MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rootusrootus | 2026-01-13 01:01:42+00:00
It does seem like there is a point -- and running out of water would be up there near that point, in addition to a collapse of the economy, where people get motivated to make change happen even at the risk to their own lives. I mean, you are going to die anyway, right?

I say that from the luxury of my very safe keyboard, of course. I hope your family is staying as safe as possible. Can't imagine the stress (I get tangled up enough in our own US gov't shenanigans and that pales in comparison to Iran right now).
by troad | 2026-01-13 01:01:44+00:00
> I have used JS before TS entered the scene, and being able to transpile features/syntax like that is not a TS innovation, nor only available in TS.

I used JS back in the 1990s. Transpiling to JS is a relatively new phenomenon.

No one said transpiling is a TS innovation, nor that it is unique to TS.

> That's why flagging that as something "you get for free, since you added a compiler anyways" feels dishonest. Ultimately it's true, but if that's what you're out after, then adding TS to your project is going way above and beyond just "transpiling new syntax to old syntax".

That's silly. Transpiling is something TS can do, so it's not dishonest to advertise it as something TS can do. If you think TS is too hefty, don't use it. But don't be toxic towards those that do.

You're moving the goalposts to try and defend a bad take. That's how you get brownie points on the Internet for extreme takes, but also how you prevent yourself from learning and growing in the long run. Learn to take an L. You'll be better for it.
by acdha | 2026-01-13 01:01:54+00:00
It’s conditional immunity: the Roberts court is openly an instrument of Republican power, but they knew there was a good chance that the Democrats would win an election and so the ruling was carefully crafted to allow them to pick the opposite outcome if a Democrat were accused of abuse of power.

You can see a similar play at work with the unprecedented use of the shadow docket to prevent lower courts from restraining the executive branch without having to take credit for positions which are highly dubious from a constitutional standpoint. If the political tides shift, they can quietly unblock the lower court’s ruling and pretend they hadn’t deliberately given this administration a window of opportunity without creating a permanent precedent empowering a future Democratic administration.
by mintflow | 2026-01-13 01:02:00+00:00
I like this idea but really do not want to share my personal data to cloud based LLM vendors.

I have a folder which is controlled by Git, the folder contains various markdown files as my personal knowledge base and work planning files (It's a long story that I have gradually migrate from EverNote->OneNote->Obsidian->plain markdown files + Git), last time I tried to wire a Local LLM API(using LMStudio) to claude code/open code, and use the agent to analyze some documents, but the result is not quite good, either can't find the files or answer quality is bad.
by autoexec | 2026-01-13 01:02:03+00:00
Machine learning and data science are not new things in science. It's great that we have the ability to share and work with existing data sets, collect data remotely with sensors, and build software to create models, but we'll always need people to go out and collect updated data, place censors and verify that what models predict is actually happening.

> Scientists who run long-term ecological studies, in particular, report that they struggle to find funding.

It's cheaper and easier to do stuff sitting at a desk. In theory that's a good thing if it means more work gets done, but field work has to happen too. For many people it's the best part of the job, for others it's a pain that has to be suffered through to get the data they need. Hopefully there's room (and funding) for both kinds of people to do the work they want.
by holman | 2026-01-13 01:02:43+00:00
404s were designed for performance, as OP says here, but also to be as simple as possible.

Part of the difficulty was info leakage; early on there was a lot of concern that a 403 would imply the existence of a repo that the org might otherwise not want known publicly. This was a little trickier in practice, really: early versions of the page took slightly different pathways as it went through auth, so based on the duration of the page to render you could make some assumptions about whether the underlying repo existed or not. It was annoying to sort out, so it wasn't touched very often.

Certainly a lot could have been done with 404s over the years; they've only gotten worse. I put ultrathin font weights on the error pages move than a decade ago, when they were en vogue, and it kills me every time to see them still there. And, of course, the parallax effect has been removed, so now it's just sort of a dorky Star Wars or Looney Tunes reference without a lot behind it. Weird.
by ekr____ | 2026-01-13 01:05:41+00:00
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here.

