MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sigmoid10 | 2026-02-08 15:39:00+00:00
I also enjoy walking more than driving, but if I had to travel 50 miles every day for my job, I would never dream of going on foot. Same goes for AI for me. If I can finish a project in half the time or less, I still feel enough accomplishment and on top of that I will use the gained free time for self actualisation. I like my job and I love coding and solving challenging problems, but I also love tons of other stuff that could use more of my attention. AI has created an insane net positive value for me so far. And I see tons of other people who could also benefit from it the same way, if only they spent a bit more time learning how to use it effectively. Considering how everyone and their uncle thinks they need to chime in on what AI is or is not or what it can or can not do, I find most people have frustratingly little insight into what you can actually do already. Even the people working at companies like Amazon or MS who claim to work on AI integrations sometimes seem to be missing some essentials.
by techblueberry | 2026-02-08 15:39:14+00:00
“Does 'maximize paperclips' mean 'convert universe'?” Statistically unlikely.

Why not? What statistics? Why is the universe more valuable than infinite paperclips? If I imagine a sandbox with no moral reasoning, I would say it is statistically likely. There is in fact the paperclips game where if you can’t specifically do that, I don’t know why you wouldn’t.

But then to your point about premise verification, again, based on what moral framework. If I ask you to build a house, is the first question, do you value the life of a tree over the wood used for the house? There are infinite premises one might examine without moral frameworks.

Why is cutting down a tree worse than genocide, of people? Of ants? Does every bug killed to build the house deserve the same moral verification? Why not? What if one of the bugs was given a name by the three year old girl who lives down the street?

If you’re argument is the training data already includes human value’s, than that’s probably a different argument. Just hope you don’t train on too many serial killer manifestos.
by testbjjl | 2026-02-08 15:40:15+00:00
The anything includes gold continuing to rise and the dollar continuing to fall as countries continue to sell dollars and dollar denominated assets because of self enriching, petty policies. Why trust anything this administration says, especially as news is driven by an investigation into a cabal of pedophiles and things are decided as they are considered in real time, emotionally. This is what people wanted, I guess.
by m132 | 2026-02-08 15:40:24+00:00
It's the combination of two that yields the best of both worlds.

Android SoCs have adopted heterogenous CPU architectures ("big.LITTLE" in the ARM sphere) years before Apple, and as a result, there have been multiple attempts to tackle this in Linux. The latest, upstream, and perhaps the most widely deployed way of efficiently using such processors involves using Energy-Aware Scheduling [1]. This allows the kernel to differentiate between performant and efficient cores, and schedule work accordingly, avoiding situations in which brief workloads are put on P cores and the demanding ones start hogging E cores. Thanks to this, P cores can also be put to sleep when their extra power is not needed, saving power.

One advantage macOS still has over Linux is that its kernel can tell performance-critical and background workloads apart without taking guesses. This allows unimportant workloads to always occupy E cores, freeing P cores for the loads that would benefit from them, or simply letting them sleep for longer. Apple solved this problem by defining a standard interface for the user-space to communicate such information down [2]. As far as I'm aware, Linux currently lacks an equivalent [3].

Technically, your application can still pin its threads to individual cores, but to know which core is which, it would have to parse information internal to the scheduler. I haven't seen any Linux application that does this.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/scheduler/sched-energ...

[2] https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Pe...

[3] https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-corelibs-libdispatch?tab=...
Show HN: Try ByteDance's Seedance 2.0 AI video model
by jackson_mile | 2026-02-08 15:40:46+00:00
Hi HN,

I’m building an AI video playground where people can try different text-to-video models in one place. We recently added support for Seedance 2.0, ByteDance’s latest video model, and I thought some of you might like to experiment with it.

https://laike.ai/tools/seedance-2

A few things that stood out when testing Seedance 2.0:

It often generates multi-shot sequences instead of a single static shot

Motion can be quite smooth compared to earlier T2V models

It supports native audio generation

Prompts with camera movement or cinematic language tend to work well

The goal of the site isn’t just Seedance — it’s to let people compare different video models under a similar interface. I found it frustrating that every model lives in a separate UI with different credit systems and prompt formats.

