MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Arainach | 2026-02-27 20:49:59+00:00
> That is also my experience with DuckDuckGo but all search engines. They ALL suck including Google Search. I don't know why, but the results are simply crap.

(obligatory disclaimer: I work for Google but not in Search, all opinions strictly my own, yadda yadda)

It's a scale problem. An (in my opinion) unsolveable one.

Google - let's say all search engine companies combined - employ N engineers working on search engines. They allocate those teams X dollars, and let's pretend that's all these companies do and their total income is Y dollars.

Around the world there are orders of magnitude more people - let's say 1000*N, I don't know if anyone has even tried to gather this data - trying to game the search results and get their thing to the top. Those people have a combined budget dramatically larger than X and (I suspect) significantly larger than Y. Oh, and the best of them are almost certainly sharing notes and tactics with each other.

Even if everyone working on a search engine is a 10X genius engineer, they're still at a multiple-orders-of-magnitude disadvantage.
by ggreer | 2026-02-27 20:50:39+00:00
SpaceX has the most reliable orbital launch vehicle ever made. Falcon 9 block 5 has had 550 successful launches out of 551 attempts, giving it a 99.8% success rate. For comparison, Soyuz-2's success rate is 97%, Ariane 5 is 95.7%, and the Space Shuttle was 98.5%. All of these are worse than Falcon 9's block 5's landing success rate of 98.9% (552 out of 558 attempts[1]).

The current Starship launches are part of a development and testing program. They expect quite a few failures (though probably not as many as they've experienced). But since each Starship launch is only 1/25th the cost of an SLS launch, SpaceX can afford to blow up a lot of them. And they won't put people on them until they have a track record of safe operation. Falcon 9 didn't have crew on it until the 85th launch.

1. The number of landing attempts is higher than the number of launches because Falcon Heavy results in multiple landings per launch.
by almosthere | 2026-02-27 20:50:45+00:00
Death threats mainly. Personally I think it would be easier if they just made it so that platforms ran a tiny LLM against the content that will be posted - determined if it is a death threat, then require them to be identified before it's posted, then it would solve a lot of these problems.

TLDR: Evil people be doxxed internally not everyone.
Ask HN: How does training an AI on another AI actually work?
by timonpimba | 2026-02-27 20:50:49+00:00
How is Deepseek actually doing this? Are they just feeding claude's answers into their own models as their own model as training data to improve reasoning?
How exactly one train it's model on output of other? what's enginnering inovlved here?

I'd love breakdown of how thsi is executed at scale.

Backstory:

Anthropic recently accused Deepseek,Minimax,Moonshot of using lots of fake accounts to generate exchanges with claude, using the outputs to train the model and called it "distillation attack".
by nullc | 2026-02-27 20:50:56+00:00
Since you're not realtime you could also have a configurable playback speed on the rx side or processing that removes gaps to make it go faster. This would improve the latency while maintaining the whole store/forward design, and would also let a recipient get more than 100% audio (e.g. from multiple people sending to them).

You're using opus but you might be interested in abusing the DRED error correcting scheme (which is an experimental part of opus) in it as a codec, as it does pretty good sounding speech at 2kbit/sec. You could send the dred first then the opus compressed audio so that if tor craps out before the transmission completes the receiver still get the audio. (A step further would be to run automatic speech recognition, a send text, dred, then opus. :P ).
by mikkupikku | 2026-02-27 20:51:30+00:00
The overpressure caused by the SRB ignitions exceeded predictions due to the geometry of the launch pad. This overpressure forced the orbiter's bodyflap away, beyond the design limits of the hydraulic system that controls it. John Young said that if he had known this, he would have ejected, which would have caused the loss of the shuttle.
by wahern | 2026-02-27 20:51:40+00:00
In the case where you're using the top of the stack as a, well, stack, I don't see the problem. It would only work if you're not interleaving processing of dynamically-sized objects and function codegen works out. It's similar to TCO in the sense of maintaining certain invariants across calls (e.g. no temporaries need be preserved), and actually in languages with TCO, like Lua, you can hack an application-level stack data structure using tail recursion that can sometimes be more performant or more convenient than using a native data structure. (Lua has stackful coroutines so you can create as many of these as you want, same as if using table objects to implement stacks.)

