MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fsflover | 2026-01-26 20:50:47+00:00
Good call. It seems this is just one way to run it, https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Hybris. Another way is to run mainline kernel, which is currently supported by few devices, including Librem 5, Pinephone, Fairphone 2, OnePlus. It seems only the first two run with all FLOSS drivers and full support: https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices

You may stop getting updates for proprietary drivers whenever the vendor decides so. Also, not all features are supported due to the difficulty of reverse-engineering the drivers.
by exsomet | 2026-01-26 20:50:52+00:00
The two key differences to me are infrastructure and specificity of purpose.

Autoland in plane requires a set of expensive, complex, and highly fine-tuned equipment to be installed on every runway in the world that enables it (which as a proportion is statistically not a majority of them).

And as to specificity, this system does exactly one thing - land a specific model of plane on a specific runway equipped with instrumentation configured a specific way.

The point being: it isn’t a magic wand. Any serious conversation of AI in these types of life or death situations has to recognize that without the corresponding investment in infrastructure and specificity of purpose, things like this blog post are essentially just science fiction. The fact that previous generations of technology considered autoland and algorithmic trading to be magic doesn’t really change anything about that.
by dog4hire | 2026-01-26 20:50:59+00:00
Some people can write 1-3k lines of good code (incl. tests) in a day when everything is just right. We used to be called 10xers lol. The 1600LOC PR is legit if trust is there, it's really a single change unit, it's not just being thrown over a wall (should have a great PR description and clear, concise commit history).

I automatically block PRs with LLM-generated summaries, commit messages, documentation, etc.
by mtmail | 2026-01-26 20:51:56+00:00
Is there a URL? Do you have anything to show that people can test?

"If your work isn't ready for users to try out, please don't do a Show HN. Once it's ready, come back and do it then. Don't post landing pages or fundraisers." https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

As alternative it can be a normal submission or question ("Ask HN").
by apetresc | 2026-01-26 20:52:17+00:00
We say that a shell script "is trying to open this file". We say that a flaky integration "doesn't feel like working today". And these are all way less emotive-presenting interactions than a message that literally expresses excitement.

Yes, I know it's not conscious in the same way as a living biological thing is. Yes, we all know you know that too. Nobody is being fooled.
by justapassenger | 2026-01-26 20:52:24+00:00
> 2) The "Russia is weak" thing; it is vastly exaggerated because it is 4 years that we hear that "Russia is on the verge of collapse" but they still manage to handle a very high intensity war against the whole West almost alone.

It's nearly impossible to bankrupt huge country like Russia. Unless there's civil unrest (or west grows balls to throw enough of resources to move the needle), they can continue the war for decades.

What Russia is doing is each week borrowing more and more from the future and screwing up next generations on a huge scale by destroying it's non-military industrial base, isolating economy from the world and killing hundreds of thousands of young man who could've spent decades contributing to the economy/demographics.
by crazygringo | 2026-01-26 20:52:42+00:00
But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? In the places where greater control leads to less efficiency, what is the benefit of control?

This is a genuine question -- I really don't understand. I appreciate local tooling when it helps my long-term efficiency, even if there's a learning curve. But not if cloud seems like it will always be more efficient. And while there are LLM's you can run locally, it doesn't seem like the ones useful for coding, with their vast memory and GPU requirements, will be realistic or cost-effective to run locally in the foreseeable future.
by saurik | 2026-01-26 20:52:45+00:00
I don't think that's it, as we usually don't even have to update the kernel: when I get a new PC, my old software still boots and runs. The answer has to also provide some analogous note that, unlike new x86 hardware having an interest in still being able to run old versions of Windows, new Apple hardware (maybe... one must presume for the story to be consistent) must not really care about being able to boot old copies of macOS.
Ask HN: Any need for Monte Carlo in prediction markets?
by iamorlando | 2026-01-26 20:52:53+00:00
In general looking for a use case to a Monte Carlo solution I wrote. My hypothesis is crypto and prediction market tooling is not yet mature and there is a market for financial quant analytics with adaptations.
In the case of prediction markets, would it be helpful to see the world under consistent joint distribution? For example as a way to see relative value, quantify and aggregate exposures? My tool could provide tail risk for these questions.