The Google system is tied to a mobile driver's license, and there is an identity check at enrollment that is intended to tie the credential to the device. It's true that if you give someone access to your phone without erasing it, then they can potentially use this mechanism to circumvent age assurance. This is true for a number of other age assurance mechanisms (e.g., credit card-based validation).

In any case, I'm not really interested in getting into an argument with you about the level of assurance provided by this system and whether it's "trivial to abuse" or not. I was merely describing the way the system worked in case people were interested.
by zahlman | 2026-01-13 01:05:58+00:00
I'm happy to put my real account behind the following, because it's simply objective. I'm not here to call people names or use political invective.

I've seen multiple videos. It's very clear that:

* The officer was unambiguously struck, and unambiguously in front of the vehicle when struck (as evidenced by the bullet hole through the front windshield). This can be discerned even from the footage where that officer is hidden behind the other one trying to speak through the driver's side window.

* It is the car that aligns so that the officer is in its path, not the officer that takes any extraordinary action at that point. But it seems that the woman is being arrested anyway.

* The shooting victim was being encouraged to "drive, baby, drive" (audio that I'm told has been ducked or skipped over in some mainstream media coverage) by her partner who was also acting belligerently with officers; while it appears that her intent was to flee the scene, she did so in a manner that clearly endangered the officer's life. She was not free to go and she accelerated into the officer.

* There is no plausible way that she or her partner could have mistaken the fact that they were dealing with legitimate LEOs.

* They came to protest not just from out of state, but from the far side of Iowa.

While hindsight might suggest that shooting the driver of a vehicle won't stop you from getting hit, the relevant objective legal standards aren't concerned with hindsight. When someone presents a serious threat to the life of an LEO, it is expected that the LEO responds with lethal force. That is precisely why they are armed.

(It's very nice of whoever to downvote this without comment. Everything I said is objectively verifiable and in accordance with black-letter law.)
by neilv | 2026-01-13 01:06:21+00:00
Thank you for pointing out that section. I wasn't aware of those storytelling compromises specifically, and some of them are annoying.

I said "drama" rather than "documentary" because I was sure there were storytelling compromises, but I agree with you that I think some of the compromises this section describes are not OK, when we're talking about real events and real people.

Knowing that the filmmakers made some choices that I think cross the line, I don't know whether I'd enjoy re-watching it, or just find the mistakes irritating to the point that I couldn't enjoy the rest of the film.

As the section goes on, it discusses some of the challenges (e.g., the need for composite characters), and some of the criticisms and dialogue around the filmmakers' choices.
by beepbooptheory | 2026-01-13 01:06:32+00:00
Sure, but what does this mean? Like ok we know not to solely cater to the youth vote, great. That wouldn't imply to me then that the correct thing to do instead is alienate or anger that same vote, right? Shouldn't we see nominees that cater to all of them, or a lot of them at least? Or, what's wrong with wanting that?

We do not need to start from the point of view that each given interest or group is totally opposed, that we are locked in some zero-sum death spiral where "the youth vote" shares absolutely no overlap with anybody else. Politics is possible at all because we believe in something else. You could decompose everything down into a list of people to blame with stuff like this, but it won't tell you what to actually do!
by DrewADesign | 2026-01-13 01:06:44+00:00
Yeah… there’s this “bro— do you even business?” vibe in the tech world right now pointed at any tech firm not burning oil tankers full of cash (and oil, for that matter,) training a giant model. That money isn’t free — the economic consequences of burning billions to make a product that will be several steps behind, at best, are giant. There’s a very real chance these companies won’t recoup that money if their product isn’t attractive to hoards of users willing to pay more money for AI than anyone currently is. It doesn’t even make them look cool to regular people — their customers hate hearing about AI. Since there are viable third party options available, I think Apple would have to be out of their goddamned minds to try and jump in that race right now. They’re a product company. Nobody is going to not buy an iPhone because they’re using a third-party model.
by Terretta | 2026-01-13 01:06:50+00:00
Sure does.

