MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by cbolton | 2026-01-20 17:48:12+00:00
> Biden tried diplomacy with the EU. He tried to get them to agree to a renewed US-led world order, but it wasn't working.

Can you elaborate on that? It seems to me it "wasn't working" mostly in the sense that Trump got elected again.

> The EU decided to play the US and China against each other to improve its own standing, which is why the US is now moving away from the EU.

Seems like confusing cause and effect. The EU is drifting away from the US towards China because the US pushed them away.

> The world is going to be a much more violent place without hegemony. Free trade doesn't exist in that type of world. The US realizes this and is playing 50 years ahead. None of the nice words matter when the energy, trade, and economic lines are redrawn.

This is happening largely because of the US, although they stand to lose by replacing a world order that benefits them with a world order that benefits China and Russia. Well maybe the US will become sufficiently like China and Russia that they can benefit too. But even with a gradual loss of hegemony there was nothing inevitable about a transition to the law of the jungle and it's doubtful that the net result will be positive for the US.

> People like to say the US is led by lawyers and China is led by scientists and engineers. This is wrong. The US is led by war generals and intelligence.

I think the relevant distinction is that the US is democratic while China is authoritarian. But the current US government wants to be authoritarian.

> The career DoD folks are the ones impressing upon the administration to make these moves.

Again a reversal of cause and effect? I doubt old career DoD folks like the current developments. But the current government might give a bigger role to the war generals.
by hypeatei | 2026-01-20 17:48:27+00:00
> Anytime people criticize betting, it looks to me like some kind of utopian scheme

This is how I feel, too. Life is all about risk management and a life where you take no risk is one where you have nothing. People make bets all the time: areas they move to, people they ask out, jobs they take, what foods they eat, etc. which is clearly different than going to the casino and putting it all on red.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-20 17:48:28+00:00
> Nobody actually says "I agree that you are feeling that emotion but I neither endorse it nor disagree with it" (in less formal wording). If you're going along with someone else's emotions, you're implicitly endorsing their reaction as justified.

Yes, actually, lots of people have healthy partnerships where they disagree with how their partner got into the situation, but can still recognize that the partner's feelings about that situation is valid, regardless, since it's an emotion their feeling, it doesn't have to be rational or logical and it's certainly not up to you to decide if it is/was neither.

This is what emotional support is, not validating their actions, but validating the emotions they're feeling, regardless of why. And not seeing some emotions as more "correct and valid" than others, they're all valid and correct, since we're humans after all.

> They share the emotion because they want other people to agree that the emotion is right and justified.

This, in your words "falls apart in the real world", because people don't speak with others always with the same intention, sometimes people want to vent, sometimes people want to manipulate, sometimes people are looking for help, and a whole other rooster of reasons. Most of the time, people speak with others about their feelings because they want connection.

I think you're stuck in trying to separate "valid, rational and logical emotions" from "the rest of emotions" while that distinction matters less than you think, and you'll be seen as very emotionally cold/distant if you aren't able to accept people's emotion because they aren't "rational" (or whatever reason you use).
by dapperdrake | 2026-01-20 17:48:57+00:00
Valid feelings and validation are unrelated.

The good kind of "valid" is about whether (a) your process of measuring reality might be broken to your detriment. And by extension (b) whether your communications channel with the person you are talking to is working.

Chris Voss's mirroring is basically TCP ACKs.

Then there are the people who say that they lack validation and are just narcissists looking for yes-men. Big difference on how much of your time is being wasted.
by peder | 2026-01-20 17:49:02+00:00
Yep, and nobody ever goes on these types of threads and says the EU is collapsing, even though there's demonstrable evidence that things are not going great for the EU (the UK left, there is virtually zero economic dynamism or tech investment, Russia has seized 1/3 of Ukraine who was trying to join the EU, and the continent has no money, no navies and terrible demographics to compete globally in the next century). People gloss over issues about the EU because it aligns more closely with their political beliefs.
by dlcarrier | 2026-01-20 17:49:04+00:00
As someone with a background in electronics who doesn't manage any internet-connected equipment but has multiple embedded devices connected to a WAN, I'm glad that IPv4 still seems to have a bit of life left in it.

