MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CamperBob2 | 2026-01-15 21:43:03+00:00
I don't use a Mac so can't run Cowork, but the normal Claude CLI is pretty good at general automation tasks (as is Codex-CLI and Gemini CLI.)

Most recent example: I wanted to try out GLM-image when it dropped the other day, but didn't feel like spending an hour dealing with multifile, multidirectory HuggingFace downloads and all the usual Python dependency headaches. So I made an empty directory, ran Claude Code, and told it "Please download all files from https://huggingface.co/zai-org/GLM-Image/tree/main into this directory and test the model." An hour later, I tabbed back to the console window and there was the sample image file.

Looking at the transcript, sure enough, it ran into all the usual headaches and hassles... but the difference is I didn't have to deal with them.

Note that I didn't tell it "Use uv to test the model" -- I just YOLOed it with my system Python installation. If I later find that it broke something else, oh, well... that sounds like a job for Claude, too.

Another thing that's nice about these CLI tools is that they hide the differences between terminals pretty effectively. I ran this particular task in a Windows DOS box, but could just as easily have used PowerShell, a Mac, or a Linux terminal. The idea of not having to care what OS I'm running is an alluring one, given the steady enshittification of Windows.
by al_borland | 2026-01-15 21:43:16+00:00
I don't think this is true. For math, even with an LLM, you need to know how to ask the question properly to get a good answer. If you don't know the basics you'll end up talking in circles to describe what should be a pretty basic problem.

Instead of 120/6, you'd end up writing, "I'm on lunch with a few friends, we got the bill and it was $120. There are 6 of us here. How much should each of us pay if we want to split the bill?"

Now imagine how complicated the prompt would get with a problem that's actually difficult and how easy it could be to state the question in a way that provided the wrong context. When this happens, without a foundation, you won't have any idea of the answer is way off or not.

Back when I was in school we'd have answers given to us and had to determine if they made sense without doing the exact calculation. This is very useful. With the 120/6 example. If the LLM said to pay $0.05 each, it should trigger something in a person to think that's not right and to examine the question that was asked. This may be an extreme example, but this stuff happens all the time.

There are also quick calculations that are useful, but where asking an LLM every time isn't practical. Price comparisons in a store, measuring stuff in your home to make sure a piece of furniture fits. Without any math foundation would they be able to read and understand a tape measure enough to actually measure and enter in the right stuff? Do you want them to need to consult an LLM to know that a wall that is 5 1/4" long will accommodate a cabinet that is 5 1/16" wide? These are things some people can't figure out today, and they had math class.

I can't imagine how helpless someone would feel if they had to reach for a phone with billions of dollars worth of infrastructure behind it just to answer basic questions that everyone around them can figure out in their head.

The foundation should always be there. It's more a question of how high do you go with it. But if the kid likes it and is good at it, why take that away from them? Also, remember that you're cherry picking exceptional examples of where it worked. There are a lot of examples where the LLMs have been embarrassingly bad at math (counting the number of "r" in "strawberry"). Math is built on rules, and LLMs are a text prediction engine... they don't necessarily know the rules or have real logic. LLMs also tend to look smart to someone who doesn't know the subject, and kind of dumb to the experts in a field.

As an aside, my high school had some kind of new math program that failed to go into depth on each topic of mathematics that people normally learn. I had been really good at math, but this screwed me over in college and now, 25 years later, I'm still upset that a solid foundation in math is taken from me. I could self-study, but it's harder to prioritize that when there are so many things competing for attention. When the kids are young is the time to do it.
by alexisread | 2026-01-15 21:43:18+00:00
Tip of the hat there, it’s a very selfless thing to commit to caregiving. From a 50kft view, we have an aging demographic globally, and the bet seems to be robotics- hopefully they will get good enough to help meaningfully in this capacity. What happens to an economic system predicated around having more kids (GDP growth) is another concern.
by alphazard | 2026-01-15 21:43:37+00:00
This sounds suspiciously like the average developer, which is what the transformer models have been trained to emulate.

