MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throwawayb2025 | 2026-01-26 00:58:22+00:00
There might be Gandhian/Nelson Mandela way of handling this.
Both fought to change system and didn't teach hatredness towards individual a Racist person.
Get arrested peacefully.

Others can work for immediate protest for release of the arrested.

Appeal to common values that they also have, and show how they are violating the religious values they profess.

Technically someone can make some app, that can easily help in getting the citizenship proof for an individual.

I am not from USA.
by cmurf | 2026-01-26 00:58:40+00:00
There's no uncertainty. Republicans now openly assert the 2nd amendment belongs to supporters and defenders of the regime, and no one else.

The movement opposes equality because equality stands opposed to their need for hierarchy. It is a domination and submission movement. It boasts about its application of double standards. Double standards are not logical fallacies, when they use them they are virtues. To enjoy for themselves what they deny to others is a display of dominance.
by concinds | 2026-01-26 00:59:02+00:00
I've been dismayed by how fast the "we should own our hardware" crowd has so quickly radicalized into "all security features are evil", and "no security features should exist for anyone".

Not just "there should be some phone brands that cater to me", but "all phone brands, including the most mainstream, should cater to me, because everyone on earth cares more about 'owning their hardware' than evil maid attack prevention, Cellebrite government surveillance, theft deterrence, accessing their family photos if they forget their password, revocable code-signing with malware checks so they don't get RATs spying on their webcam, etc, and if they don't care about 'owning their hardware' more than that, they are wrong".

It is objectively extremist and fanatical.
by herf | 2026-01-26 00:59:35+00:00
There is a 15-30% difference between the groups at baseline (fig 8c-9c, 8d-9d), about the same magnitude as the claimed effect of the experimental condition.

I think the result would be much stronger if these baselines were comparable, so they show they have accounted for other variables like time of day and light history. I am also skeptical of any effect in the retina lasting 6 weeks, with no fading.

Consider that people are often exposed to much more infrared light outdoors, so "worked under a relatively dim incandescent lamp" is not a particularly novel stimulus. Imagine that any of these people spent time outdoors during the six weeks - thousands of times more infrared light there.
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2026-01-26 00:59:48+00:00
It is in a sense by design because the focus was creating a decentralize-able/federate-able protocol and infrastructure that can scale more or less indefinitely first and foremost, community second.

The community is working on actually decentralising the network now that things mostly "just work" (assuming you are using did:plc/generally a happy path user).

- Building out PDS communities that are trusted takes time and nowadays there's a few outside of bluesky PBC (one or two big ones and a bunch of smaller ones). People are eager to move off because a lot of users really really don't like bluesky PBC leadership but it's a matter of waiting for these third party communities to reach critical mass.

- Relay infra is already pretty much decentralised. Lots of people still rely on the main relay but it's trivial to use a third party relay and there's more of them than you can count.

- There are a lot of really high quality third party clients and afaict a lot of users do actually use third party clients but there's basically no metric for tracking these stats.

- Appviews are expensive currently and there's work on making them easier to host but there's already one "full" alternative appview for bluesky.

- There are a lot non-bluesky apps/services that are genuinely high quality experiences and they are gaining their own communities.

The main technical barrier to true decentralisation outside of improving UX is introducing other did:methods and/or spreading trust of did:plc across the community (ex: clustered via raft or paxos across major operators) but there's just not a reason to pursue this over the other fires that need fighting in the ecosystem right now (and keeping did diversity low reduces another source of complexity the space just doesn't need to tackle yet).

--------------

TLDR: it is intentional because the goal is to in order of priorities:

1. get the architecture for eventual decentralisation right.

2. make it exist.

3. make it good.

4. make it easy to use for normal people.

5. build community.

6. focus on decentralisation.

Decentralisation in theory is the first priority but in practice it's the last priority. Being able to decentralise is always the utmost importance but forcing it to happen is not ever the top priority because that's on the community, not on the developers.
by JeremyNT | 2026-01-26 01:00:55+00:00
The left / right split isn't really meaningful in the United States right now.

The split is currently between people who believe in and want a functional and equitable government, and those who are fine with a kleptocracy as long as they are personally the beneficiaries (or at least, the people they dislike suffer worse).

People like Frum were quick to notice this and get on the correct side of it. Unfortunately, there are not enough Republicans who feel the same way to make much of a difference.
by paperwallet | 2026-01-26 01:01:00+00:00
Working with your local government and particpating in it will create greater change because you have the ability to influence laws at a local level.

From there, it opens doors to working with towns and eventually the state.

States have the power to override Federal laws in greater numbers.

This is by design. If you dont understand how your country works, the systems that run it, then you will fail.