Some honest notes:

Outputs are still inconsistent

Prompting quality matters a lot

Long narrative coherence is hard for all current models

Running these models is expensive, so there are usage limits

If you’re experimenting with generative video, I’d love to hear:

What prompts work well for you

Where current models fail

What tooling you wish existed around text-to-video

Happy to answer questions about the product or setup.
by hirako2000 | 2026-02-08 15:41:02+00:00
The question nobody asks, is what will happen once atrophy kicks in and nobody is able fire fight production genAI isn't able to fix without making things worse, with broke system bleeding a million dollars per day or more.

It's at least possible that we would eventually do a rollback to status quo and swear to never devalue human knowledge of the problems we solve.
by estearum | 2026-02-08 15:41:17+00:00
There is no world in which an MFN clause does anything other than reduce the overall revenues to the pharma companies.

There is no world in which lower overall revenues does not reduce R&D spend.

There is no world in which lower R&D spend does not reduce the number and quality of new drugs.

This doesn't require trusting anyone about anything other than trusting that pharma companies are generally profit-seeking and therefore an MFN clause imposed by USG will create less optimal pricing (for the pharma companies' own incentives) than currently exists.

The exact price changes that happen in different localities that net out to "less revenue → less R&D → fewer drugs" is hard to predict, but the fact that it will be lower and it nets out to "less revenue → less R&D → fewer drugs" is absolutely predictable.

Please suggest an alternative outcome, if you can think of one.
by _aavaa_ | 2026-02-08 15:41:34+00:00
The original pithy comment I was replying to was arguing that we’ll become dependent to a service run by another company. I don’t see that being true for two reasons:

1. You are not forced to use the AI in the first place.

2. If you want to use one, you can self host it one of the open models.

That at any moment in time the open models are not equivalent in capabilities to the SOTA paid models is beside the point.
by zajio1am | 2026-02-08 15:41:53+00:00
I do not talk about UBs, compiler can be non-deterministic even for completely valid and well-specified source code.

Seems to me that people just confuse determinism with soundness.

Determinism is just whether the output of the tool (machine code) is determined by the input (source code), i.e., for one input always returns the same output.

Soundness means that output is always consistent with the semantics of the input. i.e. returned machine code always does what is specified by the source code.

Compilers can be non-deterministic (although usually are deterministic), but they are always sound (ignoring compiler bugs).

LLMs can be deterministic (although usually aren't), but they are not sound in general.
by cosmic_cheese | 2026-02-08 15:41:58+00:00
Being able to make small grocery trips means less spoiled perishables (only buy what you plan to use right away) and more flexibility when cooking, since it’s no big deal to go grab whatever it is that you need in the moment. It also prevents the annoyance of realizing you forgot that one thing last week’s trip, which is just going to have to wait until next week’s trip.