Designing good APIs is hard, being good at it is rare.
That's why most APIs suck, and all of us have a negative prior about calling out to an API or adding a dependency on a new one.
It takes a strong theory of mind, a resistance to the curse of knowledge, and experience working on both sides of the boundary, to make a good API.
It's no surprise that Claude isn't good at it, most humans aren't either.
by truenfel | 2026-01-15 21:43:50+00:00
I've been working on something called Open Enough Design (OED). The core idea: most rooms force a binary choice between total isolation (the bunker) and overwhelming exposure (the stage). Neither works. What works is a dial you can adjust.

In my book "Leave the Door Open" I suggest simple, high leverage moves anyone can do. Three examples of practical moves that cost nothing:

-Turn your chair to face the door instead of a wall. Your nervous system relaxes when it can see who's coming.

- If you live alone, open your door or window four inches for an hour. The sounds of life beyond your walls remind your body you're not alone on the planet.

- Put out a second chair. Even if no one visits. It shifts your internal posture from "no one is coming" to "I'm expecting life to enter."

Small changes, I know. But the room shapes you as much as you shape it. It's a virtuous cycle.

I write about this at oedmethod.substack.com if you want to go deeper.
by wrs | 2026-01-15 21:43:51+00:00
"LLM as Socratic tutor" isn't quite right, because the LLM can't be trusted. But I have had great results with "LLM as debating partner". Basically, I try to explain the thing I'm learning and have the LLM critique me. Then I critique the LLM, because it usually says something that doesn't quite make sense (or I ask it cite its source and it recants its statement). A few rounds of this is (I think) really helpful for cementing my understanding.
by OliverGilan | 2026-01-15 21:43:58+00:00
Maintainer here.

In the case where a human edits a previously AI-generated line we simply track that as a human-produced line of code. We are thinking of making this a distinct subcategory because there's a lot of useful info in that data.

Regarding performance we haven't done rigorous benchmarks but we've been using this internally and haven't noticed any problems
by seneca | 2026-01-15 21:44:45+00:00
> it's entirely coming from you and your experiences, and nothing to do with me and my own personality except for the one thing we have somewhat in common, means that your comment is to me merely a representation of you and what you stand for. Which is great and beautiful, but it doesn't cross the bridge of being a meaningful comment on my end.

Man, well said. People who "over engage" are doing it out of a sense of kindness, but you're right that it feels hollow and is really just about them.

I think the solution to this is basically what you're doing. Build small connections via whatever engagement mechanism you can and let them organically grow into meaningful ones. Jumping from zero to pretending you have a meaningful connection is exactly why those gestures feel hollow. There is no shortcut, it takes time.

Sounds like you're making those initial connections with your signs, which I think is great.
by epistasis | 2026-01-15 21:45:37+00:00
> Reddit is mostly bots, astro-turfers and people so brainwashed it's hard to tell the difference. I remember disagreeing with people on there (this in the pre-Digg migration era) you would get interesting divergent points of view. Now it's like people are reading from a script.

It's hard to classify Reddit as one thing, the communities are all so different.

The subreddit for my town has led to several new friends that I meet with in person. Most of that came from coming together to advocate for something at a city council meeting or similar, where there was a directed meat space purpose. Getting together for hobbies like hiking or other things happens once in a while too.

On other, technical subreddits dedicated to digging deep into details, there are few bots. It's all real people with shared interests. Reddit is far better than most forums that I frequent for finding those communities.

The few times I have been swarmed by bots on Reddit was when I touched on a topic where, say, Russia had a strategic interest, then the subreddit would get tons of new commentators from other subreddits, which was the indication of bots. Fortunately the mods took swift action when this happened, becuase my god the discourse is awful when bots flood the zone with their babble.
by onemoresoop | 2026-01-15 21:46:20+00:00
It’s a bit like the shift from film to digital in one very specific sense: the marginal cost of trying again virtually collapsed. When every take cost money and setup time, creators pre-optimized in their head and often never explore half their ideas. When takes became cheap, creators externalized thought as they could try, look, adjust, and discover things they wouldn’t otherwise. Creators could wander more. They could afford to be wrong because of not constantly paying a tax for being clumsy or incomplete, they became more willing to follow a hunch.

