MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 0x3f | 2026-01-21 15:18:45+00:00
Well yes, that is how many things work, but it being common isn't a great argument for it being good. With banking, for example, I'd much prefer a low-touch technological solution. You could argue fingerprinting _is_ a low-touch technological solution, although I'm not sure it's particularly good at enforcing who is who at driving time.
by mixermachine | 2026-01-21 15:18:45+00:00
Regarding the $200 subscription.
For Claude Code with Opus (and also Sonnet) you need that, yes.

I had ChatGPT Codex GPT5.2 high reasoning running on my side project for multiple hours the last nights.
It created a server deployment for QA and PROD + client builds.
It waited for the builds to complete, got the logs from Github Actions and fixed problems.
Only after 4 days of this (around 2-4 hours) active coding I reached the weekly limit for the ChatGPT Plus Plan (23€).
Far better value so far.

To be fully honest, it fucked up one flyway script. I have to fix this now my self :D. Will write a note in the Agent.md to never alter existing scripts.
But the work otherwise was quite solid and now my server is properly deployed.
If I would switch between High reasoning for Planing and Middle reasoning for coding, I would get even more usage.
by amluto | 2026-01-21 15:18:46+00:00
In most (all?) US states, you can just start a company. You file a form, usually online, with the state, and you ask the IRS, online, for an ID number called an EIN. Technically you have a valid company after just step 1, but good luck getting any sort of bank account without doing step 2.

If you want to employ people, you need to file gratuitously obnoxious paperwork, but it’s still automatic.

What’s the actual problem? Why should it be harder?

Some states like California dislike small businesses in that they charge $800/year. But that’s pretty much it.
by sublinear | 2026-01-21 15:18:49+00:00
> they can easily pick up most of it after a week long crash course

I have to disagree and question what you mean by "optimization". It's very easy to write web code that technically accomplishes a task, but does so poorly. This is the natural consequence of having so many options available.

The vast majority of web devs with less than 5 years of experience simply don't understand plain javascript well enough. It's a longstanding problem that devs will reach for the most ergonomic tools, not the best tools.

Lacking sufficient experience, they can't help it. This happens in all programming languages and in all layers of software. AI slop is even worse because it tends towards the mean.
by josefritzishere | 2026-01-21 15:19:05+00:00
We've been watching a series of decisons which seem random, utterly lacking in strategy. Some pundits keep muttering about 4D chess but it's been a year with a profound lack of economic stewardship. I think we can safely assume there is no strategy, unless the goal is chaos. It seems more likely there just is no plan, and no plan to form one, and that the outcome for everyone will continue to be uncertain at best.
by shevy-java | 2026-01-21 15:19:41+00:00
What is strange is that this happens in several countries at the same time.

I never found out why this is the case, because there can be many explanations. In general the global tendency is that the more and more digital data is there, the more and more states want to surveil people and invade onto their privacy. This is functional erosion of rights. I don't know of many states that counter that trend.
by freetonik | 2026-01-21 15:19:54+00:00
> with the claim that we should move from “validating architecture” to “validating behavior.” In practice, this seems to mean: don’t look at the code; if tests and CI pass, ship it.

But... tests and CI are also code. It may be buggy, it may not cover enough, etc. It is also likely written by an LLM in this scenario. So, it's more like a move from “validating architecture” to “LLM-based self-validating”
by friendzis | 2026-01-21 15:20:03+00:00
> Its also a chicken and egg problem. Having a revenue means having a company and vice versa.

How would you pay your employees making the product/service that will eventually bring in the revenue? That's what "own capital" is for.

Typical LLC/JSC will have at the very least one employee -- the CEO -- and that will bring one minimum wage worth of expenses (sort of). There are legal entity types that can function without employees with shareholders sort of self-employing, but those are not universal across the EU.
by hirvi74 | 2026-01-21 15:20:10+00:00
I would never recommend my method for every type of application nor perhaps even most. However, I have had great success with not using soft deletes at all. I just write the records to a duplicate table then hard delete the records from the main table.

