MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by xmorse | 2026-02-27 09:51:05+00:00
Check out Critique too if you are looking for a side by side diffs TUI

It uses opentui, the same framework uses by opencode.

It can also render diffs to images, pdf and html. Very useful for agents to share diffs in remote environments like Openclaw or Kimaki

https://github.com/remorses/critique
by fortran77 | 2026-02-27 09:51:32+00:00
> These features made possible Windows 3.0, OS/2, and early Linux.

And also--before Linux--SCO Xenix and then SCO Unix. It was finally possible to run a real Unix on a desktop or home PC. A real game changer. I paid big $$$ (for me at the time) to get SCO Xenix for my 386 so I could have my own Unix system.
by davidguetta | 2026-02-27 09:51:53+00:00
> Very cruel, and wrong to go after a vulnerable population.

absolutely true

> Sexual identity isn't anyone else's business.

well some did insist to have sexual identity "courses" in school and everywhere, leading to many people, sometime as young as 13 being pushed to get masectomies or other horrific stuff they did regret afterwards. something had to be done

really a 'everybody sucks' situation
by ptx | 2026-02-27 09:52:32+00:00
Although PowerShell borrows the syntax, it (as usual!) completely screws up the semantics. The examples in the docs [1] show first setting descriptor 2 to descriptor 1 and then setting descriptor 1 to a newly opened file, which of course is backwards and doesn't give the intended result in Unix; e.g. their example 1:

dir C:\, fakepath 2>&1 > .\dir.log

Also, according to the same docs, the operators "now preserve the byte-stream data when redirecting output from a native command" starting with PowerShell 7.4, i.e. they presumably corrupted data in all previous versions, including version 5.1 that is still bundled with Windows. And it apparently still does so, mysteriously, "when redirecting stderr output to stdout".

[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsof...
by u1hcw9nx | 2026-02-27 09:53:15+00:00
Google, OpenAI Employees Voice Support for Anthropic in Open Letter. We Will Not Be Divided https://notdivided.org/

-----

The Department of War is threatening to

Invoke the Defense Production Act to force Anthropic to serve their model to the military and "tailor its model to the military's needs"

Label the company a "supply chain risk"

All in retaliation for Anthropic sticking to their red lines to not allow their models to be used for domestic mass surveillance and autonomously killing people without human oversight.

The Pentagon is negotiating with Google and OpenAI to try to get them to agree to what Anthropic has refused.

They're trying to divide each company with fear that the other will give in. That strategy only works if none of us know where the others stand. This letter serves to create shared understanding and solidarity in the face of this pressure from the Department of War.

We are the employees of Google and OpenAI, two of the top AI companies in the world.

We hope our leaders will put aside their differences and stand together to continue to refuse the Department of War's current demands for permission to use our models for domestic mass surveillance and autonomously killing people without human oversight.

Signed,
by HunOL | 2026-02-27 09:53:33+00:00
> Anyone have any solutions to this?

No solution. I am a big fan of OSM, but modern maps are not about street namesabd building, but about POI. When you go/drive somewhere you are going to store/museum/pharmacy and so on. If this data isn't reliable it's useless. Additional information like phone number, working hours and website is next level which isn't achievable by OSM.
by birdsongs | 2026-02-27 09:56:15+00:00
Same, but it was late 90's and I had found a Quick Basic compiler on our Windows 95 laptop. It had the ability to compile EXEs and I felt like I'd discovered some old magics. Like, this thing was just sitting here? All I had to do was double click qb45.exe?? And it opened a fully integrated terminal IDE???

The built in syntax help, which was incredible, and some example programs (no idea why our laptop had these) let me self-teach.

Now I sit all day and write bare metal firmware, but it feels so empty.
by thoughtfulchris | 2026-02-27 09:56:43+00:00
I'm hacking on a similar thing that lets you build CLIs directly into xterm / ghostty web so that they also work in the terminal. Eg they are cross platform web and CLI.

Demo: https://wizard-nine-blush.vercel.app/

Project: https://ink-web.dev

I love the approach of just bash as well. Super cool!