This is how it is in the sleepy residential parts of Tokyo. An interesting knock-on effect is smaller, simpler, cheaper refrigerators since you don’t need to store a ton of refrigerated goods for long periods when groceries are within arm’s reach.
by saagarjha | 2026-02-08 15:42:03+00:00
On iOS system libraries (e.g. UIKit, CoreFoundation) are packed into a file called the dyld shared cache. To get symbols for them, you need to download this file, split it apart, and parse the symbol tables embedded inside. These symbols change with every iOS release, so it needs to be done every time you update. When you see this message in Xcode, it's downloading the shared cache file off your device (which is several gigabytes) and splitting it. This does not get cleaned up unless you do so explicitly (which is why a lot of "dev cleaner" apps will prune it for you). You can also see the symbols you have cached on your computer from System Settings.
by jredwards7 | 2026-02-08 15:42:06+00:00
The structural validation layer is worth separating from the semantic layer, even if the semantic problem is harder. If every AI-proposed change is validated against a JSON Schema before execution, and that validation produces a deterministic, signed result, you get an auditable record of what passed structural checks and when. That doesn't solve semantic drift (a field can be renamed and still pass validation) but it gives you a foundation to build semantic checks on top of. The key property is determinism: identical schema and payload should produce identical hashes and outcomes, regardless of which service runs the check. Without that, you end up debugging whether a failure is in your schema logic or in validator implementation differences across languages. Contract tests and regression evals work better when the structural layer underneath is provably consistent. One reference for this pattern: https://docs.rapidtools.dev/openapi.yaml
by cat_plus_plus | 2026-02-08 15:42:24+00:00
I have no idea what everyone is talking about. LLMs are based on relatively simple math, inference is much easier to learn and customize than say Android APIs. Once you do you can apply familiar programming style logic to messy concepts like language and images. Give you model a JSON schema like "warp_factor": Integer if you don't want chatter, that's way better than Star Trek computer could do. Or have it write you a simple domain specific library on top of Android API that you can then program from memory like old style BASIC rather than having to run to stack overflow for evwery new task.
by hedora | 2026-02-08 15:42:29+00:00
Corn ethanol isn't a renewable resource. The land use of corn is a problem, but it's rounding error compared to the petroleum consumption of that industry, or the topsoil degradation.

To get one Joule out of corn ethanol, the US is burning more than one Joule of oil. This is probably the main reason corn subsidies are so popular politically. They serve the oil barons, mega farms, and big agriculture firms like Monsanto.

On top of that, modern farming practices degrade topsoil over time. It's gotten a bit better than the Dust Bowl days, but we're still burning through topsoil at crazy rates, and it is beyond current technology to manufacture new topsoil.

So, ethanol corn is like heating your house by dumping gas on a field and burning it to boil water. Then you carry the water inside. There only difference is the number of levels of indirection.

The last I checked, it took less energy to make a solar panel than the expected lifetime output of the panel. So, at least you can power solar factories (in theory) with solar. There's still the problem of the environmental impact of rare earth refining, but at least it's a second order issue, and not like the first order issues corn ethanol has.

(Note that not all ethanol farming is as dumb as what the US does: For example, Brazil has had a net positive energy industry from sugar ethanol for a while. They "just" have to clear cut the rain forest to replace the farmland that house of cards is destroying.)
Ask HN: Suggestions for General Tech forums without AI anxiety
by AndrewKemendo | 2026-02-08 15:42:37+00:00
At this point not only the front page of hacker news, but the new page of hacker news is totally inundated with blog posts about people complaining about or otherwise worried about about generative AI.

Are there any other general technical forums, where this is not the dominant narrative?

I say “generally technical” because places like less wrong and lobsters are not general in the same way as HN
by gaigalas | 2026-02-08 15:42:49+00:00
I see, you're using "determinism" coloquially, in the sense of "exact outcome".

That's perfectly fine. We are honed for this too.

We don't need to produce exact solutions or answers. We need to make things work despite the presence of chaos. That is our job and we're good at it.

Product managers freak out when someone says "I don't know how much time it will take, there are too many variables!". CFOs freak out when someone says "we don't know how much it will cost". Those folk want exact, predictable outcomes.

Engineers don't, we always dealt with unpredictable chaotic things. We're just fine.
by the-grump | 2026-02-08 15:43:28+00:00
What has worked for me is having multiple agents do different tasks (usually in different projects) and doing something myself that I haven't automated yet.

e.g. managing systems, initiating backups, thinking about how I'll automate my backups, etc.

The list of things I haven't automated is getting shorter, and having LLMs generate something I'm happy to hand the work to has been a big part of it.
by aurareturn | 2026-02-08 15:43:33+00:00
Recently, I had to do an integration with a Chinese API for my company. I used Codex to do the whole thing.