Of course, in a system with 1000s of tables, I would not likely do this. But for simpler systems, it's been quite a boon.
by foxinthebox | 2026-01-21 15:20:20+00:00
Thanks for the feedback! I tried to make the search feature in the nav bar (Cmd+K on desktop) to support searching for both verses and references but I can look at adding the traditional navigation as well.

And on translations, I started off with languages that I cared about but I can add more as well. Happy to prioritize any languages that you'd like to see.

Edit: Clicking the book name at the top should also pull up a bible picker
by ruslan | 2026-01-21 15:20:25+00:00
When I was watching that Lunduke's video a couple of days ago initially I was thinking he's just making a joke of that Vendefoul Wolf distro on 200MB box. I recalled using FreeBSD as access server with lots of modems (PPP/SLIP), Apache, Samba and QuakeWorld server running on a box with just 32MB of RAM. That was also my daily working machine with XF86 and Enlightenment desktop manager, circa 2000. So, 200MB is a whole lot of memory!
by surgical_fire | 2026-01-21 15:20:30+00:00
> A decade ago you could quickly check the blue mark and know that the account most likely belonged to the person it was labelled for.

They routinely removed blue checkmarks of people that had naughty opinions. The account was known to belong to the actual person. This was no mistake, it was just the good boy badge being removed for vibes.

My point is not that Twitter now under its retarded billionaire king is better. It is not.

It was shit then, it is shit now. The world would be objectively a better place if Twitter had never existed.

The turd just smells different under Musk. You happened to enjoy the old smell.
by 1dom | 2026-01-21 15:21:09+00:00
> an IPv4 NAT and an IPv6 default deny rule are equivalent in security: both uphold the invariant

Yes, you're correct, on some level, they are equivalent: in both cases, packets don't reach the target machine. That is one of the few levels on which they are equivalent.

> There's no basis for claiming the two schemes differ in the level of security provided.

Yes there is, this is basic secure architecture and secure by design principals. If you understand these principals, you will understand that the equivalence level you're talking about above leaves space for other security issues to creep in.

> you can configure an IPv6 firewall to pass traffic and you can configure a DMZ host or port forwarding in the NAT case.

IPv4 & NAT config: takes effort to accidentally expose things behind it. It's not even physically possible to fully expose all the ports of more than 1 host behind it, assuming it's only got 1 public IP. For IPv6 and firewalls, you've just pointed out how easy it is to configure it to not have this security property.

I'm not arguing that IPv6 is not secure because it lacks NAT. My point was that this entire discussion is silly engagement bait: there's no clear right answer, but it's an easy topic for dogma and engagement. A holywars topic like NAT, IPv6 and security is prime for that. The author and submitter muddies the waters further by - probably not intentionally - choosing a strawman submission title.
by quietproof | 2026-01-21 15:21:14+00:00
We can see a pattern in AI history where constraints produce architectural breakthroughs. CNNs came out of hardware limits, RNN/LSTMs were responses to memory scarcity, and now mHC appears to be an efficiency-driven innovation born from bandwidth ceilings.

What call my attention here more than anything is that mHC isn't simply "doing more with less". I would say MoE would better fit this description. Instead, it introduces a geometric constraint that changes the optimization landscape itself. I find this to be more profound.

If the approach survives independent replication, it won't just be China's workaround to sanctions. It would potentially be an architectural contribution the whole field adopts for cost reasons. Efficiency breakthroughs tend to travel fast.
by pixl97 | 2026-01-21 15:21:22+00:00
>I wonder why her trade-off is morally superior?

I mean, if you start using your thinking cap for a few minutes it makes sense.

1. The number of drivers is small. The number of passengers is large. This makes checks on drivers technically possible.

2. Drivers work in their own cars. Are you saying they should get bars installed between the back and front of the car?

3. The passengers are the random public, do you want to submit a criminal background check before riding in a car?

4. These are all things Uber can do themselves to protect their employees. These are not things the public can do to protect themselves from Uber employees.
by yadaeno | 2026-01-21 15:21:32+00:00
China is buying 50% of Russian gas and supplying them with drone parts and gunpowder which is directly used to kill Europeans and destabilize Europe.