When IPv6 was developed, over 30 years ago, connecting everything to the internet seemed like a great idea. I know that IPv6 can be made secure, but I don't have the background or research time to learn how to do so, and the NAT-by-default of IPv4 effectively means that I get the benefit of a default-deny security strategy that makes it impossible to accidentally directly connect anything to the internet.

I'm hoping I can keep using IPv4 until IPv8 or IPv4.5 or whatever comes next is developed with the modern proliferation of cheap insecure IoT in mind.

For some background on why IoT products are so insecure:

Hardware manufacturers don't really comprehend the idea of updates, let alone timely of security patches. Hardware has to work on the day of release, so everything is documented and tested to verify it will work. I have hardware with a TCP/IP stack that was released 20 years, (https://docs.wiznet.io/Product/Chip/Ethernet/W5500) and doesn't have a single errata published, despite widespread use. This is expected for every single component, for even the smallest 1-cent transistor, which has dozens of guaranteed performance characteristics laid out over several pages of documentation (https://en.mot-mos.com/vancheerfile/files/pdf/MOT2302B2.pdf).

When manufacturers venture into a product that runs software, they don't realize that for a given complexity, working through undocumented or, worse yet, incorrectly documented APIs takes more time than the equivalent hardware development and documentation. I've worked on multiple projects where software bugs were fixed with hardware workarounds, because it's faster, cheaper, and easier to develop, test, document, retool, and add a few cents of bill-of-materials cost per product, than to get reliable output from the already-written library that's supposed to provide the functionality.

The hardware TCP/IP stack that I linked to was developed at a time when it was the cheapest way to connect a low-power embedded system to a network. Modern low-power embedded systems have multiple cores running at hundreds to thousands of MIPS making the resources to run a softtware TCP/IP stack trivial, but the product still sells well, because when security is an absolute must, the hardware development and maintenance cost for the functionality is still cheaper than through software, even when there's no marginal cost to run the software.
by stavros | 2026-01-20 17:49:17+00:00
Yes, PETG has higher density, so it's much heavier for the same volume, exactly what the author doesn't want.

The heat resistance isn't far behind, but that still means it's behind.

Yes, it's hard to print well, but it's the best-performing material when you need light, durable material. That's the tradeoff.
by b40d-48b2-979e | 2026-01-20 17:49:22+00:00
I personally don't see these as bad things.

With the dose of bad faith you put on those arguments, it sounds like you would fit right in with the described Meta lawyers. I'm not sure it's even worth engaging with you considering how you engaged with the content by ignoring the preface about John Adams and the ethics of practicing law.
by II2II | 2026-01-20 17:49:38+00:00
> Gambling refers to taking on risk for the feeling it brings.

Is there much of a difference when it comes to placing bets on the news?

To play off the article's opening example: investing in mineral exploration in Greenland, with an American invasion opening up opportunities for resource extraction, would be taking a risk with an unknown payout due to imperfect information. That is to say, it is taking a risk to build a business. A business where the payout may exceed what is going in. Betting on the news is just an exchange of money, with the intermediary taking a cut. Risks are being taken, but no value is being created. It is all about emotional involvement.
by nadis | 2026-01-20 17:49:59+00:00
I tend to agree, although I do think Claude Code specifically is having a moment for AI for software development. There are a lot of similar products (OpenAI's Codex, Google's Gemini CLI, etc.) but none work quite as well - yet anyways. Sort of orthogonal to the potential market impact, which I personally am not really sure how to interpret.
by avgDev | 2026-01-20 17:50:08+00:00
Why should my 5 year old learn anything if he can just ask chatGPT?