Edit: warning - don't use it mobile.
by Spacecosmonaut | 2026-02-27 09:57:27+00:00
Regarding point 2: I think most people cannot destinguish between "genuine" creativity and artificial almalgamation of training data and human provided context. For one, I do not know what already exsists. Some work created by AI may be an obvious rip off of the style of a particular artist, but I wouldnt know. To me it might look awesome and fresh.

Furthermore, I think many of the more human centric thinkers will be disappointed at how many people just wont care.
by namdionwuachu | 2026-02-27 09:57:38+00:00
Interesting direction. I’m curious how you’re handling schema drift and join discovery when Claude infers relationships.
Are you materializing AI-generated wide tables or regenerating them per query?
I’ve seen LLM-driven schema reasoning struggle once datasets exceed a few hundred columns would love to hear how you’re constraining token usage and maintaining deterministic outputs.
by logicallee | 2026-02-27 09:57:54+00:00
>the point is that it _is_ the only possible model in our marvellous Friedmanian economic structure of shareholder primacy. When the only incentive is profit, if your company isn't maximising profit then it will lose to other companies who are. You can hope that the self-imposed ethics guardrails _are_ maximising profit because it the invisible hand of the market cares about that, but 1. it never really does (at scale) and 2. big influences (such as the DoD here) can sway that easily. So we're stuck with negative externalities because all that's incentivised is profit.

I'm curious about your thinking on this subject, if you email me at the email on my profile I have some specific questions about your views on this matter.

We've already created a digital sovereign nation called State of Utopia which will be available at stateofutopia.com or stofut.com for short, our manifesto is here: https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/d6b35b81-0eeb-4e41-9628-5...

We have real services you can use immediately, such as this p2p phone/chat/video service without time limits (Zoom has a 1 hour meeting limit for free accounts) and no tracking: https://stateofutopia.com/instacall.html

Just yesterday we published a fitness tool proof of concept: https://stateofutopia.com/experiments/bodyfat/

We do believe that it is important to have market dynamics, and our model is for this state to own state-owned companies as well. Getting this model right is important to us and we would like to engage with you on this subject. We hope you'll email us to discuss your thoughts further.
by koehr | 2026-02-27 09:59:14+00:00
This is the wrong argument. Claiming that Mozilla is doing it wrong because the technology purist part of their userbase decided they don't want AI is simply short-sighted.
The kill switch is the best option, because it let's Firefox be like a typical user would expect, while still giving the option to deactivate things. Deactivate by default and the typical user feels patronized.
by w10-1 | 2026-02-27 09:59:14+00:00
We are all assuming Anthropic can elect not to do a deal with the Pentagon, and put conditions on it.

But Hegseth and Trump are abusing federal powers at a rapid clip.

I'm guessing Anthropic would regret any deal with that administration, and could lose control of their technology.

(Stanford Research Institute originally limited their DoD exposure, and gained a lot of customers as a result.)
by jfngozo | 2026-02-27 09:59:37+00:00
We’re starting to see AI agents move beyond chat interfaces and into production systems where they can call APIs, modify data, and trigger workflows autonomously.

Most of the current ecosystem focuses on model quality and observability, but much less on runtime control. IAM and logging were designed for humans and services with deterministic behavior. Agents are neither.

I wrote a post exploring what a control layer for AI agents could look like, especially around verifiable identity, policy enforcement at runtime, and auditability.

Curious to hear thoughts from others building or deploying agents in production.

https://sekuire.ai/blog/the-missing-control-layer-for-ai-age...
by aleph_minus_one | 2026-02-27 10:00:10+00:00
> I think most engineers vastly overestimate how important high quality, maintainable, reliable code is to product success.

Rather: Many software developers overestimate how important high quality, maintainable, reliable code is to initial product success.