There's been a least one experiment (posted a few years ago to HN) where someone benchmarked a stackful coroutine implementation with hundreds of thousands (millions?) of stacks that can grow contiguously on-demand up to, e.g., 2MB, but are initially minimally sized and don't reserve the maximum stack size upfront. The bottleneck was the VMA bookkeeping--the syscalls, exploding the page table, TLB flushing, etc. In principle it could work well and be even more performant than existing solutions, and it might work better today since Linux 6.13's lightweight guard page feature, MADV_GUARD_INSTALL, but we probably still need more architectural support from the system (kernel, if not hardware) to make it performant and competitive with language-level solutions like goroutines, Rust async, etc.
by EnPissant | 2026-02-27 20:51:50+00:00
This is just marketing. It doesn't even say if you will get any money back or how much. There is a form asking you how much you overpaid, and stating maybe you will get something back. Surely they could come out and say how much they raised prices due to tarifs and promise a refund with proof of purchase? Maybe they felt that number was too small to make for a good marketing stunt?

Mostly this is just an attempt at raising their brand's profile by printing insults (demented, pedofile, etc), and obscenities (fucking, dumbass, etc) directed at Trump (a popular thing to do).
by sukinai | 2026-02-27 20:52:55+00:00
Really like this framing. Separating facts from ephemeral context seems like a very strong design choice, especially because each layer should probably have different health rules and validation logic.

I have been thinking mostly about stale entries, duplicates, drift, and sync, but your point makes me think layer-aware memory health is important.

The hashing / integrity check idea is very interesting too, maybe overkill for some local workflows, but very relevant for higher-trust or enterprise settings.

And yes, it is open source, would definitely love to compare approaches.
by js8 | 2026-02-27 20:53:02+00:00
So are you asking how to change it? I think that's pretty obvious once people understand it's a collective social choice - organize to change it. The point is "the market" is not some mysterious unreachable force.

For example, this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47181837 is wrong; even if you had large amount of people acting like that person does, you would still likely have a system that doesn't work in the interest of society.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2026-02-27 20:53:13+00:00
With Linux the stack size is a process limit, set with ulimit (default 8MB?). You can even set it to unlimited if you want, meaning that essentially (but not quite) the stack and heap grow towards each other only limited by the size of the address space.

ulimit only affects the main program stack though. if you are using multi-threading then there is a per-thread stack limit, which you can configure with pthreads, but not until C++23 for std::thread.
by dang | 2026-02-27 20:53:14+00:00
Related:

Remove/Bypass Google's SynthID AI Watermark - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46692023 - Jan 2026 (1 comment)

SynthID – A tool to watermark and identify content generated through AI - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45071677 - Aug 2025 (83 comments)

SynthID Detector – a new portal to help identify AI-generated content - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44045946 - May 2025 (1 comment)
by nikisweeting | 2026-02-27 20:53:29+00:00
- ZFS snapshot all your state, makes it trivial to roll back changes

- gate access to secrets via external service that replaces placeholder values with actual secrets, e.g. something like agentvault.co

- have it perform the action on a staging env with fake data, then replay the recorded action on real data without the LLM involvement (e.g. use something like stagehand / director.ai to write the initial browser automation script, but then replay the recorded LLM actions deterministically after you see it work the first time)
by themafia | 2026-02-27 20:53:42+00:00
> you can't be aggressive

I disagree that this is "aggressive." It's certainly opinionated. I think the AI does a bad job here and I'm attempting to express that in a humorous and qualified way.

> WTF?

You don't consider this to be "aggressive?"

> stick to the rules when posting here

Do you genuinely think I'm trying to be disruptive?
by dfp33 | 2026-02-27 20:53:43+00:00
This right here is the right attitude.