Using chatGPT as a professional is different than using it for homework. Homework and school teaches you many things, not only the subject. You discover how you learn, what your interests are, etc.

ChatGPT can assist with learning also but SHOULD NOT be doing any of the work for the student. It is okay to ask "can you explain big O", then answer follow up questions. However, "give me method to reverse a string" will only hurt.
by epistasis | 2026-01-20 17:50:15+00:00
> The goal of Europeans is not to work.

What, would you say, all these entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley are doing here?

They are all trying to invent something so that they don't have to work anymore.

> They will continue to sell their crown jewels to the highest bidder, because no one wants to work.

Is this about Europe or the US?
by mschuster91 | 2026-01-20 17:50:25+00:00
They are likely referring to Q3/25 numbers [1].

The problem is the AI bubble, without it it is speculated that the US economy might actually be in a recession [2] - effectively, that web of investments, deals, ownerships, purchase contracts and god knows what is nothing more than wash trading that will come crashing down hard.

That is why for the 99%, the economy doesn't "feel" like 4.3% of growth. If you're not in AI directly or at least adjacent (e.g. datacenter or utility construction), you don't feel any of that money.

[1] https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/14/ai-infrastructure-boom-masks...
by sarky-litso | 2026-01-20 17:50:30+00:00
Have you watched sports recently? Gambling has always had a negative effect on the perceived fairness but once that effect becomes a core part of the way the sport is monetized it gets even worse for everyone involved. Watching playoff games last weekend either Draft Kings or Fan Duel showed an ad where a single person in a crowded bar is cheering wildly by themselves while looking at their parlay bet or whatever on their phone - this isolation of the communal experience alone is a definitely a negative effect but I could go on...
Show HN: Git-Fit – A workout app for people bored to death waiting for vibes
by rebelchrisycom | 2026-01-20 17:50:31+00:00
I made this because I spend half my life "vibing" (infinitely waiting for things to load/build) and getting bored to death. I figured I might as well get fit in the downtime.

The Stack: Claude Code, Swift, Accessibility API, Some terminal hacks

It’s a bit of a meme, it’s definitely a vibe, and the UI is aggressively neon.

App: https://www.git-fit.app/ Repo: https://github.com/rebelchris/git-fit

Yes, it’s simple. Yes, it’s silly. Roast the code, the UI, or my life choices. If you hate it less than you expected, I’d love a on the repo.
by aja12 | 2026-01-20 17:51:14+00:00
Actually, the real countermeasure to PTH is to disable NTLM auth and rely only on Kerberos (and then monitor NTLM as a very strong indicator that someone or something is attempting PTH)

Of course kerberos tickets can be abused too in a lot of fun ways, but on a modern network PTH is pretty much dead and a surefire way to raise a lot of alerts

(You are absolutely right that privileged accounts must never login on less privileged assets, however!)
by amalcon | 2026-01-20 17:51:18+00:00
This argument has always seemed odd to me. The 17th amendment first took effect in 1915, and the whole Senate had been directly elected by 1919. Are we really going to claim that the late 1910's are when things really went off the rails? For example, to your specific point here, it seems unlikely that this made amending the Constitution harder. Excluding the Bill of Rights and the 27th Amendment (each a special case for its own reason), there have actually been more amendments in the fewer years after the 17th was enacted.

It's also unclear why one would expect that the Senate would be less partisan if its membership were selected by state legislatures. State legislators have a lot more partisan loyalty than the rest of us, both because they tend to be more ideological and because they are deeply dependent on the party for future career prospects.
by nadis | 2026-01-20 17:51:58+00:00
What felt vague about it? Personally while I'm not sure how to interpret the potential market impact (or lack there of) I thought it was an interesting hypothesis, especially the quote at the end:

> “One day, the successor to Claude Code will make a superhuman interface available to everyone. And if Tokens were TCP/IP, Claude Code is the first genuine website built in the age of AI. And this is going to hurt a large part of the software industry.”