Awareness helps, but it rarely changes things. Participating in the democratic process creates the potential for change before it's too late.
by torginus | 2026-01-26 01:02:02+00:00
I think the article talks about nonviolent protests - the first two were anything but.

The Slovakian incident worked, because Slovakia has a working representative democracy.

In a deeply flawed, or downright nondemocratic system, like Serbia or Georgia, it's very hard to drive change through nonviolent protests.

It also bears mentioning, that the key issue with protesting, is that it, legally speaking does nothing. Legal representatives are under no obligation to do anything in response to protests.
Show HN: Klaus – a Claude Code native delegating agentic harness
by blas0 | 2026-01-26 01:02:32+00:00
Good afternoon everyone, spent like 2 weeks straight doom-scrolling Anthropic docs, Arxiv rabbit holes, and Claude blog posts till my eyes bled. Instead of shipping yet another wrapper that "reinvents" the wheel, I just vibe engineered this thing to max out Claude Code's native features. Klaus Baudelaire (https://github.com/blas0/klaus-baudelaire) basically: Routes agents (in parallel/sequence) with through keyword based scoring + prompt length (no fancy external router needed).

Instead of trying to make agentic delegation deterministic by setting keyword variables as a "YOU MUST INVOKE X-AGENT IF THE USER SAYS DELEGATE", keywords = a score, a certain score = a specific system prompt that is injected into the session post UserPromptSubmit. You can read how this works more on the repo: (https://github.com/blas0/klaus-baudelaire)

Delegates built-in agents + some redefined ones (broad general roles + hyper-specific tool callers)
Some agents were built from/around Claude's exposed system prompts and whatever invisible native agents they're hiding behind the scenes.

Bonus: optional memory manager tuned to how Claude actually thinks (not some vector DB cope) to help with managing memory based on: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/memory - doing away with the branded ".memory" directories and such.

Zero external APIs, zero services, zero reinventing (besides context7).

Feels like what Anthropic probably wanted us to do before everyone started LARPing as OpenAI. Plugin version drops late Monday–early Wednesday (this week, Jan 2026).

Video coming day-of with routing/delegation demo + bare Claude Code vs Klaus Baudelaire.

Thoughts? Go ahead and roast or don't! Please, just don't make another 500-line prompt wrapper pls and call it a novel abstraction.
by LexiMax | 2026-01-26 01:02:41+00:00
Most of the social spaces that I frequent don't have the amount of political topics posted as HN.

Would you like to know the difference between those spaces and here? It's that in those spaces, regardless of if the members are left right or center, the community is on the same page in terms of authoritarians, and authoritarian apologia will get you tossed.

Therefore, there isn't the same sort of desire - or need - to point out the obvious and show the uncomfortable realities to the crowd.

Refusing to take a stand on this sort of thing and leaving it for the community to sort out will only make things worse. It's functionally no different than the kind of combative environment you get on major social media networks; the only difference is the amount of tone policing caused by the user-facing moderation tools.
by hubber | 2026-01-26 01:02:49+00:00
>mostly selected ages ago in response to climate

You say that as if it dismisses any reason for non-visible traits to diverge, but it's commonly theorised that this is actually the main reason. Taking early Europeans, for example, there are very clear and extreme selection pressures introduced by the long, barren, freezing, dark winters.

Come to think of it, even without these pressures it would be highly unlikely, in the Out-Of-Africa model. What are the chances that each and every small group migrating to each corner of the globe all across time all happen to be a perfectly average representation of their larger former tribe? It's absurd to suggest that the few individuals to first settle Australia must have been completely identical in every non-visible way to the few individuals that first settled Iceland.

If you selected two random groups of 100 people from the same 'tribe' today, and managed to quantify various mental and intellectual attributes, you would certainly find variation between them! Then put these two groups in radically different environments for thousands of generations...

>not only is there not extraordinary evidence for it, but the evidence we have is mostly countervailing

A lot of people try to explain away correlations between race and IQ, criminality, wealth, relationship statistics, etc, but I've never seen someone suggest that these phenomena just don't exist. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to respond.
by 1-6 | 2026-01-26 01:03:09+00:00
I see this posted everywhere this week. Is it really that good? I understand this runs on any hardware (not limited to Mac Minis) as long as you have an API key to an LLM (Preferably to Claude). People online make bold promises that it will change your life...

