MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by KaiserPro | 2026-01-05 22:26:02+00:00
Right which is my point. A genai character could probably negate it being CSAM, depending on how the case is argued.

But

the law applies if its a depiction of a person who is real, So a sexualised hand draw drawing of a recognisable person, (who is a minor) is CSAM.

Which means if someone says to grok "hey make a sexy picture of this[post of a minor]" and it generates a depiction of that minor, its CSAM.
by biophysboy | 2026-01-05 22:27:25+00:00
An AI porn tool makes the world less free, even with post hoc purges. That is the point.

If you want to be an actress and you are 14 years old, you now have to worry about tools that make porn of you.

If you are an ordinary woman that wants to share photos with your friends on instagram, you now have to worry about people making porn of you!
by metadope | 2026-01-05 22:27:28+00:00
I am a noob. I remember, it was not too long ago, when I first read the guidelines, took a deep breath, and submitted my very first comment.

I was immediately downvoted.

Zero karma. Into the Darkness. It was 200 days before I tried again (I'm sensitive).

As helpful as the guidelines[0] are, they are just the beginning of a learning experience. I've decided that participating in the HN community is like playing Zork[1]. You have to step to the edges to discover the boundaries. You have to feel your way through; you need to absorb the feedback you receive and find your way, without falling into the pit.

Often moderation comes from the veterans here. Some of the moderation process does seem mysterious to me; I am still exploring; it takes time to understand and map out all these connected rooms.

There is sometimes an 'unfairness' but life is equally unfair to everybody.

I hope I am never shadowbanned.

Now, let me get back to my game.

> Throw the sack at the troll

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zork
by vehemenz | 2026-01-05 22:27:34+00:00
Here are a few perfectly acceptable explanations.

1. Computer users were generally well-educated, unlike today.

2. UX designers didn’t inherit any mess and could operate from first principles.

3. The “experience” of modern users—phones, tablets, and software that does everything for you—doesn’t translate the way you think. And it explains why Gen Z seems to have regressed in terms of tech knowledge.
by ux266478 | 2026-01-05 22:27:42+00:00
Firstly, what we are talking about here is not "selling pornography" or "engaging in prostitution". It's a public event of widespread obscenity being actively defended by those who made it possible. I can't take your comparison seriously as being good faith.

Secondly, you posit it's "nearly impossible to find a man being killed for violating a morality law", which is true because of two factors. The first of which is because it's difficult to find any kind of representative sample of justice being meted out in Afghanistan because it's not freely and actively reported on. The second of which is because the punishment for violating moral laws is usually public flogging. The idea that these laws overwhelmingly target women is false, most of the time the people being punished for breaking morality laws are men: https://amu.tv/137185

It is clear to me the only thing you know about Afghanistan is that women unfortunately live as second class citizens. This is clear not only because of the naive things you say, but because you explicitly fall back to painting with ridiculously unspecific brushstrokes. With your knowledge exhausted, you revert to talking about "most fundamentalist religions", despite the domain already being pretty well defined to specifically the Taliban. You shoehorn in the misogyny angle, as though that's relevant to the context and makes your point stronger, but it's just vacuous nonsense. Your entire point seems to be that the justice system in Afghanistan primarily punishes women (which is an silly falsehood in and of itself), and that's why a major public figure enabling mass obscenity would entail no consequences? Are you actually out of your mind? There's simply no way you actually believe this crap. I'm sorry, that kind of naivete is just too ridiculous to buy.

The cherry on top is that you lead all of this crypto neo-orientalist shit with "I don't think you understand how religious fundamentalism works in practice". Give me a break.
by okayGravity | 2026-01-05 22:28:02+00:00
It all has to do with specific filler words you use when prompting, especially chatGPT. If you use words that suggest a heavy (and I mean you really have to make the LLM know you're questioning), then it will question to an extent as you imply. If you look at the chats that they do have from this incident, he phrased his prompts as more convincing rather than questioning (i.e "Shes doing this because of this!") So chatGPT roleplays and goes along with the delusion.

