would on the whole prefer a 'lint-style' tool to catch most stuff because they don't hallucinate.

But obviously they don't catch everything so an LLM-based review seems like an additional useful tool.
by behnamoh | 2026-01-27 00:51:28+00:00
Sorry, so basically you're saying there are two separate guidelines, one for Python and one for Rust, and you have the LLM write it first in Python and then Rust. But I still don't understand why it would be any better than writing the code in Rust in one go? Why "priming" it in Python would improve the result in any way?

Also, what happens when bug fixes are needed? Again first in Py and then in Rs?
by xp84 | 2026-01-27 00:52:58+00:00
I don't think I disagree with you at all. Older businesses that have a significant investment in Windows-based, non-web-based applications will keep on keeping on, and it would take a lot of degradation of the platform to convince them to "modernize" (scare quotes because I don't actually think shiny web-based everything is automatically better than native Windows apps built for a certain niche purpose).

That said, it's still a threat to Microsoft that no company founded today or in the last 5 years will have such a tight coupling to Windows on the Desktop, not even if the founding IT person is a big fan of Windows and deploys a Windows laptop to every desk. They may use Microsoft platforms, but things like Outlook, SharePoint and the tools a new company would subscribe to are perfectly usable on the Web for a large group of non-software-developer users. If one optimistically predicts that Apple sorts their stuff out, the Mac provides a non-web alternative to worry about too (as long as you don't need Excel to perform worth a damn!)

Note: I deliberately drew a distinction with "on the Desktop" as I feel like things like Outlook, SharePoint, and especially Azure and what used to be called Active Directory, those things are still both popular and very sticky (hard to "just" migrate off of) even with brand new businesses. I suppose this is how Microsoft has hedged, since they could lose the desktop OS market and still do all right if they can keep businesses using those products. A Microsoft without Desktop Windows, looks to me kind of like Oracle.
by subscribed | 2026-01-27 00:53:07+00:00
I have. Also windows 98, Me (I loved it), NT 4.0, 2000, 2003 (as a workstation), XP, 7, (loved 7; skipped Vista, skipped 8), windows 10 is my last one.

I really really liked windows 95. It rarely crashed on me even though I used and abused it extensively. It lived running smoothly, tolerated tinkering and uni files shenanigans.

The i loved 7. To me it was a pinnacle. All comfort, no crap. Win 10 was less convenient (even if safer), and it was a constant struggle with the subversive, hostile vendor.

Windows 95 is closer to the ideal, I agree with GP, although to me the closest is Windows 7 tbh.
by socketcluster | 2026-01-27 00:53:09+00:00
This conclusion is completely off the mark. Author seems to lack a critical piece of understanding of software development and operations. The case against no-code might make sense (UI being a hurdle for AI use), but does not apply to low-code.

Low-code has become especially important now with LLMs for several reasons, especially in terms of stability, maintainability, security and scalability.

If the same feature can be implemented with less code, the stability of the software improves significantly. LLMs work much better with solid abstractions; they are not great at coding the whole thing from scratch.

More code per feature costs more in terms of token count, is more error-prone, takes more time to generate, is less scalable, more brittle, harder to maintain, harder to audit... These are major negatives to avoid when working with LLMs... So I don't understand how author reached the conclusion that they reached.
by stephenr | 2026-01-27 00:53:47+00:00
I think you'll find it's not so much about how likely the event is (stalking vs theft) as it is about the potential impact of the event.

The things you want to "protect" with an invisible AirTag are, at their core "just stuff".

The things being protected by not selling an invisible AirTag are, at their core "people".
by bdangubic | 2026-01-27 00:54:17+00:00
This type of comments get downvoted the most on HN but it is absolute truth, most human-written code is “subpar” (trying to be nice and not say garbage). I have been working as a contractor for many years and code I’ve seen is just… hard to put it into words.

so much discussion here on HN which critiques “vibe codes” etc implies that human would have written it better which is vast vast majority is simple not the case
by culi | 2026-01-27 00:54:30+00:00
Yes it's very short.

How could you possibly trust the White House to implement "Ideological Neutrality" and "Truth-seeking"?