It sounds interesting to me, I might install it on a cheap Mini PC with Ubuntu. This can't come at any worst time as storage and RAM has gotten astronomical. I feel bad for people who are just starting to build their first rig and an alt rig for this.
by doug-moen | 2026-01-26 01:03:18+00:00
I am unable to extract any meaning from your post. You appear to be making a general claim: it is impossible to design a programming language where everything is a value. You at least admit that "data thingies" can be values. Are you claiming that it is not possible for functions to be values? (If we assume that the argument and the result of a function call is a value, then this would mean higher order functions are impossible, for example.) If not that, then what? Please give a specific example of something that can never be a value in any programming language that I care to design.
by bucket_ | 2026-01-26 01:03:40+00:00
In the current release, files rely on S3's server-side encryption. The bID + secret function as access control mechanisms rather than encryption keys. The zero-knowledge aspect refers to us never storing the secrets themselves - only cryptographic hashes - so we can't authorize downloads even if our database is compromised.

I've been actively working on adding client-side encryption to the CLI so files are encrypted by the binary before upload. The CLI implementation is ready, but I'm working through aligning the web dashboard with these changes. Should have it deployed in the next few days.
by tptacek | 2026-01-26 01:05:37+00:00
This the "cold winters theory", popularized by the academic fraudster Richard Lynn (of "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" fame). It's a just-so story. You could tell the same story about the selective pressure for intelligence and problem-solving in hot climates; try to eat in the Kalahari sometime.

Really, the more you think about that theory, the dumber it gets.
by threethirtytwo | 2026-01-26 01:06:04+00:00
You don’t need a test to know this we already know there’s heavy reinforcement training done on these models so it optimizes for passing the training. Passing the training means convincing the person rating the answers and that the answer is good.

The keyword is convince. So it just needs to convince people that’s it’s right.

It is optimizing for convincing people. Out of all answers that can convince people some can be actual correct answers, others can be wrong answers.
by gnerd00 | 2026-01-26 01:06:42+00:00
this is an important question. I am not a specialist in this area. I believe what you say was true before the invention of the Transformer ML architecture around 2015. I believe that among practitioners close to the Transformer effort, they passed around "The Common Crawl" because it was standard and basically one file chunk. I suspect that Bible material was just one part of CommonCrawl. more info welcome
by Arainach | 2026-01-26 01:06:55+00:00
A list consisting entirely of fictional works (one by an American who has never lived in Japan even) is not a good basis for claiming to understand a culture.

Seriously, Cryptonomicon is a bizarre thing to put on this list. I like the it a lot, but none of that book takes place in Japan and the closest intersection is Japanese soldiers during World War II, with a brief participation of a single fictional Japanese company in the modern section of the book.
by dang | 2026-01-26 01:07:07+00:00
> the mods like to avoid anything involving "politics" since it's likely to start a flame war.

You're correct that we like to avoid flamewars, but not correct to say "anything involving politics". We don't try to (or want to) avoid politics altogether—a certain number of threads with political overlap have always been part of the mix here*. For (reams of) past explanations see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so....

What we want to avoid is HN being taken over by politics altogether, and thereby turning into an entirely different site. We want HN to adhere to its mandate, which is to optimize for intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). That certainly includes some political discussion, but (a) not beyond a certain threshold, and (b) not every kind of political story or article. (For example, opinion pieces are usually less of a fit than stories which contain significant new information, and so on.)

Unfortunately, this way of doing things inevitably generates conflict. For politically passionate users, that "not beyond a certain threshold" bit is far too little—especially in turbulent times, as now. Apart from that, there's no agreement on which particular stories deserve to be on the frontpage, and even if there were such agreement, there's still no way of making sure that the most deserving stories get the spots (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42787306).

Everyone has the experience of being frustrated when a story that they care about gets flagged or otherwise falls in rank. When feelings are running hot, people jump to the conclusion that we're secretly on the opposite political side, or trying to suppress discussion on a particular topic. That's not the case at all—it's all explicable by the principles that we've been repeating for years—but that none of that changes how it feels.

Then there are the users who feel like HN has gotten too political and is a shadow of its former self—this also has always been with us: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869.

Double unfortunately, I don't know of a fix for any of these binds, because all of them derive from the fundamentals of what HN is - e.g. a single frontpage with only so many slots (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).

(* Or to put it differently, note the words most and probably in https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, as pg once said: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4922426.)
by jhickok | 2026-01-26 01:07:27+00:00
I thought the same thing. I had a spare iMac sitting around so I thought I would kick the tires on it. I realize I could have used something else, but I wanted to give it iMessage access. I have to say, it's just better enough than a few things I have tried to really give me a glimpse of what is possible and make me excited. I am nervous about handing over a computer, my accounts, data, etc to a tireless bot that can destroy my life for a year on accident, but regardless I think this is startling good and fairly polished.
by hypeatei | 2026-01-26 01:07:32+00:00
I thought a lot of the rhetoric was around economic issues during the 2024 campaign season? I see this argument a lot, and while it's true that a sizable percentage voted for punishment of their political opponents, I don't think independents (in the immigration and "egg prices" camps) wanted this. Trump 2.0 voters should be ashamed because the signs were obvious, but the notion that we need to put kid gloves on for the vile, murderous fascists is asinine.