Once the product is highly successful, a high quality, maintainable, reliable code pays huge dividends - and I have a strong feeling that most business people vastly underestimate this dividend.
by YokoZar | 2026-02-27 10:00:50+00:00
You may be interested in "Do Morons Make Prediction Markets More Accurate?" - https://nicholasdecker.substack.com/p/do-morons-make-predict...

Essentially the argument is that more dumb money in a prediction market provides an even stronger incentive for smart money to join, moving the price back to an accurate probability.
by rounce | 2026-02-27 10:02:30+00:00
Breadboards, whilst initially appearing to be nice and accessible, tend to be a false economy when it comes to building a good intuition around a lot of fundamentals. This is because it’s a lot easier to reason about the basics with ‘perfect’ circuit and component behaviour than the messiness of reality. For example in a ‘perfect’ circuit wires can have no resistance or inductance (unless you want them to), in reality it’s unavoidable that they do, by how much will vary for reasons that may not be obvious to a beginner. I’m not saying breadboards are universally bad, they have a place but IMHO learning fundamentals directly through them ain’t it. I spent a long time stubbornly trying to learn things breadboard-first and in hindsight it was horrendously confusing versus drawing schematics, doing the math, and then playing in something like Circuit JS. It was only then that really important things started to really become second nature.

There’s also the other thing of being able to read documentation. If one wants to use some module in one’s project, the datasheet and application notes aren’t going to have breadboard-centric illustrations, they’re going to have schematics (or at least abstracted ones). I presume you come from a programming background, and so would know the importance of being able to read documentation, and knowing that if you can’t do that you’re pretty much dead in the water.

The hard part of learning about electronics is not identifying the components but getting a good understanding of what is happening in the circuit. For that, it’s better to have a learning tool which displays voltage and current at every part of the circuit all the time. Rather than something which prioritises looking like what you’d have on your desk as a constraint for its method of visual representation.
by latexr | 2026-02-27 10:03:05+00:00
It was not my intention to be patronising nor snarky, nor was I the least bit concerned for you (faux or otherwise). Though on a reread I do understand how my reply can be understood as unkind. I regret that and apologise for it. It was not my intention but it was my mistake. I should’ve made it shorter:

> It’s not a person, It’s a tool. There’s no reason to anthropomorphise it.
by kace91 | 2026-02-27 10:03:55+00:00
>I don’t see my employer as an owner or steward of me.

They don’t need to be. You can both recognize a freedom to do something and yet consider it wrong.

The fact that you and your employer both are approaching a negotiation freely does not make the relationship balanced.

If you leave a company of 10k people, the CEO will not be waking up the next morning in anxiety wondering how to feed their children. If said CEO fires 5k people, many of the fired workers will. A business owner who is not aware and respectful of this fact is not acting morally.
by FpUser | 2026-02-27 10:04:19+00:00
Assuming RAM prices will not make it totally unaffordable. Current situation is atrocious and big infrastructure corps seem to love it, they do not want independent computing. Alternatively they might build specialized branded hardware which people could only use for what corps allow them to do for nice monthly fee.

Another problem is too much abstraction on input spec level. The other day I asked Claude to generate few classes. When reviewing the code I noticed it doing full scan for ranges on one giant set. This would bring my backend to a halt. After pointing it out to Claude it had smartened up to start with lower_bound() call. When there are no people to notice such things what do you think we are going to have?
by imtringued | 2026-02-27 10:04:23+00:00
Uh, out of all the things that are the bottleneck, you think it's robotics hardware that is the bottleneck?

In an age where seemingly every single robot company has a humanoid prototype whose legs are actively supported through high powered actuators that are strong enough to kick your ribs in?

In an age where the recent advancements in machine learning have given bipedal walking a solution that is 80% of the way to perfection with the last 20% remaining the hardest to solve?

Honestly, from a kinematics/hardware perspective the robots are already good enough. Heck, even the robot hands are pretty good these days. Go back 10 years ago and the average humanoid robot hand was pretty bad. They might still not be perfect today, but they are a non-issue in terms of constructing them.

The only real bottleneck on the hardware side is that robot skin is still in its infancy. There needs to be some sort of textile with electronics weaved into it that gives robots the ability to sense touch and pressure.