They are also exporting their surveillance state technology to dictatorships in Pakistan, Iran, and Venezuela. Look at Iran, 16000 protestors are dead in two weeks. That is the Chinese model of stability.

Bad leaders exist everywhere, Europe included. But in the US, they leave. Trump is gone in two years. Good luck aligning your economies and value systems with China. I’m firmly on the side of liberal democracy.
by estearum | 2026-01-21 15:21:40+00:00
Right, but obviously people in this comment thread are trying to use relative jumps (which I also have a strong preference for), but seem to be under the impression you must guess the distance: you do not.

Typing 5j, where the number "5ish" was already loaded into your brain by looking at the distance, is 100x better than typing 384g, where 384 is an effectively meaningless number and will change momentarily anyway.

Fwiw, relative line numbers doesn't obscure the "real line numbers" in any meaningful way. First of all, real line numbers aren't used for anything except external references into the file, which you can still navigate to perfectly fine using G or g. Also, relative line numbers show your current line's real line number at all times.

There have been exactly zero times I've regretted having relative line numbers on and it's not default behavior, that's why it's useful to point out here.
by armchairhacker | 2026-01-21 15:21:52+00:00
> In case one wants to output literally "[[[" one could escape it using backslash, as usual in many languages.

Sometimes you want to paste a large region of code into a code block, and escaping the content is harder than fixing and start and end delimiters. This matters particularly in Markdown, where embedding large regions of code or text is common, whereas other languages you’d put it in its own file.

So I still suggest the ability to change the number of open and close brackets. Then you’ll also need an implicit newline or other way to distinguish content that starts with an open bracket.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-21 15:21:55+00:00
> It's not a problem for me today. It was a big problem when I had no revenue, needed to do all the paperwork, meet ridiculous local accounting requirements connected to selling software in a different currency than my local one, write code, setup licensing, shipping the software to the clients etc.

Since this depends mostly on what country you are in/you are setting up the country in, what specific country was this? Because it's not the same everywhere, and by the sounds of it, is a lot more complicated than most other EU countries. Germany is famously bureaucratic, as just one example, and differs wildly from the type of experience you'll have in Sweden.

> It wasn't so simple when I had 0 capital and just wanted to ship software to see if people want to buy it.

Most people, accountants or not, won't tell you this, but you're usually fine starting to charge people and running a business "unofficially" for a couple of months without having to pay any fines or anything when you finally "regularize" your situation. Many accountants have dealt with this sort of setup countless of times too. But again, people won't advice you to take this route, but it is one option if you just wanna ship software and see if people want to buy it. If no one buys it, just don't tell anyone :) Unless you're doing five figures or more in revenue, no one will mind.
by postalcoder | 2026-01-21 15:21:59+00:00
That alt feed has a lot less gristle - nice! Kagi should update their Github page because I don't see any documentation for it.

I've had a few requests for rss feeds but alas I've been focusing on comments-related features. Is anyone else interested in an rss feed for HN x smallweb? I may get the ball rolling if there's some more interest.
by jackyinger | 2026-01-21 15:22:04+00:00
It seems to me you think of politics as being the politics of the sensationalist 24 hour news cycle. Sure, that is a mind killer.

But I encourage you to take a look at politics as a broader thing. Read some academic, foundational political philosophy works. Politics in its broad sense is inescapable. Better to know it and be an active participant than to leave it up to others.
by tylermw | 2026-01-21 15:22:05+00:00
Nice results! SIMD can be a pain, good to know Zig makes it easy.

However, note that the plot under "Native SIMD Throughput Comparison" is extremely misleading: for an accurate proportional comparison between bar charts, you should start the y-axis at zero. The way the data are presented makes it look like a 10-100x gain, rather than the actual 2x improvement.
by ElectricalUnion | 2026-01-21 15:22:15+00:00
jart Cosmopolitan. It combines a polyglot format (the αcτµαlly pδrταblε εxεcµταblε is simultaneously a Windows Portable Executable and a Thompson Shell script) and a polymorphic libc that works in all major OSes under both amd64 and arm64.