Use these freebies/relatively cheap tools up 'whilst stocks last'.

I personally managed to create a very high quality marketing promo vid using grok. After spending weeks of enduring a lot of pain. But I saved myself tens of thousands.

I took advantage of 30 Grok premium subscriptions that were given to me via a free trial. There's no doubt the cost of services I took advantage of is in the tens of thousands.

But what do I care? I get what I want and then I get out before the freebies disappear.
by MarkusQ | 2026-02-27 20:53:58+00:00
> Don't believe the latest fashion on social media, including the latest thing it's fashionable to be sceptical about.

I don't think choosing to believe in something just because other people are piling on being skeptical of it is a viable strategy. If you hear a lot of people pointing out "X is a scam" you shouldn't refuse to believe them on principle.
by collabs | 2026-02-27 20:54:04+00:00
Especially in the city of New York, I sincerely believe a police officer butting a reflective vest on the front dashboard of their illegally parked car is enough grounds for immediate dismissal/firing from the job and all retirement seized with no recourse. I don't know how we would make it legal but this is the kind of visible, petty corruption that makes people lose their respect for the system.
by simonw | 2026-02-27 20:54:22+00:00
I'm mainly addressing sandboxing by running stuff in Claude Code for web, at which point it's Anthropic's problem if they have a sandbox leak, not mine.

It helps that most of my projects are open source so I don't need to worry about prompt injection code stealing vulnerabilities. That way the worst that can happen would be an attack adding a vulnerability to my code that I don't spot when I review the PR.

And turning off outbound networking should protect against code stealing too... but I allow access to everything because I don't need to worry about code stealing and that way Claude can install things and run benchmarks and generally do all sorts of other useful bits and pieces.
by sershe | 2026-02-27 20:54:39+00:00
I wonder about the downvotes? Do you really think people being personally muzzled by a dictatorship without due process and with draconian punishment is remotely comparable to having some strings attached when a large bureaucracy gets taxpayer money, in a manner that both parties have demonstrably, factually used for decades?

in that case, as much as I hate the current admin, a thin silver lining is that progressives, the most contemptible, even though less harmful, faction in American politics is even more upset :D
by jona-f | 2026-02-27 20:54:44+00:00
AFAIK every popular Android phone uses a qualcomm modem chip with a separate OS that has complete access to ram. NSA most certainly has a backdoor there and such complete access to any Android phone. This was common knowledge after the Snowden stuff. I don't think this has changed at all since. Only few niche phones (pinephone) separate these systems or have a hardware switch to disable the cellular system.
by bentley | 2026-02-27 20:54:49+00:00
You’re free to believe that. But the topic here is F-Droid and its board of directors, along with the context that governments are attempting to censor operating systems and app stores. The question is, if you controlled an app store, would you prevent users from making religious choices for themselves? F-Droid is, probably, the biggest and most mainstream app store for mobile operating systems, and is trying to drum up community support (“Keep Android Open,” etc.) in response to the new laws. But F-Droid initiated a sudden change in policy—censoring religious apps—wilfully censoring content that’s never been illegal by any reasonable interpretation of the law. Such decisions obviously negatively impact parts of the free software community, and bring up questions about how effective F-Droid can be in this fight.
by ABCLAW | 2026-02-27 20:54:55+00:00
No, most genetic drift that ends up being reflected in wildtype populations happens during those periods, because small errors taking up a sizable percentile of the allelic distribution is easier when there are less alleles.

When it comes to neutral mutations, we can literally see constant variance creation in plenty of non-coding areas of DNA over time.

Drift occurs at a fairly consistent rate that reflects the intrinsic error rate of the particular replication machinery that a given organism uses. You can measure the statistical error rate of different ribosomal complexes.

Different planets are going to have different selection pressures. They'll have different conflicts. Different crises. Different cultures. Different reproductive preferences. Imagining that these populations will converge on the same wildtype by sheer chance is lunacy.
by singhsanjay12 | 2026-02-27 20:55:08+00:00
This isn't a critique of DNS load balancing.