I can understand there not being demand today, but it might still be useful as these markets make their way into cross asset portfolios where they will need to be seen under the traditional portfolio analytics lense.

Am I wrong about this? or any other uses I am not seeing>?

thank you!!
Show HN: Taxplain – AI Tax Guidance That Explains Your Situation
by smusham | 2026-01-26 20:53:24+00:00
I built Taxplain because existing tax software is great at form-filling but terrible at guidance. Most Americans don't understand why they owe what they owe or how to optimize their situation.

Taxplain uses AI to answer tax questions in plain English across complex scenarios: crypto gains, self-employment, AMT, business structures, state-specific rules. It's like having a tax advisor in your pocket, powered by verified IRS documentation and tax code.

The core insight: people don't want software—they want answers. We're targeting the DIY tax filer market that TurboTax underserves on guidance.

Currently in beta. Would love feedback on the approach, the UX, or whether this solves a real problem for you.

https://www.taxplain.xyz/
by zamadatix | 2026-01-26 20:53:26+00:00
I also have an Apple M4 MacBook Pro from Work and an HP ZBook G1a for my personal. I used to have an Asahi MacBook but switched over with the lack of M3/M4 support. Some extra compare/contrast:

- The build quality of each are excellent. The touchpad on the G1a is probably the closest to a MacBook touchpad I've seen and it even manages to boast an OLED screen. On the other hand, the G1a is only available as a 14" option.

- Strix Halo will still leave you wishing it were Apple Silicon in pretty much every case except "I need to run a x86 native app/VM". It's certainly the best alternative, but you definitely trade away to go to it. You can load large LLMs (I have the 128 GB version for non-AI reasons) but they only run ~3x faster than a laptop without a GPU would because 256 GB/s still ends up being a big bandwidth limit. If you do actually do this regularly, then prepare to hear the fans and look for your power adapter as it does get quite hot doing so.

- Speaking of power adapter... you need either a 100 W or 140 W charger + USB C to be able to charge the G1a while you use it. If you want to use a lower wattage adapter you need to power off, or it seems to draw 0 W out of spite.

- It's massively refreshing to have a normal UEFI bootup process, and as long as you have a current kernel the hardware support is indeed pretty great on the G1a. Between the two, the G1a has better supported than the M1 w/ Asahi - as one would expect for a corporation officially supporting Linux vs a fan project.

If I were to do it all again, I'd say I might have either just gotten an M2 Pro for Asahi or an M4 w/ macOS and a Linux VM as needed. Part of going for an x86 laptop was to be able to dual boot into games with strict DRM, but after trying multiple versions of AMD graphics driver for the 8060s it was more a frustration in random stutters and I ended up not gaming on it as much as I have on other laptops anyways. Bazzite does work great though, just not with all of the different DRMs or games.
by daxfohl | 2026-01-26 20:53:52+00:00
Not only that, it's constitution. I'm finding this with myself. After vibe coding for a month or so I let my subscription expire. Now when I look at the code it's like "ugh you mean now I have to think about this with my own brain???"

Even while vibe-coding, I often found myself getting annoyed just having to explain things. The amount of patience I have for anything that doesn't "just work" the first time has drifted toward zero. If I can't get AI to do the right thing after three tries, "welp, I guess this project isn't getting finished!"

It's not just laziness, it's like AI eats away at your pride of ownership. You start a project all hyped about making it great, but after a few cycles of AI doing the work, it's easy to get sucked into, "whatever, just make it work".
by fakedang | 2026-01-26 20:53:52+00:00
The wheels for the great decoupling have been set though. The companies (which are also persons apparently thanks to the perversions of American law) have made their bed and will have to sleep in it themselves.