It's a single binary.
by avsteele | 2026-01-21 15:22:31+00:00
Obviously ~nobody has read this yet... But I did have a question based on the opening:

"If you wanted to create a tool that would enable the destruction of
institutions that prop up democratic life, you could not do better than artificial intelligence. Authoritarian leaders and technology oligarchs are deploing [sic] AI systems to hollow out public institutions with an astonishing alacrity"

So in the first two sentences we have hyperbole and typos? Hardly seems like high-quality academic output. It reads more like a blog post.
by BlackFly | 2026-01-21 15:22:42+00:00
That reminds me of all the bad tests of numerical algorithms you can write if you use numbers like 0, 1, 2 as test inputs because:

- 0 * x = 0 so you don't necessarily test the correct computation of x,

- 1 * x = x so you don't necessarily test if you actually use the input 1,

- 2 * 2 = 2^2 = 2 + 2 so you can get some pretty weird masking.
by shevy-java | 2026-01-21 15:22:58+00:00
The title is a bit odd.

For instance:

"The affordances of AI systems have the effect of eroding expertise"

So, some expertise will be gone, that is true. At the same time I am not
sure this is solely AIs fault. If a lawyer wants 500€ per half hour of advice,
whereas some AI tool is almost zero-cost, even if the advice may only be up to
80% of the quality of a good lawyer, then there is no contest here. AI wins,
even if it may arguably be worse.

If it were up to me, AI would be gone, but to insinuate that it is solely AI's
fault that "institutions" are gone, makes no real sense. It depends a lot on
context and the people involved; as well as opportunity cost of services. The
above was an example of lawyers but you can find this for many other professions
too. If 3D printing plastic parts does not cost much, would anyone want to
overpay a shop that has these plastic parts but it may take you a long time to
search for, or you may pay more, compared to just 3D print it? Some technology
simply changes society. I don't like AI but AI definitely does change society,
and not all ways are necessarily bad. Which institution has been destroyed by
AI? Has that institution been healthy prior to AI?
by tsimionescu | 2026-01-21 15:23:02+00:00
The whole premise of IPv6 is that every device should have a globally routable IP. This thread went into DHCP for some reason, but that is uncommon and not recommended for IPv6, where you're supposed to use SLAAC. With SLAAC, I'm not even sure you could realistically disable the ability to get a public IP. And if you did, I'm not sure you could allow a device to access the Internet over IPv6 with a consumer router without it having a publicly routable IPv6.
by DocTomoe | 2026-01-21 15:23:12+00:00
How to you estimate the 'time and skill' that went into the creation of a random piece of art? Is a portrait that took 50 hours to paint inherently more worthy than a virtually identical one that took 5 hours? Is the slower artist the better artist? Is a Bob Ross 'happy little trees, body of water, mountain in background'-image not artistically valuable because he does it in 20 minutes?

As for skill: I would argue that a random Banksy takes a lot less skill than the average Artemisia Gentileschi (admit it: you had to look her up). Yet, one is celebrated art, the other is virtually unknown and at best 'one among many baroque northern-Italian painters'.

Those are earnest questions, I want to understand the recently-recurring time-and-skill argument. What sort of people honestly look at a picture and ask 'yes, but how long did it take to make? How long had the artist to be trained for this?'
by sodapopcan | 2026-01-21 15:23:12+00:00
I am. I use Deepseek and free-tier ChatJippity and as a sometimes-better search.

EDIT: I also wasn't going to say it but it's not about the money for me, I just don't want to support any of these companies. I'm happy waste their resources for my benefit but I don't lean on it too often.
by jezzamon | 2026-01-21 15:23:15+00:00
Makes sense to me, the whole structure of the artist booth is about connecting with the person that made the art. Why would you want to see a booth showing artworks that weren't even created by the person in front of you but by an AI?

If anything, an AI artwork booth should be manned by the engineers that built and trained the image model and well as scraped the training data. Then they can meet all the people they non-consensually took artwork from :P
by yashsm01 | 2026-01-21 15:23:33+00:00
We believe payments should be as simple as a text message. No gas fees, no wallet addresses, no headaches. Just pure connection.
The Mission
There are 2 billion people on WhatsApp and only 300 million in Crypto. The gap isn't technology; it's usability.