I imagine a combination of stop loss and market share. If larger shops use up compute, you can't capture as many customers by headcount.

// There was a figure around o3, an astonishing model punching far above the weights (ahem) of models that came after, that suggested the thinkiest mode cost on the order of $3500 to do a deep research. Perhaps OpenAI can afford that, while Anthropic can't.
by ekr____ | 2026-01-13 01:07:28+00:00
The problem with this specific design is that it reveals your identity to the site, which is obviously undesirable from a privacy perspective.

For those who are interested one of my recent newsletter posts goes into a fair amount of detail about the various technical options here for using digital IDs in this context: https://educatedguesswork.org/posts/age-verification-id/
by dadoomer | 2026-01-13 01:08:33+00:00
This has great UX, congrats!

There's quite a few jazz things that are missing. E.g., altered and bebop scales, 7#9 and 7b9 chords. Plus, for any given chord, there are a lot of voicings (drop 2, rootless, etc.).

This suite could be a really cool resource for new/intermediate jazz guitarists if you add some of the jazz stuff in. Any decent jazz guitar book could give you the most used scales and chord voicings.

Since the UX is already quite good, maybe if you open source it and if these things are easy to add, you could rely on the community to do so to some extent.
by Guestmodinfo | 2026-01-13 01:08:35+00:00
Please don't make me type my email password in your website so that if you get hacked then you take down along with you my email and possibly most other internet services and products related to me.
The dangers lurking far outweigh any benefit of at all.

You should subscribed to a compendium of newsletters that we users subscribe to and then let us choose with checkboxes, which newsletters are ours and the ones we wished to use your service. You could have a "request your newsletter here" field also on your website. That would be a sane profit making service.
by mickeypi | 2026-01-13 01:09:10+00:00
Yes, and this is a huge habit difference between Mac and Windows laptop users I know. Give a Windows user a Mac and they will habitually try to use scrollbars with their fingers. Mac users just don’t have that habit and they find it strange. The reflective MacBook screens also look awful with the slightest smudge so that enforces the “don’t touch” reflex for them, I think.
by windexh8er | 2026-01-13 01:09:16+00:00
Will is a true reviewer and one of the few, in the power space, worth even watching. He did a rare reaction video to some guy who gave all incorrect information for configuring a high voltage system [0] about 5 months ago which does an amazing job of showcasing his domain expertise.

Will does a great job distilling a ton of useful information without any sort of agenda. I've purchased his books simply to support him. I'm glad to have watched him go from his early days to a lot of success just by being himself and staying honest to his reviews. Brilliant young guy.

[0] https://youtu.be/0sktmbmaJqY?si=E1A9Lez83nAsVXAl
by WorldMaker | 2026-01-13 01:10:08+00:00
Not with that attitude.

Apple and Google have said that Private Cloud Compute will be involved as well, which Apple is trying to build a mystique of "on-device-like" trust. (Which yes, if Private Cloud Compute is involved and is secure in the ways that Apple says it is does presumably imply that the announced deal with Google includes selling Apple the complete model weights.)
by williamcotton | 2026-01-13 01:10:27+00:00
Hey, I was literally just writing up this example for a DSL I'm working on:

GET /:city/weather.svg
|> fetch("https://geocoding-api.open-meteo.com/v1/search?name=" + .params.city + "&count=10&language=en&format=json", {method: "GET"})
|> jq: `{
latitude: .data.response.results[0].latitude | tostring,
longitude: .data.response.results[0].longitude | tostring
}`
|> fetch("https://api.open-meteo.com/v1/forecast?latitude=" + .latitude + "&longitude=" + .longitude + "&hourly=temperature_2m", {method: "GET"})
|> jq: `
.data.response.hourly as $h |
[$h.time, $h.temperature_2m] | transpose | map({time: .[0], temp: .[1]})
`
|> gg({ "type": "svg", "width": 800, "height": 400} ): `
aes(x: time, y: temp)
| line()
| point()
`

Thanks for the service, I use it for demos all the time!
by perrygeo | 2026-01-13 01:10:30+00:00
LLMs tend to rise to the level of the complexity of the codebase. They are probabilistic pattern matching machines, after all. It's rare to have a 15 year old repo without significant complexity; is it possible that the reason LLMs have trouble with complex codebases is that the codebases are complex?