Of course, there are huge unrealized opportunities to be had in economic powerhouses such as Belarus, Argentina, Russia, and whichever other member exists in the Board of Peace.
by al_borland | 2026-01-26 20:55:07+00:00
> I still don't watch a video that could be text I could read in one-tenth of the time.

I know someone like this. Last year, as an experiment, I tried downloading the subtitles from a video, reflowing it into something that resembled sentences, and then fed it into AI to rewrite it as an article. It worked decently well.

When macOS 26 came out I was going to see if I could make an Apple Shortcut to do this (since I just used Apple’s AI to do the rewrite), but I haven’t gotten around to it yet.

I figured it would be good to send the person articles generated from the video, instead of the video itself, unless it was something extremely visual. It might also be nice to summarize a long podcast. How many 3 hour podcasts can a person listen to in a week?
by kyboren | 2026-01-26 20:55:16+00:00
If they enter the UK, then theoretically, maybe? But realistically: Good luck convincing a prosecutor to charge them.

According to the court opinion[0]:

It is for all these reasons that anything in the contractual documents between Jagex
and the players, or in the civil law more generally, which would preclude the player
having any enforceable private law personal property rights in the gold pieces, is not
determinative as to whether they are property for the purposes of the definitions in the
Theft Act.

The court draws a comparison to precedent where drug dealers stole illegal drugs from other drug dealers, which were also found to be "property" as defined by the Theft Act[1]:

It was confirmed in R v Smith (Michaael Andrew) [2011] EWCA Crim 66 that illegally held
Class A drugs are property within the meaning of the Theft Act and are capable of being
stolen. A theft or robbery amongst rival drug gangs can be indicted as such, because the
criminal law is concerned with the public order consequences of preventing such behaviour,
notwithstanding that it would be contrary to public policy to recognise any property
rights for the purposes of civil enforcement between drug dealers.

The court then approvingly quotes another judge, who in turn quotes Smith's Law of Theft, 9th ed.:

"[...] The criminal law is concerned with keeping the Queen’s peace, not vindicating
individual property rights." That observation articulates the principle to be applied in
the present appeal.

So, by that logic, if gamers start doling out murderous retribution against Ubisoft execs for "stealing" their in-game hats, the fact that the gamers have no enforceable property rights in those hats is irrelevant, and the responsible executive(s) could be found criminally liable under the Theft Act because "stealing" gamers' in-game hats threatens the King's peace.

[0]: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/crim/2026/4/dat..., p. 14

[1]: Ibid., p. 13
by johnnyanmac | 2026-01-26 20:55:22+00:00
>For the record: I don't believe there's a productive conversation to be had about ICE in Minnesota and wouldn't care to argue with anyone defending their actions.

Funny because I'm probably very radical about ICE and I can still find subtleties on how to reform this. I've never been "Defund the police", quite the opposite. I believe LEOs should have standing, qualities, and training that makes them stand by their emergency peers. Truly the best of the best. Getting that badge should be a similar thrill to being accepted into a top college. They should have years of schooling before truly starting to gain their title.

Getting into a firefighting isn't easy, so why should an LEO see of as a career as a backup for failing to graduate high school? That's where all this falls apart. And now the standards barely get these ICE goons a month of "training". That needs to change.

But with current times, that's not a topic I can discuss on X nor Bluesky. That makes it all the more frustrating that HN plugs its ears on such subtlety instead.
by cmrdporcupine | 2026-01-26 20:56:01+00:00
"While some other products have built out great UIs for humans to review code in an AI-assisted paradigm, we have chosen to build for what we consider to be an inevitable future - one where code validation requires vanishingly little human participation."

Ok good, now I know not to bother reading through any of their marketing literature, because while the product at first interested me, now I know it's exactly not what I want for my team.