“I believe that all software must leave information work as soon as possible. I believe that the future role of software will not have much ‘information processing’, i.e., analysis. Claude Code or Agent-Next will be doing the information synthesis, the GUI, and the workflow. That will be ephemeral and generated for the use at hand. Anyone should be able to access the information they want in the format they want and reference the underlying data.

What I’m trying to say is that the traditional differentiation metrics will change. Faster workflows, better UIs, and smoother integrations will all become worthless, while persistent information, a la an API, will become extremely valuable.”
by vacuity | 2026-01-20 17:52:03+00:00
Other people have given good insights, so I'll instead describe one of my pet theories.

Given by how we talk about emotions, I think they are "rational", but operate under a different set of rules than we normally apply to "rational" thinking. In fact, feelings are deeply intertwined with our supposedly "rational" thinking, to the point where I don't think there is a significant boundary. The lack of information is prevalent when feelings are in play, and I believe the same is true in general. Even physics feels far different than pure mathematics, after all. Instead of deferring to conventions in how to act when feelings are involved, as if they belong to a wholly different and mysterious world, we can make sense of the entire world. But of course, empathy, kindness, and good judgement are not exempt. None of this conflicts with what you're saying, but I think a subtle shift in mindset will be fruitful in applying it.
by fzeroracer | 2026-01-20 17:52:34+00:00
I don't think there is a single concrete goal, when you look at how flabbergastingly stupid most of the oligarchs are (just scroll through Elon Musk's most recent posts) it's hard to imagine there being any real master plan. It's a bunch of dumb assholes that were raised with infinite money and where nobody ever told them no.

If you've ever had the unfortunate opportunity to interact with your average CEO at a mid-level business it's the same thing but on a much smaller scale. They can't fail, only be failed.
by jorblumesea | 2026-01-20 17:52:48+00:00
Carney's speech at Davos is extremely telling: https://www.youtube.com/live/dE981Z_TaVo?si=Ct_1GIQe4Orm0wGU

who would have thought that America's closest geographic and cultural ally would feel the need to ditch that relationship. Wild times.
by 9rx | 2026-01-20 17:52:52+00:00
> I believe to count as an expert on something you need to have a ready compendium of knowledge ready to go.

You are certainly headed in the right direction, but not quite. To be seen as an expert in the eyes of others you need to have had a vision for something and to have successfully executed on it. If the vision was dependent on calculus, then you will have reached a point where you had to learn something about calculus, of course...

But that's different to having a taskmaster tell you to learn calculus for no apparent reason. Even if you follow through and built up a huge wealth of knowledge from it, you would still not be deemed an expert by others. You're no different than an encyclopedia, which isn't an expert either. It is being able to see things others can't and the ability to act upon it that makes an expert.

Learning taking place when you need it isn't the same as never.

> Maybe when we have supremely reliable LLMs that can replace humans we might not but we’re not there yet.

Frankly, even Page Rank already replaced humans for this. But LLMs are even better at it. Humans are just that poorly performing. Like I said before, even someone doing nothing in life but looking for what exists in the world could not take in as much as databases that have indexed every written thing.
by jakubmazanec | 2026-01-20 17:52:53+00:00
If you're not into web development, Hacker News discussions about React are really bad way to gain unbiased perspective - it's been really popular here for last few years to just hate React (usually they know nothing, e.g. anyone who claims hooks compose worse than class components). But there's a reason why React is still used the most (large ecosystem, fast development and backwards compatibility). Of course, it's easy for inexperienced developer to produce slow and buggy apps (maybe slightly easier than in other frameworks, but that's practically unquantifiable), to include unnecessary or even badly written dependencies, etc. - but it's not the tool's fault when it's being used incorrectly.
by mullingitover | 2026-01-20 17:53:01+00:00
> They also have a large trained citizen militia but it's supported by a backbone of a professional standing army.

Less than 10% are full timers, the vast majority are conscripts and volunteers. Even officers generally aren't full timers[1].