IMO it has nothing to do with LLMs. They just mirror the patterns they see - don't get upset when you don't like your own reflection! Software complexity is still bad. LLMs just shove it back in our face.

Implications: AI is always going to feel more effective on brand new codebases without any legacy weight. And less effective on "real" apps where the details matter.

The bias is strongly evident - you rarely hear anyone talking about how they vibe coded a coherent changeset to an existing repo.
by hookedonwinter | 2026-01-13 01:11:18+00:00
I don't! It doesn't access your email account at all. You choose what to forward, and you have a separate login to Hidden Signal (unless you reuse your password of course, but I can't stop that!)

Edit on your edit: That's a great idea! I'll look into that. But, I promise, I don't want access to your email. You just auto-forward via filter or manually forward to HiddenSignal, or use the forwarding email I give you and sign up for things that way. Easy peasy, no access to your email account.
by todaycompanies | 2026-01-13 01:11:46+00:00
Hey HN,
I recently launched YachtVest (hosted at yachtvaluereport.com) to bring financial rigor to an industry that is notoriously emotional and opaque: superyacht acquisitions.
Buying a vessel is often treated like buying a very expensive car, but financially, it behaves more like a complex depreciating asset with massive opex. I realized that while there are plenty of "Zillow for boats" listings sites, there wasn't a "Bloomberg Terminal" for analyzing the asset itself.
What it does:
Depreciation Modeling: We use historical data from ~15,000 sales to project value curves 5 years out.
True Cost of Ownership (TCO): A calculator that includes the stuff brokers often gloss over—slip fees, crew salaries, insurance, and fuel consumption curves.
Risk Detection: We use AI to scan owner forums and service bulletins to flag model-specific issues (e.g., "known hull delamination issues on 2019 models").
by burnt-resistor | 2026-01-13 01:12:25+00:00
Prefer a mouse or a trackpad, so .. maybe it's cool in a 00's way.

Also, Keychron keyboards are way too heavy. Like 1 Model M too heavy. And web-based only flash updating doesn't feel like real ownership. The upside is it's a model that allows exchanging switches. One thing I didn't appreciate was red key caps without black replacements without buying a whole set.
by the_af | 2026-01-13 01:12:36+00:00
> they didn’t build a timing loop onto the animation

Wow.

1984 (!!!) IBM PC (DOS) port of the game Alley Cat had timings built it. They actually used the system clock if I remember correctly, so it would always run at the correct pace no matter how fast the computer. Last I checked it, decades later, it still ran at the correct speed!

I guess some lessons don't get passed on?
by Liftyee | 2026-01-13 01:14:20+00:00
Very interesting project! My understanding is that the circuits are human-validated hard coded modular blocks - is this correct? I didn't fully catch how PCB routing and placement is done. I haven't yet seen a credible from-scratch AI schematic design tool (though, admittedly, most of my projects are a mix of repeatable modules and custom circuitry... It would help to have a "known working" setup.)
by zahlman | 2026-01-13 01:14:35+00:00
It's talked about plenty. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46547612 from just the other day got nearly 400 upvotes and 200 comments.

"including US citizens" is weasel wording here. ICE operates on reasonable suspicion, as they are legally entitled to do. Furthermore, they are federal LEO, and as such may arrest people they know to be US citizens if those citizens commit federal crimes.

This is all quite clear in the law, and even reported by left-wing sources in the same breath that they claim the footage contradicts things that I (from watching it myself) believe it reasonably supports (subjective rhetoric aside). In particular, the victim in the recent case was "blocking the path of an officer’s vehicle", which the SF Chronicle explicitly calls out as valid cause for such an arrest.

LEOs tend to shoot at those who resist arrest in a manner that endangers their lives. That endangerment is not required to be itself an attempt at murder.