Digital didn’t magically improve art, but it let many more creatives enter the loop of idea, attempt and feedback. LLMs feel similar: they don’t give you better ideas by themselves, but they remove the friction that used to stop you from even finding out whether an idea was viable. That changes how often you learn, and how far you’re willing to push a thought before abandoning it. I've done so many little projects myself that I would have never had time for and feel that I learned something from it, of course not as much if I had all the pre LLM friction, but it should still count for something as I would never have attempted them.

Edit: However, the danger isn’t that we’ll have too many ideas, it’s that we’ll confuse movement with progress.

When friction is high, we’re forced to pre-compress thought, to rehearse internally, to notice contradictions before externalizing them. That marination phase (when doing something slowly) does real work: it builds mental models, sharpens the taste and teaches us what not to bother to try. Some of that vanishes when the loop becomes cheap enough that we can just spray possibilities into the world and see what sticks.

A low-friction loop biases us toward breadth over depth. We can skim the surface of many directions without ever sitting long enough in one to feel its resistance. The skill of holding a half-formed idea in our head, letting it collide with other thoughts, noticing where it feels weak, atrophies if every vague notion immediately becomes a prompt.

There’s also a cultural effect. When everyone can produce endlessly, the environment fills with half-baked or shallow artifacts. Discovery becomes harder as signal to noise drops.

And on a personal level, it can hollow out satisfaction. Friction used to give weight to output. Finishing something meant you had wrestled with it. If every idea can be instantiated in seconds, each one feels disposable. You can end up in a state of perpetual prototyping, never committing long enough for anything to become yours.

So the slippery slope is not laziness, it is shallowness, not that people won’t think, but people won’t sit with thoughts. The challenge here is to preserve deliberate slowness inside a world that no longer requires it: to use the cheap loop for exploration, while still cultivating the ability to pause, compress, and choose what deserves to exist at all.
by godelski | 2026-01-15 21:46:24+00:00
> but my Windows gaming desktop has been running more or less without issue (barring hardware failure), no reinstalls, since 2019

This also describes my Linux desktop.

> I tried so hard to use Linux on my laptop

Unfortunately comparing a laptop to a desktop is not a fair comparison. Things are better than they were in 2019 but display and battery are constant issues (especially if you have a laptop with an nvidia graphics card).[0]

I'm not trying to say Linux doesn't have issues, but I do need to point out that your logic has a strong bias to it. I'll also add that while I have no problems gaming on my Linux desktop (thanks Valve!!), I don't usually play online games or MMOs but my understanding is that this is problematic for Linux systems as anticheat is a pain.

[0] My friend has a Framework laptop which has PopOS on it and he's said he's had no issues with it. He's used other Linux laptops before and has expressed this has been a very different experience. I think it helps that they're more aware of the hardware and can do more robust testing on that hardware.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-15 21:46:32+00:00
> How does OpenAI get it so wrong, when Anthropic gets it so right?

Are you saying people aren't having proto-social relationships with Anthorpic's models? Because I don't think that's true, seems people use ChatGPT, Claude, Grok and some other specific services too, although ChatGPT seems the most popular. Maybe that just reflects general LLM usage then?

Also, what is "wrong" here really? I feel like the whole concept is so new that it's hard to say for sure what is best for actual individuals. It seems like we ("humanity") are rushing into it, no doubt, and I guess we'll find out.
by palmotea | 2026-01-15 21:46:58+00:00
> Pretending that immigrants are the underlying cause of every societal failure is how you get MAGA. Enabling that big lie bolsters it.

What are you going to do, win elections by lecturing everyone about how they're wrong and they need to think just like you? People thought the Biden administration's immigration policy was too lax, and that was a major contributing cause to the second Trump term.