Most people will just talk to LLMs like they are a person, even though LLMs won't understand the difference in complex social language and reasoning. It's almost like robots aren't people!
by AlotOfReading | 2026-01-05 22:28:12+00:00
It's not a question of "how do you decide which public standards should be freely accessible". That's easy: all of them. The public benefits more from freely accessible standards whether they're building codes, legal codes, ISO standards, or HDMI. The effect of not having them publicly available is that people make-do without having read the standard and the public has no way to validate things against the standard afterwards.

The question we don't have an easy answer for is how to incentivise the people behind these things without locking their work behind paywalls? Compliance marks, homologation regimes, copyright, and other strategies all have their own downsides.
by bryanrasmussen | 2026-01-05 22:28:13+00:00
also let us suppose I have the following

.one span {color: red}

.one span {color: purple}

inside of a CSS file.

Again I don't think I could consider that as mutating state.

This is mutating state

let color = "red";

if (x} {
color = "purple";
}

because it mutates the variable value at run time based on something else.

The variable at different parts of the program have different values.

If you read .one span with the CSSOM in the above example it will always return color: purple.

That is not a mutated value, that is poorly written code that has been compiled down.
by olyjohn | 2026-01-05 22:28:25+00:00
Maybe you don't need such a huge generator. Run your fridge and a small heater, and only heat a small section of your house. Were talking about emergencies here, not keeping your hot tub running. I can heat a bedroom easily with a 1500 watt space heater. And my fridge pulls an average of about 150 watts. Quite honestly, a whole house generator is for convenience when there's a tree that falls on a power line. It sounds like a real waste for an actual emergency.
by senordevnyc | 2026-01-05 22:28:51+00:00
Pretty ironic that he complains about Kahn citing someone who told him AI agents are capable of replacing 80% of call center employees, right after quoting Gary Marcus of all people, claiming LLMs will never live up to the hype.

If you want to focus on what AI agents are actually capable of today, the last person I'd pay any attention to is Marcus, who has been wrong about nearly everything related to AI for years, and does nothing but double down.
by comex | 2026-01-05 22:29:08+00:00
The license ([1], based on [2]) prohibits use by law enforcement agencies (of any kind), tax collection agencies, suppliers and contractors of law enforcement agencies, the military, multinational corporations that participate in mass surveillance programs (only multinational ones for some reason??), and any entity offering goods or services whose supply chain involves any such entities. Among other categories!

On my reading, the wording is ambiguous as to whether it includes use by employees of these entities, or only by the entities themselves.

Either way, it would seem to put anyone in violation who has ever distributed a copy of any large open source project (e.g. Linux kernel), since the "processes involved in the production" of those projects involve large companies that have violated various of the provisions.

In practice this software seems to be usable only by people who do not take license compliance seriously.

[1] https://xn--gckvb8fzb.com/segv/

[2] https://firstdonoharm.dev
by pyuser583 | 2026-01-05 22:29:25+00:00
And this doesn't include the messiness in the decisions themselves. Judges often edit the decisions for some time after they are published.

For example, Souter was editing his published opinion in Lee v. Weisman nine years after the case was decided.

https://balkin.blogspot.com/2025/05/a-justice-souter-anecdot...
by noelwelsh | 2026-01-05 22:29:28+00:00
I understand the original Selective Functor, so an introduction to that is not what I'm after. I want to understand this new formalization, because it's the kind of thing I use, but I'm not a theoretician. If the goal of this post is simply to explain the formalization to the small number of people who are already deep into (category) theory, I guess it does a fine job. However, I think a better post would be more accessible.

I think the blog post does a good job describing the idea of Selective ("finite-case" etc.) but for me it falls apart shortly afterwards. If I was writing it, from what I understood I would start with the overview, then describe `CaseTree`, and then go into what abstractions this is an instance of.