The other thing I find interesting is that the officers were not masked in this case, contra the usual narrative.
by ehnto | 2026-01-13 01:15:18+00:00
I am a car enthusiast so don't think I'm off the deep end here, but I would definitely argue that people love their cars as a tool to work in the society we built with cars in mind. Most people aren't car enthusiasts, they're just driving to get to work, and if they could get to work for a $1 fare in 20 minutes on a clean, safe train they would probably do that instead.
by WorldMaker | 2026-01-13 01:15:37+00:00
This story says the custom model will run on-device and in Apple's Private Cloud Compute. The implication is that Google will not see the data. The "promise" of Private Cloud Compute is that Apple wants it to be trusted like "on-device".

Presumably cutting Google out of getting the data from this is part of why this story first was mentioned last year but is only now sounds close to happening. I think it's the same story/project.
by philipwhiuk | 2026-01-13 01:15:40+00:00
> Basic ideas are minimal privilege per task in a minimal and contained environment for everything and heavy control over all actions AI is performing.

The challenge is that no application on desktop is built around these privileges so there's no grant workflow.

Are you bytecode analysing the kernel syscalls an app makes before it runs? Or will it just panic-die when you deny one?
by TeMPOraL | 2026-01-13 01:15:47+00:00
That's not a bug, that's a feature. It's what makes the system general-purpose.

Data/control channel separation is an artificial construct induced mechanically (and holds only on paper, as long as you're operating within design envelope - because, again, reality doesn't recognize the distinction between "code" and "data"). If such separation is truly required, then general-purpose components like LLMs or people are indeed a bad choice, and should not be part of the system.

That's why I insist that anthropomorphising LLMs is actually a good idea, because it gives you better high-order intuition into them. Their failure modes are very similar to those of people (and for fundamentally the same reasons). If you think of a language model as tiny, gullible Person on a Chip, it becomes clear what components of an information system it can effectively substitute for. Mostly, that's the parts of systems done by humans. We have thousands of years of experience building systems from humans, or more recently, mixing humans and machines; it's time to start applying it, instead of pretending LLMs are just regular, narrow-domain computer programs.
by acdha | 2026-01-13 01:16:34+00:00
It’s not simple, though. Simple would be something like an object wrapping YYYY-MM-DD, like a COBOL programmer in the 1950s would’ve used. Instead, people have made thousands of variations of bugs around the complexity even basic usage forces you to internalize like the month number being zero-based while the year is 1900-based but the day of the month is 1-based following standard usage.
by eru | 2026-01-13 01:16:46+00:00
> I'm going to be the nerd that points out that it has not been mathematically proven that pi contains every substring, so the pifs might not work even in theory (besides being utterly impractical, of course).

Well, either your program 'works', or you will have discovered a major new insight about Pi.

> On a more serious note, as far as I understand these compression competitions require that static data is included in the size computation. So if you compress 1000 MB into 500 MB, but to decompress you need a 1 MB binary and a 100 MB initial dictionary, your score would be 500 + 100 + 1 = 601 MB, not 500 MB.

And that's the only way to do this fairly, if you are running a competition where you only have a single static corpus to compress.

It would be more interesting and would make the results more useful, if the texts to be compressed would be drawn from a wide probability distribution, and then we scored people on eg the average length. Then you wouldn't necessarily need to include the size of the compressor and decompressor in the score.

Of course, it would be utterly impractical to sample Gigabytes of new text each time you need to run the benchmark: humans are expensive writers. The only way this could work would be either to sample via an LLM, but that's somewhat circular and wouldn't measure what you actually want to measure in the benchmark, or you could try to keep the benchmark text secret, but that has its own problems.
by mistrial9 | 2026-01-13 01:16:54+00:00
The word dither -- evidently, the term dithering originally referred to a trembling or erratic movement, from the Middle English didderen, meaning "to tremble."

further, the halftone technique developed in the 1880s by Georg Meisenbach — breaking images into dots to simulate shades of gray — was called autotype, not dithering. The term dithering was later adopted in digital imaging and computing, particularly in the 1960s, when engineers applied the concept of adding noise to reduce color banding.