Deporting people who are in the country illegally is a no brainer. If you don't want that, get the law changed. Until then, it's not wrong to deport them.

Now, that doesn't mean deportation should be the only or even the main method of immigration enforcement (personally, I like the idea of putting more burden on employers).

> And I don't think I can enumerate the ways in which an occupied house are different from a country and unsuitable for the metaphor you're trying.

Oh of course, it's always too different if you want it to be. That way, you can continue to feel righteous.
by ako | 2026-01-15 21:47:22+00:00
It's basically not very different from working with an average development team as a product owner/manager: you need to feed it specific requirements or it will hallucinate some requirements, bugs are expected, even with unit test and testers on the team. And yes, as a product owner you also make mistakes, never have all the requirements up front, but the nice thing working with a GenAI coder is that you can iterate over these requirement gaps, hallucinated requirements and bugs in minutes, not in days.
by epolanski | 2026-01-15 21:47:41+00:00
Meanwhile in Italy, the whole renewables discussion is gaslighted by "we should actually consider nuclear" and "wind turbines ruin the panorama".

I'm not against nuclear per se, but it's like this part of italians don't realize that:

1. if you decide to make a power plant today, it won't be online before the 2050s, in the best case scenario. It's very difficult to bring nuclear plants online, especially in the west. Even the countries with the capital and know-how (US and France) see more projects cancelled than brought online. I think US has put online a single nuclear plant in 20 years, France not a single one.

2. Nuclear needs tons of water, we have less and less of it as it rains less and global warming doesn't accumulate enough snow in the alps (which generally melts in the summer), our rivers are literally dry stone most of the year.

3. Renewables can be attached to the grid (or close to where they are needed) in the span of few months and with very little know-how required.

4. Money isn't limitless, building a 20B+ nuclear plant (realistically 50 knowing these projects + Italy) means this budget won't be available for the next decade on projects that could bring benefits immediately.

I'm sure that Italy and Germany, which are manufacturing heavy countries that need lots of energy cannot rely renewables alone, of course nuclear should be considered, but hell, in my region (around Rome), 95% of our energy comes from imported natural gas, I'm sure we could invest some more in that.
by soulofmischief | 2026-01-15 21:47:42+00:00
> knowing that it's entirely coming from you and your experiences, and nothing to do with me and my own personality

That's not the point of empathy and not the point of my outreach. I don't need to know you precisely or be within a certain proximity in order to empathize with you.

> A year ago, I was talking to the local Catholic priest (I was donating some religious statues that I had effectively inherited), and it came up in conversation that I was going through a rough time. He went in for a hug, and it felt so absolutely empty and disingenuous.

For what it's worth, the man who did these things to me was a Catholic deacon, and the hypocrisy is blood-boiling. He would give very pleasant-sounding homilies about love, acceptance, patience and understanding, and then come home and savagely beat and torture me through physically painful punishments and extended periods of isolation. I would not go to a Catholic leader if you are looking for surefire genuinity. The institution attracts performative, power-seeking individuals.

> What do I say next? What's the next thing we can do in that interaction, or maybe a later one if I ever see them again?

It's a combination of bridging and bonding. Meeting individuals, like myself or a stranger on the street, and learning that you have something in common which provides substrate for conversation and communication through a shared experience, is bridging. Developing those relationships by building around that core is bonding.

We typically bond contextually: We both go to the same school or office and see each other daily, or we run into each other at the store each week, etc. I once ended up becoming best friends and living with someone who was my cashier at Trader Joes.