As a small example of how I think the writing could be improved, take this sentence:

"This is in contrast to applicative functors, which have no “arrow of time”: their structure can be dualized to run effects in reverse because it has no control flow required by the interface."

This uses jargon where it's not necessary. There is no need to mention duality, and the "arrow of time" isn't very helpful unless you've had some fairly specific education. I feel it's sufficient to say that applicatives don't represent any particular control-flow and therefore can be run in any order.
by adventured | 2026-01-05 22:29:36+00:00
Nuclear deterrent is absurd.

You have to assume everyone is willing to die over every single thing short of obliteration.

So what's the scenario then? Venezuela has nukes. The US abducts Maduro. Venezuela launches its nukes, everyone dies on both sides. Please, explain that laughable premise. Everyone in Venezuela dies for Maduro? Go on, explain it, I'll wait.

Back in reality: Venezuela has nukes. The US abducts Maduro. Venezuela shakes its fists at the sky, threatens nuclear hell fire. Nothing happens. Why? The remaining leadership of Venezuela does not in fact want to die for Maduro.
by Terr_ | 2026-01-05 22:29:37+00:00
P.S.: In that scenario, it's quite possible for both groups of conspirators to benefit from denying it and saber-rattling:

* The (remaining) Venezuelan government gets to point to Big Evil America to unify (or crack-down-upon) an unhappy public, and they avoid being personally tarred as unpatriotic.

* Trump et al. get to "wag the dog" as distraction from crimes and mismanagement back home.
by paxys | 2026-01-05 22:30:05+00:00
False DMCA takedown requests have always been a problem, and have massively surged in the last few years when more of the general public figured out the mechanics and started treating it as a big downvote button for the internet. This is also being done adversarially at a large scale, for example to suppress websites or YouTube videos containing certain viewpoints or to remove competition. So regardless of how Google has treated these requests in the past, they are absolutely right to want to verify that you actually are the content owner before taking further action.

As for how to do it - I don't see why it is hard for you to come up with something that proves ownership. Do your books have a publisher? Do you have a contract with the publisher? Or just a letter from someone at the firm confirming your work? Have you registered the work with the copyright office? Do you have proof of publishing on online portals?

You aren't helping yourself or anyone else by anthropomorphising Google. It is not your friend who can "break your heart", or a "trustworthy helper on the Web", or a "trusted ally", but a large bureaucratic corporation. Treat it like the machine it is and you will get the results you want.
by ZoomZoomZoom | 2026-01-05 22:30:10+00:00
You're confused at multiple levels.

> free to continue making whatever music that they want

Never said they weren't.

> can refuse to listen to the AI music if they don't want to

A musician can be a listener, indeed. If you believe a listener has this freedom and will keep it, you're most probably mistaken. No one besides musicians and discerning, ideologically relentless listeners is interested in making NN-generated music distinguishable and supporting the right of filtering it. The goal is to supplant one with the other.

> The fact that 2 other, unrelated 3rd parties both like to make AI music and listen to AI music…

Listeners is not an unrelated party to a musician. They form a vital symbiosis. And it's a zero-sum game, as listener's attention is a limited resource.

> They do not get to decide what other people like to listen to or make.

This is an unrelated point. Who decides what is a separate topic.

The crux of the issue is that we have two types of superficially similar product which are in fact substantially different (hope this does not require clarification) and incomparable in terms of resources necessary for their creation. This begets unprecedented power imbalance and incentives for deceit, biased legislation and other moves to solidify this situation.
by JasonADrury | 2026-01-05 22:30:35+00:00
>Would your answer change if China were somehow guaranteed to not intervene? Because I'm not sure the obstacle here is North Korean defenses, so much as Chinese intervention.

No. The obstacle isn't Chinese intervention, the obstacle is that such an operation would have to be significantly larger and it would take longer. There would be much more air defense assets to suppress, and some of them would be impossible to effectively defeat.