Yet, there is no way a product manager without any coding experience could have done it. First, the API needed to communicate to the main app correctly. This required human engineer guidance. AI was lost. Second, the API was designed extremely poorly. You first had to make a request, then retry a second endpoint over and over again while the Chinese API did its thing in the background. Yes, I had to poll it. I had to test many requests to make sure it was reliable (it wasn't). In the end, I gave a recommendation that we shouldn't rely on this Chinese company and back out of the deal before we send them a huge deposit.

A non-technical PM couldn't have done what I did... for at least a few more years. You need a background and experience in software development to even know what to prompt the AI.

I still have a job. I'm very bullish on AI as well.
by xtiansimon | 2026-02-08 15:43:38+00:00
Interesting. Very useful _in the event of my untimely demise_.

Specifically for my own memory problem I use a printed "random number pad" that is a 10x10 grid of characters. I keep a copy in the house and in the cloud.

I have a strong visual memory. I can remember shapes and images much better than words or strings. To reveal the password I need only recall the visual pattern and collect the characters underneath.
by fyredge | 2026-02-08 15:44:00+00:00
That's great that you have your plans sorted out. I'm working in a HCOL area and plan to move to a more relaxed place for retirement myself. The thing is, neither of us would be part of the immigration that is necessary for a continued QOL.

In the extreme case of an entire nation of DINKs, that nation will cease to exist as it once was. It I think in some sense, having kids is like paying for social security. If an entire society does not have kids, then who are they to demand that their quality of life remains? In fact, it feels a little selfish to me that they did not wish to bear the burden to child rearing, yet ask for others to maintain what they did not work to keep. Perhaps this makes childbirth seem too transactional, but I believe it has always been somewhat the case.

It's a shame that the world is a rat race. Why worry about letting China race ahead when they subject themselves to so much stress that the younger generations are "lying flat"? The race to more wealth as an indicator of a good life sounds too convenient to be true.
by eddythompson80 | 2026-02-08 15:44:07+00:00
I’m pretty sure they have used it before, or maybe it was githubnext. I’m also pretty sure I have seen many large companies and organizations launch developer facing tools and stuff through GitHub pages. The structure of GitHub pages is pretty simple. You know the user/org from the domain. I’m still not sure what’s phishy about it. Is it a broken promise?
by grayhatter | 2026-02-08 15:44:58+00:00
> I think the 10 lines of code people worry their jobs now become obsolete.

I'm gonna assume you think you're in the other camp, but please correct me if I'm mistaken.

I'd say I'm in the 10 lines of code camp, but I'd say that group is the least afraid of fictionalized career threat. The people that obsess over those 10 lines are the same people who show up to fix the system when prod goes down. They're the ones that change 2 lines of code to get a 35% performance boost.

It annoys me a lot when people ship broken code. Vibe coded slop is almost always broken, because of those 10 lines.
by goostavos | 2026-02-08 15:45:07+00:00
Sigh.. same.

The real AI fatigue is the constant background irritation I have when interacting with LLMs.

"You're not imagining it"
"You're not crazy"
"You're absolutely right!"
"Your right to push back on this"
"Here's the no fluff, correct, non-reddit answer"
by zozbot234 | 2026-02-08 15:45:22+00:00
> you lost control of the code and are running more and more frictionless on hopes and dreams

Your control over the code is your prompt. Write more detailed prompts and the control comes back. (The best part is that you can also work with the AI to come up with better prompts, but unlike with slop-written code, the result is bite-sized and easily surveyable.)
Show HN: Standardized robot brain with hardware safety – 10 patents in 4 days
by opencxms | 2026-02-08 15:45:47+00:00
I'm a solo inventor in rural Pennsylvania. Over four days last week, I filed 10 provisional patents (70 claims, $650 total) describing a complete hardware specification for a standardized AI compute module for robots -- what I've been calling a "robot brain."

The spec defines three standardized sizes (drone to surgical robot), a universal connector system (the Manufacturer Interface Module, or MIM) so any brain works with any robot body, and a hardware safety architecture where a dedicated safety processor on its own power rail physically controls whether the AI processors receive electricity.