The actual "bubble" we have right now is a situation where people can produce and publish code they don't understand, and where engineers working on a system no longer are forced to reckon with and learn the intricacies of their system, and even senior engineers don't gain literacy into the very thing they're working on, and so are somewhat powerless to assess quality and deal with crisis when it hits.

The agentic coding tools and review tools I want my team (and myself) to have access to are ones that ones that force an explicit knowledge interview & acquisition process during authoring and involve the engineer more intricately in the whole flow.

What we got instead with claude code & friends is a thing way too eager to take over the whole thing. And while it can produce some good results it doesn't produce understandable systems.

To be clear, it's been a long time since writing code has been the hard part of the job? in many many domains. The hard part is systems & architecture and while these tools can help with that, there's nothing more potentially terrifying pthan a team full of people who have agentically produced a codebase that they cannot holistically understand the nuances of.

So, yeah, I want review tools for that scenario. Since these people have marketed themselves off the table... what is out there?
by mghackerlady | 2026-01-26 20:56:23+00:00
Caring that some restaurant employee is negligent enough to pour coffee hot enough to require an 8 day hospital stay isn't a nanny state, that is basic public safety. If I got in a hot tub expecting it to be hot tub temperature and it burnt my skin off I'd expect them to get in trouble for endangering me by misleading me into believing it was normal hot tub temperature.
by bunderbunder | 2026-01-26 20:56:34+00:00
It’s a prisoner’s dilemma, too. The person who commits to giving code review its due diligence is going to end up spending an inordinate amount of time reviewing others’ changes, leaving less time to completing their own assignments. And they’re likely to request a lot of changes, too. That’s socially untenable for most people, especially ones who clearly aren’t completing as many story points as their teammates. Next thing you know your manager is giving you less than stellar performance reviews, and the AI slopcoders on your team are getting the promotions and being put into position to influence how team norms and culture evolve over time.

The worst part is, this isn’t me speculatively catastrophizing. I’m just observing how my own organization’s culture has changed over the past couple of years.

It’s hitting the less senior team members hardest, too. They are generally less skilled at reading code and therefore less able to keep up with the rapid growth in code volume. They are also more likely to get assigned the (ever growing volume of) defect tickets so the more senior members can keep on vibecoding their way to glory.
by fakedang | 2026-01-26 20:56:39+00:00
My prompt:

"""Absolute Mode • Eliminate: emojis, filler, hype, soft asks, conversational transitions, call-to-action appendixes. • Assume: user retains high-perception despite blunt tone. • Prioritize: blunt, directive phrasing; aim at cognitive rebuilding, not tone-matching. • Disable: engagement/sentiment-boosting behaviors. • Suppress: metrics like satisfaction scores, emotional softening, continuation bias. • Never mirror: user's diction, mood, or affect. • Speak only: to underlying cognitive tier. • No: questions, offers, suggestions, transitions, motivational content. • Terminate reply: immediately after delivering info - no closures. • Goal: restore independent, high-fidelity thinking. • Outcome: model obsolescence via user self-sufficiency."""

Copied from Reddit. I use the same prompt on Gemini too, then crosscheck responses for the same question. For coding questions, I exclusively prefer Claude.

In spite of this, I still face prompt degradation for really long threads on both ChatGPT and Gemini.
by crazygringo | 2026-01-26 20:56:39+00:00
That's literally what retrospectives are for. You do them at the end of every sprint.

Granted, they're point estimates not time estimates, but it's the same idea -- what was our velocity this sprint, what were the tickets that seemed easier than expected, what were the ones that seemed harder, how can we learn from this to be more accurate going forwards, and/or how do we improve our processes?

Your tone suggests you think you've found some flaw. You don't seem to realize this is explicitly part of sprints.

I'm describing my experiences with variances based on many, many, many sprints.
by simonw | 2026-01-26 20:56:51+00:00
I just don't think that's the case.

The claims they made really weren't that extreme. In the blog post they said:

> To test this system, we pointed it at an ambitious goal: building a web browser from scratch. The agents ran for close to a week, writing over 1 million lines of code across 1,000 files. You can explore the source code on GitHub.