DNS works well in certain scenarios (multi-region failover, coarse traffic steering), but I've seen it misapplied in cases where faster failure detection or finer-grained routing was required.

This piece tries to outline where DNS fits well architecturally and where it starts to show limits.
by skydhash | 2026-02-27 20:55:34+00:00
I mostly use a web engine (DDG) to find web sites these days, not content. Then I use the site's search instead or just browse the navigation tree. Make everything simpler.

I much prefer to use scholar.google.com or npmjs.com for research. The URL is already in my history/bookmarks and the scoped query is more useful than the generic websearch.
by dlubarov | 2026-02-27 20:55:49+00:00
> if your neighbour kidnaps a canadian citizen

In this scenario it would not be some random Canadian doing the kidnapping, it would be a team of soldiers under official orders from our president. So Carney can't collaborate with Trump to surgically rescue the Canadians, because Trump was the one who had them kidnapped in the first place, and is actively holding them hostage.

In that case, yes absolutely, I'd put the blame squarely on Trump if Canadian rescuers operated in my neighborhood, and it got destroyed during the fighting as US soldiers tried to prevent the hostage rescue.

> holding thousands of palestinian civilians without charges

Every country on the planet detains suspects before formal charges are filed. But sure, we can assume Hamas had some valid casus belli, it doesn't really change things.

> it justifies the killing of israeli civilians

Nothing justifies targeting civilians. Hamas didn't incidentally harm some civilians while attempting to free prisoners, they went out of their way to systematically kill, rape and kidnap as many Israeli civilians as possible.
by thallavajhula | 2026-02-27 20:56:10+00:00
I used to have a custom domain setup via Google apps. Google decided to update it to something else (they changed their name several times and I lost track of the name now). I switched to iCloud+ Mail when iCloud introduced their custom domain support a few years ago. I do have notification summaries on my iOS turned on, but that's just a guilty pleasure of mine. The summarization is so bad that it's funny. I literally have the summarization feature turned on to laugh at how bad it is every time I see a new summary. Anyway, I used to be a everything-Google guy. Now, I just spread my app usage across multiple services, which I think is a win for me in the long run instead of being locked in to an ecosystem.

I also got myself out of the most of the Apple products from the Apple ecosystem too. I'm a 1Password user because I didn't want to be part of Google or Apple ecosystems.
by richardfeynman | 2026-02-27 20:56:37+00:00
You are rewriting your own argument.

You opened with "Israeli massacres sparked the Second Intifada." Now the "massacre" is just the first day of the riots themselves, and when that gets challenged you pivot to Oslo (which you never mentioned in your original claim).

Mitchell's chronology is not "Israel opened fire on peaceful unarmed demonstrators." It describes a confrontation after Friday prayers where Palestinians began throwing at police near the Western Wall; police used rubber-coated bullets and live ammo; 4 Palestinians killed, about 200 injured; and 14 Israeli policemen injured. That is a violent riot plus (arguably) bad crowd-control, not a one-sided massacre. Same report: "no persuasive evidence that the Sharon visit was anything other than an internal political act" and "The Sharon visit did not cause the Al-Aqsa Intifada."
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/21st_century/mitchell_plan.asp

Nobody is claiming Palestinians pre-planned Israeli live fire or used "mind control." The point is what happened next: Palestinian leaders chose to turn this into a sustained uprising. Barghouti said the explosion would have happened anyway and Sharon "provided a good excuse."
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift

Also, a politician visiting a holy site under police protection is not violence. Throwing stones and turning it into a street war is.

Your Oslo II claim is wrong on the text: interim jurisdiction explicitly excludes settlements, Jerusalem, borders, etc. The 18-month clause is phased redeployments, not "full withdrawal from Area C."
https://www.peaceagreements.org/agreements/410/
by 3rodents | 2026-02-27 20:56:49+00:00
If this were true, why didn’t the chatbot immediately recognize that the word “Taiwan” should trigger the response? Detecting the word “Taiwan” has been possible since before most of us were born.