That last part is the point. Every AI safety system I've seen is software watching software. This design puts a hardware kill switch between the AI and the power supply. The AI can't prevent its own shutdown -- it's the same Safe Torque Off principle that industrial motor controllers have used for decades, applied to AI compute for the first time.

The formal spec name is the Standardized Autonomous Safety Module (SASM). Think ATX for robot brains -- standardized form factor, universal connector, safety built into the hardware.

I built all of this working alongside AI, using an open-source context management system I created that gives AI assistants persistent memory across sessions. The tool I built to solve AI's memory problem became the tool that let me design a robot brain. Several of the patents describe the context management system itself.

Open-source tool: https://github.com/RobSB2/CxMS

Happy to answer questions about the hardware spec, the safety architecture, or the experience of filing 10 patents in four days as a solo inventor.
by ArtTimeInvestor | 2026-02-08 15:46:13+00:00
In the limit, that would mean that Bitcoin's volatility reflects only the savings rate of people.

That would mean that Bitcoin is pure monetary value. In that case, it would suck out all the monetary premium from other assets like real estate, equities and gold. The monetary premium in those is probably a few hundred trillion. So by that time, Bitcoin's price should be 2 orders of magnitude higher than today.
by echelon | 2026-02-08 15:46:36+00:00
This is what I don't understand: everyone who thinks we're still relevant with the same job and salary expectations.

Everything just changed. Fundamentally.

If you don't adapt to these tools, you will be slower than your peers. Few businesses will tolerate that.

This is competitive cycling. Claude is a modern bike with steroids. You can stay on a penny farthing, but that's not advised.

You can write 10x the code - good code. You can review and edit it before committing it. Nothing changes from a code quality perspective. Only speed.

What remains to be seen is how many of us the market needs and how much the market will pay us.

I'm hoping demand and comp remain constant, but we'll see.

We need ownership in these systems ASAP.
by chasd00 | 2026-02-08 15:46:36+00:00
It _does_ feel good, I know what you mean. I don’t understand why exactly but there’s def an emotion associated with vibe coding. It may be related to the feeling you get when you get some code working and finish a requirement or solve a problem. Maybe vibe coding gives you a shortcut to that endorphin. I think it’s going to be particularly important to manage that feeling and balance with reality. You know, I wonder how similar this reaction is to the endorphins from YouTube shorts or other social media. If it’s as addicting (and it’s looking that way) but requires a subscription and tied to work instead of entertainment then the justification for the billions and billions of investment dollars is obvious. Interesting times indeed.
by kkfx | 2026-02-08 15:46:51+00:00
The Bitcoin genesis is certainly unclear; a FLOSS project is proudly published by those who create it and certainly don't want to remain anonymous, but the super-value of BTC over time has been driven by substantial criminal activities, not exactly US nor pro-US. The first ones were indeed US "ally", the D-Company that sold drugs for BTC to arm Al-Qaeda by selling BTC for weapons and explosives, which the sellers were happy to accept because they could sell them for various nations' fiat currencies to D-Company customers, laundering it well and without having to carry around pallets of unmarked bills, which are easy to seize during travel. Yes, Al-Qaeda was pro-US kleptocracy, certainly not pro-American people, see https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/c...

But then China also used them to smuggle Fentanyl into the US, and this late revenge against the East India companies that invaded it with opium so long ago, on the wrong subject (since it was the UK that started the Opium War and the US helped and was largely helped by China, which paid for e.g. the development of the railway networks in the US, a history forgotten by most), it proved that BTC as a tool is neutral. Its use by Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea confirms this.

So I suspend judgment, I don't trust the genesis, I read and encounter various problems https://blog.dshr.org/2025/09/the-gaslit-asset-class.html but I am not completely convinced by your analysis and honestly, I am very much in favor of the end of the banking system and the current financial model for the development of humanity, and it matters little who brings about this event; they are the enemy of my enemy in any case.