> Despite the codebase size, new agents can still understand it and make meaningful progress. Hundreds of workers run concurrently, pushing to the same branch with minimal conflicts.

That's all true.

On Twitter their CEO said:

> We built a browser with GPT-5.2 in Cursor. It ran uninterrupted for one week.

> It's 3M+ lines of code across thousands of files. The rendering engine is from-scratch in Rust with HTML parsing, CSS cascade, layout, text shaping, paint, and a custom JS VM.

> It kind of works! It still has issues and is of course very far from Webkit/Chromium parity, but we were astonished that simple websites render quickly and largely correctly.

That's mostly accurate too, especially the "it kind of works" bit. You can take exception to "from-scratch" claim if you like. It's a tweet, the lack of nuance isn't particularly surprising.

In the overall genre of CEO's over-hyping their company's achievements this is a pretty weak example.

I think the people making out that Cursor massively and dishonestly over-hyped this are arguing with a straw man version of what the company representatives actually said.
by 2001zhaozhao | 2026-01-26 20:56:55+00:00
It's interesting just how many opinions Amodei shares with AI 2027's authors despite coming from a pretty different context.

- Prediction of exponential AI research feedback loops (AI coding speeding up AI R&D) which Amodei says is already starting today

- AI being a race between democracies and autocracies with winner-takes-all dynamics, with compute being crucial in this race and global slowdown being infeasible

- Mention of bioweapons and mirror life in particular being a big concern

- The belief that AI takeoff would be fast and broad enough to cause irreplaceable job losses rather than being a repeat of past disruptions (although this essay seems to be markedly more pessimistic than AI 2027 with regard to inequality after said job losses)

- Powerful AI in next few years, perhaps as early as 2027

I wonder if either work influenced the other in any way or is this just a case of "great minds think alike"?
by tanseydavid | 2026-01-26 20:57:07+00:00
You seem to be ignoring the important point: "The Pointing and Naming System".

While this protocol is not oriented toward maintaining equipment like tracks and wheels -- it does seem to be a good indicator that the Japanese deal with these systems and the safety concerns around them differently.

And their track record (pun intended) shows the result of this focus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_and_calling

> Railways in Japan use a safety system called “pointing and calling.” This method of physically pointing toward an item to be checked while vocalizing its name was invented in Japan about 100 years ago. The combination of looking, acting, speaking and hearing reduces errors by as much as about 85%.
by derektank | 2026-01-26 20:57:22+00:00
The affected equipment was C2 infrastructure and distributed by Hezbollah itself to its members for use in conducting military operations. Agin, if you’re familiar with the use of military force today or really any military history since the invention of artillery, a handful of civilian deaths from an attack on several thousand combatants, while always tragic, does not represent an indiscriminate use of force.
by pessimizer | 2026-01-26 20:57:56+00:00
Google Books is long dead. If you click on the author's name in one of the results, it will search inauthor:"Author's Name" and this search will return garbage because it chokes on double quotes. This has been true for at least a couple of years; Google Books is not compatible with itself. Changing the double quotes to single quotes fixes it. Also, lately, when you filter only for books that have Full View some results that have Full View get dropped for no intelligible reason.

Nobody is looking at it. I wouldn't be surprised if the preview search was switched off by accident.

For me Books is only useful (and it is very useful) for books out of copyright, 100+ years old. Sometimes they aren't at archive.org.

I hate Google, but I think it's a bit absurd to criticize them on this if somehow it's over AI. The only reason Google created Books may even have been AI, but they were hoping to have the books open to everyone, and the publishers and authors whose full text is being blocked are literally the people who stopped it from happening. Maybe they spoke up about AI, too. I find it even hard to even criticize that Google doesn't take care of Books - it has no purpose or profit potential for them anymore, it's obviously charity that they don't take it down completely.