Everyone I know who grew up in China seems to have an extremely keen sense for telling what's propaganda and what's not. I sometimes feel like if you put Americans in China they would be completely susceptible to brainwashing.

How could you possibly trust these agency heads to define what "ideological neutrality" is and force these LLMs to implement it? Even if you DO completely trust them, it's still explicit speech control
by gcanyon | 2026-01-27 00:54:35+00:00
> The invention of the "airplane" is just a simplified term for "controlled and sustained powered flight"

Maybe? But most people think of it as "invented the airplane," and the two terms have different connotations in common use. Likewise, the title here says "television," not "real-time capture, transmission, and display of moving images" -- and similarly, I think the terms have different connotations.
by notatoad | 2026-01-27 00:55:24+00:00
i thought so too, but in practice i've been getting much better battery life from the official airtag on my keychain, than i do from the "atuvos" trackers that see much less use. high-precision UWB finding and half as many coin cells used makes the airtag an easy choice over the cheaper trackers for me.

the card-shaped one i've got in my wallet isn't going to be replaced by an official airtag any time soon though, that form factor is too nice.
by techblueberry | 2026-01-27 00:56:41+00:00
It is very weird to wonder, what if they're all wrong. Sam Bankman-Fried was clearly as committed to these ideas, and crashed his company into the ground.

But clearly if out of context someone said something like this:

"Clearly, the most obvious effect will be to greatly increase economic growth. The pace of advances in scientific research, biomedical innovation, manufacturing, supply chains, the efficiency of the financial system, and much more are almost guaranteed to lead to a much faster rate of economic growth. In Machines of Loving Grace, I suggest that a 10–20% sustained annual GDP growth rate may be possible."

I'd say that they were a snake oil salesman.
by subscribed | 2026-01-27 00:56:48+00:00
I'm anxiously waiting for a slightly better Nvidia support. It'll either be Bazzite or CachyOS, it seems.

Id rather have something mainstream, like Fedora i dislike but know its daemons better, but tough luck, it seem.

Still, it's so fragmented. If I want a server, I have two families to chose from and two exactly solid choices. I'd I want a desktop for work - 2-4 solid choices.

But desktop for gaming? Well, it's where "well, it depends" starts.
by 999900000999 | 2026-01-27 00:58:08+00:00
Ok.

I'm imagining something like.

"Hi Ralph, I've already coded a function called GetWeather in JS, it returns weather data in JSON can you build a UI around it. Adjust the UI overtime"

At runtime modify the application with improvements, say all of a sudden we're getting air quality data in the JSON tool, the Ralph loop will notice, and update the application.

The Arxiv paper is cool, but I don't think I can realistically build this solo. It's more of a project for a full team.
by sbpayne | 2026-01-27 00:59:12+00:00
This has been one of my favorite frameworks to use for AI development. I feel like it is pretty dead-simple to use. But also has a great quality: it gets the f** out of your way when you need it to. I feel like with a fast moving layer beneath it (ie ai providers), I need to be able to adopt and experiment with new features from the providers, without having to wait for your library to update.

I think the api generally is great taste. Having typed functions as the core abstraction (which shares some similarity with Dspy Signatures) was a great move.

Congrats on the launch, can't wait to see the platform come together more and more.
by xp84 | 2026-01-27 00:59:12+00:00
You don't have to convince every Trump voter. The margin who swung from Biden to Trump and elected Trump aren't all those things. They just don't want what the Dems were selling in 2024, specifically: the dems' adopted ideology surrounding gender, plus using race and gender to pick who gets jobs and into schools, rather than merit. If they removed just those two planks from the DNC platform, (1) Harris would have never been nominated, and (2) Trump couldn't have won.
by shagie | 2026-01-27 00:59:34+00:00
In C++, the code would look like:

#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>

std::vector<int> someCall()
{
return {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10};
}

void printEvens(const std::vector<int>& nums)
{
std::ranges::for_each(nums, [](int n)
{
if (n % 2 == 0)
{
std::cout << n << '\n';
}
});
}

int main()
{
std::vector<int> data = someCall();
std::vector<int> tmp;

std::ranges::copy_if(data,
std::back_inserter(tmp),
[](int n) { return n % 2 == 0; }
);

printEvens(tmp);
return 0;
}

---

Nothing in there is wrong. There is no test that would fail short of going through the hassle of creating a new type that does some sort of introspection of its call stack to verify which function its being called in.