What has remained hard is the software side of things and it is stuck in the mud of lack of data. Everyone is recording their own dataset that is unique to their specific robot.
by menaerus | 2026-02-27 10:04:38+00:00
That's polymorhpism 101, and not quite what I was asking. From my understanding what Rust has is something different to what C++ is offering. In C++ you either opt-in for static- or dynamic-dispatch. In Rust it seems that you can mix both for the same type object and convert between the two during runtime. It seems that this is true according to the example from dminik from the comment above but the actual purpose is still not quite evident to me. It seems that it tries to solve the problem of excessive template instantiations, called as I can see monomorphizations in Rust. In C++ this is normally and mostly done through the linker optimizations which may suggest that Rust doesn't have them yet implemented or that there are more useful cases for it.
by dandanua | 2026-02-27 10:04:54+00:00
For newcomers my main tip is to use views for array slices (for example, via the @view and @views macros), since by default Julia creates copies of slices. Broadcast operation (the dot syntax) is another super useful instrument for speeding up vectorized operations. You can write fast GPU code with them without resorting to GPU kernels, in some cases. Although GPU kernel programming via CUDA.jl is convenient in Julia, once you get used to it.
by prmph | 2026-02-27 10:06:00+00:00
Not sure why you are being downvoted. What you are saying has a lot of truth to it. It is directly observable in the history of nations.

Germany has to be forced to accept that, although it was advanced, it could not have the European empire it thought it deserved. Japan had to learn a similar lesson. The speed and horror of the reset was in direct proportion to the potential for advancement and high society in these nations.

Ghana, where I come form, for example, has not has to experience any massive upheaval even from its pre-colonial and colonial days up till now. Our society is laid-back, and moves slowly. Even many other African countries have had to have their national reckoning in the form of civil wars and other huge upheavals in order to settle into a viable way of existing and advancing.

And, like you said, this is iterative. Given the nature of people in a nation and its fundamental geopolitical position, the same question will need to be answered after every N generations. Germany is central to Europe, and already a generation that is far removed from the world wars are starting to rethink why it shouldn't assert itself more strongly. Same in Japan.

THe way to analyze the iterations of the US is to understand that the primary threats are from within. It may not implode complete, but civil war and the civil rights era show that the potential is there for massive unrest and violence.
by u1hcw9nx | 2026-02-27 10:06:14+00:00
It does not matter if lawyers are using AI, a text editor, a paralegal, or some random chump from the street to write their documents. They are responsible for their work, its quality, and its errors.

Low-quality lawyers produce subpar work even when they write it themselves. Good lawyers will produce high-quality work products even when using AI to do the bulk of the labor.

In legal work, blaming the tools is not an option. Reputation is on the line, even if a paralegal or AI keeps messing up it's always your fault.

Vibe-legal just exposes bad lawyers.
by tialaramex | 2026-02-27 10:09:56+00:00
That's usually just because it's the same network, it's not a loss of isolation.

It is possible for your university to run a single WiFi network that is multi-campus, and so some "local" packets have to be sent between campuses, whether that's a good idea doesn't necessarily affect whether it's how it was set up.

If your university has campuses in other countries (as mine does) it is not likely they use a single WiFi LAN though it isn't impossible. However the fact that the networks operated by UCLA, Manchester University and the Sorbonne are all named "eduroam" is just for the pragmatic reason that WiFi devices connect by name, those aren't the same WiFI LANs, any more than the guy I know named "Steve Harris" is the bassist from Iron Maiden just because they share the same name.

[The Eduroam name has more significance than the coincidence of name, but that's all the name is doing here, WiFi devices which trust your local cafe "Coffee WiFi" will also connect to the "Coffee WiFi" offered in a completely different store.]
by cesaref | 2026-02-27 10:09:57+00:00
The way I read it, the prefix to the > indicates which file descriptor to redirect, and there is just a default that means no indicated file descriptor means stdout.