A helicopter assault on either of those cities would in the most optimistic scenario take hours of preparatory bombing, which would give a plenty of time for nuclear retaliation by North Korea. Both countries would also certainly have better safeguarding mechanisms for their heads of state, during that bombing they would be evacuated and now you'd probably be looking at the very least at a weeks-long operation.

Assassination is a different thing, but I would suspect that for purely psychological reasons a rapid kidnapping operation like this would be far less likely to invite anything more than symbolic retaliation than a single targeted missile strike. This kind of operation would be far more confusing for the enemy than a simple assassination, and the window during which for example nuclear retaliation might make sense tends to be rather small.

>Tehran? I think it'd go more or less like Caracas did.

Tehran doesn't have a fancy air defense network, but it does have one. They'd have shot down every single helicopter. You don't even need fancy missiles, a bunch of .50cal machine guns will do the trick.
by adrianwaj | 2026-01-05 22:30:48+00:00
After reading a bunch of threads, I think the future is Vibe Apps.. not Vibe-coded apps. Code will become a thing of the past. Python will become like Assembly or Machine code. AIs will get better at reading language documentation too. Hence, Systems Analysis and Design will be more in demand than SWE.

The AIs will interview users (including observing screens) and watch how their systems are being used in real-time. They will see what/where people are spending money too.

The best users on HN of AI seem to be the ones that have the clearest visions and express that in a way that allows them to bypass code.

CRM SaaS for example will be replaced by people that say: Give me a CRM according to these parameters and integrating into these systems... etc. So like cPanel on steroids.

Also, AI will want access to train on systems. Maybe that's a business model: charging AIs to access servers to analyze different architecture implementations and business rules.

In the end, I wouldn't be surprised if things go more closed-source but that's just a feeling and the major $$$ will be made on hardware only or providing the documentation and software for AIs to train on. Something like that anyway. Maybe crypto is where the alliances will be made as systems become centered around those instead of languages.
by Analemma_ | 2026-01-05 22:31:00+00:00
Isn't this what people are constantly asking for? Every time the topic of YouTube copyright strikes comes up, people angrily demand that Google verify that the person making the request actually has the right to do so.

There's no way to design such a system that has zero false positives and zero false negatives; if you do no verification whatsoever you'll get tons of false positives, now it seems like Google has added a small amount of verification, at least sometimes, so now there are some false negatives.
by Zetaphor | 2026-01-05 22:31:01+00:00
It is trivially easy to filter this with an LLM or even just a basic CLIP model. Will it be 100% foolproof? Not likely. Is it better than doing absolutely nothing and then blaming the users? Obviously. We've had this feature in the image generation tools since the first UI wrappers around Stable Diffusion 1.0.
by DennisP | 2026-01-05 22:31:01+00:00
Generally, you want specialized robots only for tasks that can keep the robots busy most of the time. If you have a variety of low-volume tasks, you can't fill your factory with specialized robots for all of them. You need more general-purpose workers that can do all those different things. Right now those workers are humans. That's where humanoid robots could fill a role.
by mrguyorama | 2026-01-05 22:31:14+00:00
>Because they are interactive, they are best positioned to leverage AI tech.

You have not supported this argument.

On the contrary, I think LLMs are not a big help.

We've already been here. Procedural generation was the magical solution that was supposed to help a single dev make giant worlds. And it did. It helped you make giant, utterly empty and soulless worlds.

Great for minecraft. Not so great for No Mans Sky, as there were significant limitations. Useless for anything that depends on a story or immersion in that story or characters.

This idea that you can wire an in game character up to an LLM is misguided and doesn't seem to understand what players want a character to be.

In Mass Effect 2, a fan favorite character infamously had little content for most of the game. Garrus was a very loved character, including being the love interest for a lot of people who played the game, but during 2 he just sits in a part of your ship and says "Sorry, can't talk, running some calibrations" for almost the entire game.