Likewise, identify if a linter or other static analysis tool could catch this issue.

Yes, this is a contrived example and it likely isn't idiomatic C++ (C++ isn't my 'native' language). The actual code in Java was more complex and had a lot more going on in other parts of the files. However, it should serve to show that there isn't a test for printEvens or someCall that would fail because it was filtered twice. Additionally, it should show that a linter or other static analysis wouldn't catch the problem (I would be rather impressed with one that did).

From ChatGPT a code review of the code: https://chatgpt.com/share/69780ce6-03e0-8011-a488-e9f3f8173f...
by akst | 2026-01-27 00:59:51+00:00
I think their point was the meaning of multi-words isn't the result of structure or word order, such as many idioms for example aren't interpreted literally or their grammar isn't too important.

But this is also academia they want to have evidence behind claims even if they feel intuitive. Like in the social sciences you'll have models and theories that are largely true in a lot of cases, but fail to explain variance from the models. The constructivist and whatever stuff sounds like one of those larger models and they are pointing out where it falls short, not to entirely invalidate it but to show the model has limitations.

I have a feeling the authors are well aware they aren't the first people to consider this, but they did leg work to provide some empirical evidence about the claim. Which is something you want to have in challenging the orthodoxy of a field. Entirely possible they're working on a larger piece of work but they're being asked to demonstrate this fact which this larger piece of work rests on. But I'm largely speculating there.

> On top of that, the authors seem to think that any evidence for the importance of linear sequencing is somehow evidence against the existence of hierarchical structure

The way I see it if you can demonstrate comprehension in the absence of this structure, I think you can make the case that it is optional and therefore may not rely on it. Which is a different claim from it benefits in no way whatsoever.

My view is when a language depends a lot on complex grammar what's happening is its trying resolve ambiguity, but languages can address this problem a number of ways. In languages like Russian they handle more of this ambiguity in inflection (and many non-English indo-european languages), in tonal languages to some extent tone creates a greater possible combination of sounds which could provide other ways of resolving ambiguity. That's my guess at least, I also accept I have no idea what I'm talking about here.
by greenavocado | 2026-01-27 01:00:05+00:00
Canada's economy is dominated by a few big companies because the government makes too many rules. It costs too much to start a business here. In politics, only two parties really matter. This creates a closed system where big players stay big and new competition is crushed by red tape. Regulatory frameworks impose prohibitive compliance costs, favoring established incumbents over startups. Key sectors like banking, telecom, and aviation function as protected triopolies. Political power remains centralized between two parties with overlapping establishment interests. These structural barriers effectively suffocate competition and exclude new market entrants.
by komali2 | 2026-01-27 01:00:08+00:00
> You really think that the majority of taggers are thinking this deep?

Nope, not something I thought up at all, this is what I discovered after talking to a lot of taggers and street artists as a result of my photography obsession leading me into the skater scene. I used to think tagging was just gangs marking territory (in reality only a small portion of it is).

What I have noticed is that a certain class of people have formed an immutable idea of taggers, skaters, and street artists, and that idea includes that for whatever reason all these sorts of folks are stupid. I've found that to be not the case at all.
by MattGrommes | 2026-01-27 01:00:11+00:00
In blacksmithing there's the concept of an "anvil shaped object". That is, something that looks like an anvil but is hollow or made of ceramic or something. It might stand up to tapping on for making jewelry or something but should never be worked like a real anvil for fear of hurting someone or wrecking the thing you're working on when it breaks.

I feel like a lot of the AI articles and experiments like this one are producing "app shaped objects" that look okay for making content (and indeed are fine for making earrings) but fall apart when pounded on by the real world.
by throwerxyz | 2026-01-27 01:00:45+00:00
Imagine voting for a party that wants to build more housing to solve the housing problem.

Now imagine the people who don't want more housing (for some reason) end up burning all new houses being built in a state.