Ping2Pay exists to close that gap. We are building the infrastructure that makes blockchain invisible, so the value becomes visible.
by pessimizer | 2026-01-21 15:23:36+00:00
> You can do well in such games without lying

Not this one. I'll tell you from experience, and I bet there's a proof. You have to lie at least once and make at least one alliance for at least one turn that you don't plan on keeping.

Your strategy is still very good, but that's because constantly telling the truth and broadcasting your valuations and calculations to the table will allow you to hide that one lie better. For me that lie is usually "You're right, makes sense." when somebody else says that there's no reason for either of us to defect, so we might as well work together.
Show HN: MacShip – Licensing and distribution SDK/Boilerplate for non-MAS apps
by macship | 2026-01-21 15:23:37+00:00
Hi HN,

I’ve spent the last few years consulting on software licensing and entitlement systems. The current state of indie macOS dev is frustrating: you either lose 30% to the Mac App Store or you roll your own licensing implementation that usually gets cracked by a simple bool flip or API mock.

I've been building MacShip to offer a middle ground: a distribution stack that actually protects revenue without the MAS tax.

It handles the security side: I packaged the techniques I use in consulting into a drop-in SDK. It’s not just a server check; it handles offline validation and attempts to prevent common bypasses like binary patching and memory editing. (I know nothing is uncrackable, but this raises the bar significantly).

It handles the boring ops side: I hated the notarytool dance, so I wrote a zero-config GitHub Action that handles signing, notarizing, stapling, DMG creation, and generating your Sparkle feed.

I’m pre-selling v1 (shipping Feb 22).

Link: https://macship.dev
by macleginn | 2026-01-21 15:23:42+00:00
The authors are quick to assume "the inevitable atrophy of human skills and knowledge". But skills and knowledge have not been propped up by some low-fi institutional magic: they stem from the necessity of achieving practical goals, as well as general human curiosity and competitiveness. Sure, there will be a period of slop sloshing around everywhere, but the main drives for excellence (or at least passable performance) are not going anywhere.
by ajb | 2026-01-21 15:23:53+00:00
This is fair as a criticism of the leading AI companies, but there's a catch.

When you attribute blame to technologies, you make it difficult to use technologies in the construction of a more ethical alternative. There are lots of people who think that in order to act ethically you have to do things in an artisanal way; whether it's growing food, making products, services, or whatever. The problem with this is that it's outcompeted by scalable solutions, and in many cases our population is too big to apply artisanal solutions. We can't replace the incumbents with just a lot of hyper-local boutique businesses, no matter how much easier it is to run them ethically. We have to solve how to enable accountability in big institutions.

There's a natural bias among people who are actually productive and conscientious, which is that an output can only be ethical if it's the result of personal attention. But while conscientiousness is a virtue in us as workers, it's not a substance that is somehow imbued in a product, if the same product is delivered with less personal attention then it's just as good - and much cheaper and therefore available to more people, which is the product is good for them, makes it more ethical and not less.

(I'm making a general point here. It's not actually obvious to me that AI is an essential part of the solution either)
by shevy-java | 2026-01-21 15:24:04+00:00
I tried to read the article but a pop-up blocked me in
the middle, demanding that I subscribe to a newsletter.
I am not subscribed to any newsletter in general, but when
the default setting of a webpage tries to force people into
newsletter via pop-ups, then I'll simply perma-ban such
websites rather than click on anything at all.
by troupo | 2026-01-21 15:24:10+00:00
The US continues to produce "most valuable companies" by the absolute non-sensical value called "market share" and "market capitalization".

Menawhile almost every single of those "valuable" companies are either actively harmful, or keep offloading the effects of their operations onto society.

Prime example: Uber lost 20 billion dollars, will never get them back, and offloaded all the issues of gig workers on workers themselves, or the society. It's "value" (market cap) is "175 billion dollars" (it's not)