The next chapter of America needs to be punishing anyone who was apart of these death squads and the officials who allowed it to happen. That's it. There is no statute of limitations on murder or treason. We can't make the same mistakes as we did after the civil war (leniency towards confederates and various compromises)
by TomOwens | 2026-01-26 01:08:02+00:00
Point 2 misses the distinction between AI models and their outputs.

Let's assume for a moment that training AI (or, in other words, creating an AI model) is not fair use. That means that all of the license restrictions must be adhered to.

For the MIT license, the requirement is to include the copyright notice and permission notice "in all copies or substantial portions of the Software". If we're going to argue that the model is a substantial portion of the software, then only the model would need to carry the notices. And we've already settled on accessing over a server doesn't trigger these clauses.

Something like the AGPL is more interesting. Again, if we accept that the model is a derivative work of the content it was trained on, then the AGPL's viral nature would require that the model be released under an appropriate license. However, it still says nothing about the output. In fact, the GPL family licenses don't require the output of software under one of those licenses to be open, so I suspect that would also be true for content.

So far, though, in the US, it seems courts are beginning to recognize AI model training as fair use. Honestly, I'm not surprised, given that it was seen as fair use to build a searchable database of copyright-protected text. The AI model is an even more transformative use, since (from my understanding) you can't reverse engineer the training data out of a model.

But there is still the ethical question of disclosing the training material. Plagiarism still exists, even for content in the public domain. So attributing the complete set of training material would probably fall into this form of ethical question, rather than the legal questions around intellectual property and licensing agreements. How you go about obtaining the training material is also a relevant discussion, since even fair use doesn't allow you to pirate material, and you must still legally obtain it - fair use only allows you to use it once you've obtained it.

There are still questions for output, but those are, in my opinion, less interesting. If you have a searchable copy of your training material, you can do a fuzzy search of that material to return potential cases where the model returned something close to the original content. GitHub already does something similar with GitHub Copilot and finding public code that matches AI responses, but there are still questions there, too. It's more around matches that may not be in the training data or how much duplicated code needs to be attributed. But once you find the original content, working with licensing becomes easier. There are also questions about guardrails and how much is necessary to prevent exact reproduction of copyright protected material that, even if licensed for training, isn't licensed for redistribution.
by anonymous908213 | 2026-01-26 01:09:11+00:00
I don't agree. I think the chief problem with advertising is that it is extremely repetitive. I'm not, in principle, opposed to being informed about new things relevant to my interests existing. In a world that is completely oversaturated with content, it is hard to gain traction on something new with word-of-mouth alone, even if it is of very high quality. There is a point to being informed about something existing for the first time (maybe I'll use it), and there is a reason why people would have to pay to make use of that informational system (the barrier to entry is necessary to make the new thing stand out in the ocean of garbage).
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2026-01-26 01:09:22+00:00
You only needed the full copy of all atproto data for the first version of the relay protocol. Since "relay 1.1" relays became a lot thinner.

Nowadays you can run a relay which maintains the current firehose of events + some amount of backfill (commonly a day, week, or month).

Appviews listen to the relay and can save what they care about and can look to other relays if they need more backfill.

So in practice you have your relays for regular use which handle large amounts of outbound traffic and then you have "archival relays" which store all or large portions of the history.

And in the eventual future "archival relays" will likely end up providing backfill for extremely old history via something closer to IPFS (it's the same underlying data structures so this isn't a major change, just nobody has done it yet).

And of course in the event a particular bit of history is missing, a relay can just ask the PDS for a new copy of the data.

-----

TLDR: The 20usd/month is for a relay with like a month or so worth of backlog attached and you can get by with less/cheaper or with more.
by bnewbold | 2026-01-26 01:09:38+00:00
Thanks for the response Nora.

Because of your blog post I went through the process of setting up a did:web account myself this afternoon, and it was painful. Eg, I found a bug in our Go SDK causing that "deactivated" error (https://github.com/bluesky-social/indigo/pull/1281). I kept notes and will try to get out a blog post and update to 'goat' soon.

We've also been making progress on the architecture and governance of the PLC system. I don't know if those will assuage all concerns with that system immediately, but I do think they are meaningful steps in reducing operational dependency on Bluesky PBC.