Now imagine crying about how the people who want the houses to be built to solve the problem are still wanting more houses to be built.

Turns out it's harder to solve a housing problem when the houses keep getting burnt down. Who'd have thunk?
by steve_adams_86 | 2026-01-27 01:01:44+00:00
It's actually remarkable how difficult it's made. My only experience is here in BC. In a couple of years I've learned that it's practically punitive, and you have to want to do it really badly. The risk to reward ration is abysmal. I only continue because it's more of a passion project than an economically viable, sensible project. It could become one eventually, but my god, I'd hate to be doing this without a full time job to depend on.
Show HN: Runo – A metronome app that helps you hold any running pace
by pipeabello | 2026-01-27 01:02:11+00:00
I built Runo after years of inconsistent marathon training. GPS watches tell you your pace AFTER it's too late. So I made a simple metronome that plays a beat at your target cadence (steps per minute).

New in 2.0: Apple Watch haptics (run to the beat without headphones), Strava sync, and social features.

4.7 on App Store, 10k+ runners. Would love feedback from the HN community.
by ineedasername | 2026-01-27 01:02:20+00:00
I know, seems a bit silly right? But go with me for a moment. First, I'm assuming you get the duck reference? If not, it's probably a cultural difference, but in US English, "If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck..." is basically saying "well, treat it like a duck". or "it's a duck". Usage varies, metaphors are fluid, so it goes. I figured even if this idiom wasn't shared, the meaning still wouldn't be lost.

That aside, why? Because the normal rhetorical sticks don't really work in conversation, and definitely not short bits like comments here on HN, when it comes to asking a person to consider a different point of view. So, I try to go in a little sideways, slightly different approach in terms of comparisons or metaphors-- okay, lots of time more than slightly different-- and lots of times? more meaningful conversation and exchanges come from it than the standard form because, to respond at all, its difficult to respond in quite the same pat formulaic dismissal that is the common reflex-- mine included-- I'm not claiming perfection, only attempts at doing better.

Results vary, but I've had more good discussions come of it than bad, and heard much better and more eye-opening-- for me-- explanations of peoples' points of view when engaging in a way that is both genuine and novel. And on the more analytical end of things, this general approach, when teaching logic & analysis? It's not my full time profession, and I haven't taught in a while, but I've forced a few hundred college students to sit through my style of speechifying and rhetoricalizing, and they seem to learn better and give better answers if I don't get too mechanical and use the same form and syntax, words and phrases and idioms they've always heard.
by jasonfarnon | 2026-01-27 01:02:22+00:00
Do modern hdd's last as long as the old platter ones? For me, when the SSDs fail it's frustrating because I can't open it up and do anything about it--it's a complete loss. So I tend to have a low opinion of their reliability (same issue I have with old versus new electronic-everything cars). I don't know the actual lifetimes. Surely USB sticks are universally recognized as pretty crappy. I can leave those in the same location plugged in and they'll randomly die after a couple of years.
by condiment | 2026-01-27 01:02:30+00:00
100% of my LLM projects are written in Rust - and I have never personally written a single line of Rust. Compilation alone eliminates a number of 'category errors' with software - syntax, variable declaration, types, etc. It's why I've used Go for the majority of projects I've started the past ten years. But with Rust there is a second layer of guarantees that come from its design, around things like concurrency, nil pointers, data races, memory safety, and more.

The fewer category errors a language or framework introduces, the more successful LLMs will be at interacting with it. Developers enjoy freedom and many ways to solve problems, but LLMs thrive in the presence of constraints. Frontiers here will be extensions of Rust or C-compatible languages that solve whole categories of issue through tedious language features, and especially build/deploy software that yields verifiable output and eliminates choice from the LLMs.
by abdullahkhalids | 2026-01-27 01:02:36+00:00
The core of a microscope are the lenses. For this, you are required to buy three different ones [1]. One of these can be acquired from Thorlabs for 65 USD [2].

How difficult would it be to build lenses of this quality "at home"?

[1] https://build.openflexure.org/openflexure-microscope/v7.0.0-...

[2] https://www.thorlabs.com/item/AC127-050-A