China has more restrictions on what you can say than the U.S. but what you are describing is not reality. Some westerner asking Deepseek about Taiwan is completely uninteresting. Just as the government do not chase people over VPN usage.

China doesn’t try to hide that they are an authoritarian state. They don’t need to. Most people in China are no less happy with their government than westerners are with their governments. Governments reflect culture. And as for foreigners, our view of China is far worse than it actually is, China doesn’t need to hide anything, people who visit China will come away with a more positive view of the country than those who do not visit.
by Aurornis | 2026-02-27 20:56:54+00:00
> I don't read that. Where do you see a backwards justification?

Most of the improvements he cited in his life were either unrelated to Google or things that he could have turned off in Gmail.

He complains about Gmail sorting his e-mail, but that's a feature he turned on. He could have just turned it off.

He complains about his inbox being polluted from putting his e-mail address into everything, but his new account doesn't have anything signed up yet. That's not a Google problem, that's an e-mail address problem.

He says that he's getting in the habit of skipping search engines and going straight to IMDB or Wikipedia or Reddit, but again that has nothing to do with Google specifically.
by hinkley | 2026-02-27 20:57:30+00:00
I might sign up just to stay on top of a market change that I don’t have an employer paying me to learn.

But the two concerns I have are, what happens when someone uses it to make the projects I work on again but with one design change, and it this pulling up the ladder behind us? Will someone still be able to start a project five years from now and do what you’ve done? Or come into existing projects like I have?
by nephihaha | 2026-02-27 20:57:52+00:00
I've always had a problem with how Hollywood portrays it. Yes, a handful of people do get love at first sight but even that takes work to develop. If two way love was as easy as Hollywood says it is, we'd all be laughing.

And yes, I would distinguish between love and lust. One is wanting to sleep with someone and the other is wanting to spend your life with them (in a positive, non-sinister way!)
by Henchman21 | 2026-02-27 20:57:58+00:00
We’re constantly told all sorts of stuff. It isn’t clear to me at all that this fiduciary duty exists in law at all, more its a collection of precedents and wishful thinking.

Using fiduciary duty as cover for profiting from the misery of others? Well that’s just some modern American doublespeak. I’m consistently asking myself “Are we the Baddies?” and the only answer I have anymore is yes.
by Scoundreller | 2026-02-27 20:58:18+00:00
I did! If they invested it in themselves it would have been a 50-75% loss, same with doing a buyback (return the cash to stockholders) at a high stock price.

Dunno what better proxy I could
use for how it would have went other than their actual stock price. Unless we are to think their next best idea that they didn’t invest in would have done better than all the other things they did invest in. But that’s very speculative.

Instead they got a blended 300% gain on btc.

Should have sold the entire company for cash and bought bitcoin at the timelines they did.
by apoorvdarshan | 2026-02-27 20:58:34+00:00
ok so two types of calorie tracker apps exist right now and both are
type 1: myfitnesspal and stuff. you search "chicken rice" and scroll through 50 entries from a database that hasnt been updated since obama was president. half the entries are user submitted and completely wrong. you spend 5 mins logging a single meal. nobody has time for that
type 2: the new "ai photo scanner" apps like cal ai. cool concept but you scan a plate of pasta and it says 400 calories. scan the same plate again and now its 900. bro what?? the numbers are literally random
i couldnt find anything that actually worked so i built one myself
the thing that makes it different — you just type "2 rotis with dal and a glass of milk" in plain text and it gives you accurate calories and macros. no database to search. no scrolling. just type what you ate like youre texting a friend
and for packaged food you scan the nutrition label directly. not the food itself — the actual label. so the numbers are exact. not ai guessing
photo scan is there too but thats not even the main thing honestly. the text input alone changed how i track. takes me like 5 seconds per meal now
built it solo. no team. would love to know what you guys think and what would make you switch from whatever you're using rn
its called Fud AI on the app store if anyone wants to try: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fud-ai-calorie-tracker/id67589...