Put the entire game's script into an LLM as context and have it pretend to be Garrus and try and talk to it. Will the LLM take a strong stance that Garrus would take? Will it correctly figure out that Garrus would rather kill a bad guy than let him get away, and then have him make convincing arguments about that in reference to the previous mission, and then in the next mission put you in a situation where you have to decide whether Garrus is right and whether you should dome that "Bad Guy" instead of letting the police fail to aprehend him? Will that Garrus make you think about this world and your place in it and whether your personal or chosen morals are right?

Probably not.

People don't want to chat about the weather with random NPCs. People want characters that have character notes and integrate into the story and make you feel.

So far LLMs can't really write that well, and certainly are not cohesive and multidisciplinary enough to be able to build that into a game in a convincing way.

There's a famous game called "Facade" which plays up this big fanfare about how it uses "AI" and Natural Language Processing to bring two characters to life for you to talk with and navigate a crisis with, but it's almost entirely lies. The actual logic of how it works is almost identical to old fashioned text adventure parsers in their heyday. It's a heavily scripted sequence, with fairly few actual paths it can take, and the script is not that big. It got so much press for what was basically done in the 80s. I think some people have tried to hook LLMs into it, but it just doesn't feel good. The problems that AI dungeon adventure game always had still exist, just under more paint.
by sleepyguy | 2026-01-05 22:31:31+00:00
>Today Cuba is irrelevant.

Cuba has been linked to supporting terrorist activities. Over 20,000 Cubans are reportedly fighting alongside Russian forces in Ukraine. The Cuban government has also been known to back authoritarian regimes worldwide. For instance, it was a Cuban intelligence group assigned to protect Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that was reportedly targeted and eliminated by U.S. Delta Force during an operation to capture Maduro. This incident highlighted that Maduro did not trust his own security forces.

In addition, the U.S. government has accused Cuba of being involved in the "Havana Syndrome," a series of mysterious health incidents where American diplomats were reportedly attacked using a radio frequency weapon. The device was later found to be in the possession of a Russian agent in Florida (see 60 minutes Investigation). Despite Cuba's severe economic hardships, it continues to find resources to support global terror activities. This occurs even as basic necessities, like bread, are difficult to obtain within Cuba itself.

Hope that the U.S. will eventually put an end to the communist regime in Cuba.
by array_key_first | 2026-01-05 22:31:40+00:00
Misogyny doesn't just mean you hate women. It can also mean you believe them lesser, or you do not respect women, or you are actively trying to undermine them.

Sharing lewd pictures is using the tools of the patriarchy to shame and humiliate women. That's misogyny.

Think of it this way. I want to humiliate a black man online, so I generate a picture of him eating a huge watermelon slice and share it around for giggles. Is that racism? Of course it is.
by 2ndnaturewater | 2026-01-05 22:31:49+00:00
2NDNATURE | Director of Engineering (Player-Coach) | Santa Cruz, CA | ONSITE

2NDNATURE is a small SaaS company providing stormwater management software to municipalities and corporations. We have a mature product grounded in science, a solid customer base, and are at a technical inflection point.
We are looking for our Director of Engineering to be a true "player-coach"—a hands-on leader who loves writing code (60% of the role) and mentoring a small team of developers. You will lead our transition into an AI-first platform, helping us adopt modern tools like Claude Code and Copilot to scale our capacity.
The Role:
Lead by example: Write code, review PRs, and establish engineering best practices (testing, CI/CD, SOC2).
Collaborate: Work directly with the CEO and CPO. We value transparent decision-making over isolated technical dictation.
Teach: Mentor our team on modern practices, system architecture and AI-assisted development.
Requirements:
-7+ years in software engineering with leadership experience.
-Be in the Santa Cruz office 3 days per week. (office is a block from the beach).
-Pragmatic builder who understands SaaS for regulated industries.
How to Apply: Send resume and thoughtful cover letter to careers@2ndnaturewater.com. See full job description on careers page of our website www.2ndnaturewater.com