Instead of telling me our personalities and experiences have nothing to do with each other, we could discuss our experiences, find commonalities that are more than surface-level, and bond over those. I've met great people on this website. I've met some of them in person. Friends are all over the place, hiding in plain sight.
by iamacyborg | 2026-01-15 21:47:49+00:00
Here’s an example of a plan I’m working on in CC, it’s very thorough, albeit required a lot of handholding and fact checking on a number of points as it’s first few passes didn’t properly anonymise data.

https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1zo_VkQGQSuBHCP45DfO7...
by andy99 | 2026-01-15 21:48:25+00:00
it only gleans logic from human language

This isn’t really true, at least how I interpret the statement, little if any of the “logic” or appearance of such is learned from language. It’s trained in with reinforcement learning as pattern recognition.

Point being it’s deliberate training, not just some emergent property of language modeling. Not sure if the above post meant this, but it does seem a common misconception.
by mtmail | 2026-01-15 21:49:06+00:00
https://x.com/arjunworks_ is the author based on the playbook (PDF), https://trynexus.vercel.app is the product based on preview Show HN post.

From the playbook

"The Exact Launch I did for my SaaS:"

"Pre-launch (3 days before):
Posted on Twitter: "Launching Nexus on Friday -
AI memory for multi-agent systems"

I can't find such tweet on the author's twitter feed. No mention of a launch on his linkedin feed either.

"Posted on Product Hunt at 12:01am PT"

I can't find a producthunt launch for Nexus.

"Shared to Twitter, Indie Hackers, relevant Discords"

I can't find a single tweet mentioning trynexus.vercel.app

"What Didn't Work [...] $10/mo signaled "cheap tool." When I raised to $25/mo, nobody
complained"

trynexus.vercel.app still lists $10/month.

On the website all links to subpages are empty. Pricing says "coming soon", only payment method is Zelle which would be direct bank transfer (one-off, not a subscription).

Maybe I'm looking at the wrong Nexus?
by jakewins | 2026-01-15 21:49:21+00:00
.. you are commenting on an article about how non-carbon-emitting energy options are beating out polluting alternatives, aided by exactly these taxes, so obviously yes, they are working exactly as intended: price signals for the market to get carbon out of the energy system

The purpose of the tax is not to raise money to plant trees, it’s to raise the cost of emissions so that markets
move away from them
by TheAlchemist | 2026-01-15 21:49:34+00:00
It's a very good post.

From my personnal experience, this describes perfectly why people coming from poorer backgrounds struggle to get good jobs. Quite often, you just can't wait for the right job - you need to pay the bills so you take the first one available, even if you know that it's not the best choice for you. But it's the only realistic one, because waiting 3-6 months for the good opportunity is simply off the table. Then the job you take, it takes you a lot of time and effort anyway so this right opportunity 3 months later is no longer realistic neither.
by huntaub | 2026-01-15 21:49:41+00:00
These are basic POSIX features, but I think the high-level point that Kurt is trying to make is that building a FUSE file system signs you up for a nearly unlimited amount of compatibility work (if you want to support most applications) whereas their approach (just do a loopback ext4 fs into a large file) avoids a lot of those problems.

My expectations are that in 2026 we will see more and more developers attempt to build custom FUSE file systems and then run into the long tail of compatibility pain.
by rustystump | 2026-01-15 21:49:45+00:00
This is pretty spot on. It is like telling deug addicts to stop buying legal and unregulated drugs. Never gonna work.

Real change will require enforced regulation on the methods and tactics social media is allowed to use. Things like notification limits, rules on gamification, feed transparency, and more.

In the states this will never happen. The corporations own the rules.
by falloutx | 2026-01-15 21:50:22+00:00
> believing that an immigration queue should exist and skipping it is immoral and should be illegal.

Honestly, There is no queue for poor people, this is their only way, most of these people aren't even eligible for farm worker temp visa. US has created bureaucracy over the years in such a way that these people can never become legal. They are not skipping the line and taking some tech worker's spot or anything.
by mr_00ff00 | 2026-01-15 21:51:10+00:00
Sure much you will end up with more energy consumed. If it’s a free ration, almost everyone will consume all that they are given up to the limit.

Under the current system, when energy becomes hard to produce or more people need it, rising prices means people will reduce. So pricing for cost of financing, sure, but it might be a higher cost because people will consume more.