All I'm saying is, there's a spectrum of 'Complete citizen militia, as envisioned by the framers of the US Constitution' all the way over to 'Standing army as it exists in the US today', and Switzerland is obviously much closer to the former than the latter.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Armed_Forces#Personnel
by jmward01 | 2026-01-20 17:53:14+00:00
I personally don't want companies deciding what is or isn't ethical. That is because a company only has one ethos, make money, so a company's ethics and mine will never line up. I expect every company to be rational which means they will be evil from my point of view. Any system that relies on companies to 'do the right thing' on behalf of people is clearly broken and any push to get them to 'do the right thing' when they don't have to is foolish. This is why we have laws and other checks in the system like journalism. From the article it looks like there is a clear argument that these lawyers broke the law in destroying evidence or purposefully hiding it/. The real issue here is that they, and their clients, aren't being held accountable for it. That is the issue that needs to be vigorously pursued. Why are they protected over people? Dig into that and we may actually make headway on the problem.
by volkk | 2026-01-20 17:53:17+00:00
i don't know much about prediction markets aside from just a very high level view but i bumped into a thread on twitter that talks about how game-able they are as well if you have a decent chunk of money. e.g i throw 100k into "yes" and now bots/people think some insider has real info, and more shares get thrown into "yes" and then last minute the bot undoes the trade and throws a bunch of money into "no" and no resolves and they made a lot more money.

again, i don't know enough about prediction markets, but this feels like i can't really trust lower liquidity "predictions" (i guess very similar to penny stocks).

One can argue that main news headline predictions will have so much volume that it's impossible to rig it this way, but what's stopping state actors from manipulation?
by RealityVoid | 2026-01-20 17:53:42+00:00
Honestly, the idea of Trump making geopolitically informed decisions is so out of the realm of my perception of reality I don't even know how to engage with you. Trump is a narcissistic idiot that you voted into power. Your geopolitical direction is dictated by his narcissistic whims. "National security reasons Greenland" or "EU collaboration with China" or whatever is exactly what I initially said - sane washing a lunatic.

But, anyway, good luck. You'll need it.
by nikvdp | 2026-01-20 17:53:53+00:00
For a similar but lighter weight (and less isolated) tool that uses the OS's sandboxing functionality (bubblewrap on linux, Seatbelt/sandbox-exec on macos) or docker check out cco [1] (note: I built it). It's primarily useful now because it can also sandbox other agents like opencode or codex since Anthropic has added native sandboxing functionality to Claude Code itself now. Their sandbox works similarly, also using bubblewrap and seatbelt, and can be accessed via the /sandbox slash command inside Claude Code [2].

[1]: https://github.com/nikvdp/cco
[2]: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/sandboxing
by browningstreet | 2026-01-20 17:54:02+00:00
I was chatting with someone about the evils of capitalism. My position was that capitalism was viable as long as culture controlled capitalism. When culture capitulates to capitalism it's a death spiral.

When I speak with overseas friends there's often a sense of "of course" or "reasonable" moral lines in the relationship between their culture and where capitalism can't tread. That seems completely gone right now in the US, though it's been heading in that direction for decades. It was mediated by social constructs that have since been completely eradicated.
by 12_throw_away | 2026-01-20 17:54:27+00:00
> I really don't understand this desire to make websites behave like local apps while in reality they aren't.

Since the dawn of time, humans have sought to eliminate mushy laggy UIs, such as having to wait for a full page reload whenever you click a button. I don't like SPAs either, but dunno, I don't find it particularly hard to understand how we got here.
by nadis | 2026-01-20 17:54:37+00:00
I thought the concluding quote was the most interesting part but I also am not super versed in market prediction (I sort of assume it is hand-wavy in general?). I shared it because I was curious if folks with more insight might have better perspectives than I. But it also might just be too vague an article to effectively ground that kind of conversation - I'm not sure.