So, >foo is the same as 1>foo

If you want to get really into the weeds, I think 2>>&1 will create a file called 1, append to a file descriptor makes no sense (or maybe, truncate to a file descriptor makes no sense is maybe what I mean), but why this is the case is probably an oversight 50 years ago in sh, although i'd be surprised if this was codified anywhere, or relied upon in scripts.
by asdff | 2026-02-27 10:10:03+00:00
Software is just a collection of functions. Some input returns some output.

That is what people do every day with LLM. When they ask LLM to do something, they are being software developers without them or you even realizing it. But what are they doing but building something with the LLM that takes digital input and returns digital output. It is software. Summarize this email for me gpt. That is a tool.
by retinaros | 2026-02-27 10:11:12+00:00
lol. no one with common sense ever bought this story. you might have and your turning point might be this deal but for many the turning point was stealing data for training, advocating against china and calling them an adverse nation, pushing to ban opensource alternatives deeming them as "dangerous", buying tech bros with matcha popup in SF, shady RLHF and bias and millions others
by ahf8Aithaex7Nai | 2026-02-27 10:12:16+00:00
> act against someone like him

What do you mean? I have the day off today. I'm sitting here in my underwear listening to my washing machine in the background. The sun is shining outside. I went for a walk in the park next door earlier. In an hour (Germany time), I'll cook something for lunch and then go to the garage to put a new rear tire on my motorcycle. Tomorrow, sauna; Sunday, bike ride; and on Monday, back to the office. What I'm trying to say is: I'm not the protagonist whose decision determines whether Musk f*ks up the world or not. And that's not a question of my priorities, but of a realistic assessment of the real scope for action.

If you want to have a real chance of putting someone like Musk in his place, you need to join the largest possible political collective with the right agenda. But looking at the course of the conversation, my respectful recommendation (assuming you're not trolling) would be to focus on your own well-being first.
by rramadass | 2026-02-27 10:13:14+00:00
Absolutely on point!

You need only look at the bureaucracies in countries which rank high on the corruption index. Most join to just earn a livelihood but are soon "socialized into corruption".

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption#Causes

Per R. Klitgaard corruption will occur if the corrupt gain is greater than the punitive damages multiplied by the likelihood of being caught and prosecuted.

Since a high degree of monopoly and discretion accompanied by a low degree of transparency does not automatically lead to corruption, a fourth variable of "morality" or "integrity" has been introduced by others. The moral dimension has an intrinsic component and refers to a "mentality problem", and an extrinsic component referring to circumstances like poverty, inadequate remuneration, inappropriate work conditions and inoperable or over-complicated procedures which demoralize people and let them search for "alternative" solutions.

The references section has lots of links for further study of which Robert Klitgaard's Controlling Corruption is a classic with case studies.

One thing i would like to know more of is how Technology either reduces or exacerbates corruption.
by VorpalWay | 2026-02-27 10:13:40+00:00
The issue with writing high performance code in GC languages is that you end up going out of your way writing things in a strange way to avoid the GC. At that point you might as well use a non-GC language. In my experience, the most natural way to write things in Rust is usually the fastest (or close enough) as well.

Note: I don't know Julia specifically, but this does apply to other GC languages like Ocaml and Java. Try reading code in those languages that avoid the GC. It looks very strange. In python it is even worse: people try to avoid for loops because they are slower than list comprehensions for example (or at least used to, I haven't written much python for some years now).
by anon7000 | 2026-02-27 10:14:08+00:00
I think you’ve done a good job disproving your point that no one is buying them. Golf is a very popular hobby.

The point of this thread: the maker movement isn’t dead simply because most people don’t care about CNC machines. In reality, there are loads of makers & people who love tinkering and building things for themselves, it’s easier than ever to do so (and to build very non-trivial products for yourself), and more and more people are able to get into this.

If the maker movement was actually dead, we wouldn’t be seeing an explosion of powerful, easy-to-use manufacturing tools available at lower & lower price points.

I guess your point is that it’s not exactly mainstream, not that no one is buying them. Which is true, but who cares.