MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AshleysBrain | 2026-02-18 09:07:46+00:00
Is this not a good example of how generative AI does copyright laundering? Suppose the image was AI generated and it did a bad copy of the source image that was in the training data, which seems likely with such a widely disseminated image. When using generative AI to produce anything else, how do you know it's not just doing a bad quality copy-paste of someone else's work? Are you going to scour the internet for the source? Will the AI tell you? What if code generation is copy-pasting GPL-licensed code in to your proprietary codebase? The likelihood of this, the lack of a way to easily know it's happening, and the risks it causes, seems to me to be being overlooked amidst all the AI hype. And generative AI is a lot less impressive if it often works as a bad quality copy paste tool rather than the galaxy brain intelligence some like to portray it as.
by sensanaty | 2026-02-18 09:09:09+00:00
So we're suddenly going back into measuring lines of code as a useful metric?

Just because people are shitting out endless slop code that they never bothered to throw a 2nd glance at doesn't mean it'sgood or that it's leading to better projects or tools, it literally just means people are pushing code out haphazardly . If I made a python script that everyone started using and all it did was create a repo, commit a README and push it every 5 seconds we'd be seeing billions of lines of code added! But none of it is useful in any way.

Same with AI, sure we're generating endless piles of code, but how much of it is actually leading to better software?
by darkwater | 2026-02-18 09:09:32+00:00
> I think we underestimate how technical things like WIX or Squarespace are, to a non-technical person, but many are skilled business people who could probably work with an LLM agent to get a simple product together.

In the same vein, I think you underestimate how much "hidden" technical knowledge must be there to actually build a software that works most of the time (not asking for a bug-free program). To design such a program with current LLM coding agents you need to be at very least a power user, probably a very powerful one, in the domain of the program you want to build and also in the domain of general software.
Maybe things will improve with LLM and agents and "make it work" will be enough for the agent to create tests, try extensively the program, finding bugs and squashing them and do all the extra work needed, who know. But we are definitely not there today.
by kunley | 2026-02-18 09:12:50+00:00
Ok, I am not saying it doesn't run on hardware, but the primary example runs (for the somehow stretched definition of "run", as you say) on QEMU but displays a message that it's bare metal.

Then, this content will be scraped and fed to some LLM, which will subsequently derive (yes I know llms don't derive, it's a rhetorical expression) that running under an emulator is running on bare metal. Confusion for the masses!
(Not to mention confusion for a reader already now)
Show HN: Galopen – Auto-opens Zoom/Meet links from your calendar
by piro0919 | 2026-02-18 09:13:22+00:00
I built Galopen because I kept missing the right Zoom/Google Meet link when meetings started.

Instead of searching through calendar events manually, Galopen automatically detects upcoming events and opens the correct meeting link at the right time.

It’s macOS-only and built with Tauri. I originally made similar apps in Electron, but the bundle size was too large, so I migrated everything to Tauri to keep it lightweight.

Website: https://galopen.kkweb.io/

Curious what others think:
- Would you prefer full automation or confirmation before opening?
- Any edge cases I should consider?

Would appreciate any feedback.
by mark_l_watson | 2026-02-18 09:13:53+00:00
I agree with you, but then I am retired so my opinion is not that relevant.

I have a sweet spot for using just Emacs, no other IDEs except very occasional use of AntiGravity. For a particular fun project or researching how to use generative models in applications, I like to start low: see if a small local model with appropriate tool use or agentic library will get the job done, if not move up to using something cheap like gemini-3-flash, and only if none of these approaches work, then use an expensive model.

I was advising a friend’s company last month on their application that effectively uses LLM models, but I was blown away by their zeal to spend lots of money on tokens.
by Arkhaine_kupo | 2026-02-18 09:14:11+00:00
We made this unbeatable tests for AI then told some of the smartest engineering teams in the planet that they can present a solution in a black box without explaining if they cheated but if they win they get amazing headlines and to keep their jobs and funding.

Somehow thye beat the score in the same year, its crazy! No one could have seen this coming, and please do not test it at home to see if you get the same results, it gets embarrased outside of our office space
by syukursyakir | 2026-02-18 09:14:25+00:00
Hey HN,

I posted Book2Course here a couple of weeks ago and got some valuable feedback. The main criticisms were that the course output felt template-like, quizzes were too surface-level, and the content lacked depth.

I went back and rebuilt most of the generation pipeline. Here's what changed:

What's new in V2:
- Step-by-step lessons instead of walls of text — you click through sections, can't just scroll past
- Inline comprehension checks mid-lesson (compulsory — you have to answer to continue)
- Quiz explanations that tell you WHY you're wrong, not just "incorrect"
- Spaced repetition flashcards auto-generated per chapter (exportable to Anki)
- Practice mode: generate fresh AI questions across any chapters at any difficulty
- AI Tutor grounded in YOUR book — highlight any text and ask about it
- Page references so every concept traces back to the source
- Chapter selection — pick the chapters you need, skip the rest
- Knowledge map showing how concepts connect
- Difficulty verification: a second AI pass checks that question difficulty ratings are accurate

What it's NOT: a summarizer. If your book spends 10 pages on recursion, the course reflects that depth. The lessons stay faithful to the source material.

Tech stack: Next.js, FastAPI, Supabase, OpenRouter for AI generation. Processing a 300-page book takes ~3 minutes.

Free tier: 1 book + 3 notes/month. No credit card needed.

https://book2course.com

I'd especially love feedback on course quality — that's where I focused most of the rebuild. Try it with a textbook you know well so you can judge the output. I will read every comment and look at EVERY feedback! Yes and we have launched on Product Hunt! I am so excited!
by choeger | 2026-02-18 09:14:44+00:00
I am working with main/master for years now, and there's one problem you don't have with develop: Whenever you merge something into master, it kind of blocks the next release until its (non-continuous) QA is done. If your changes are somewhat independent, you can cherry-pick them from develop into master in an arbitrary order and call that a release whenever you want to.
by jstummbillig | 2026-02-18 09:15:41+00:00
I see no reason to believe that just handing a Claude subscription to everyone in a company simply creates economic benefit. I don't think it's easier than "automating customer service". It's actually very strange.

I think it could definitely already create economic benefit, after someone instructed clearly how to use it and how to integrate it in your work. Most people are really not good at figuring that out on their own, in a busy workday, when left to their own devices and companies are just finding out where the ball is moving and what to organize around too.

So I can totally see a lot of failed experiments and people slowly figuring stuff out, and all of that not translating to measurable surpluses in a corp, in a setup similar to what OP laid out.
by ihagen | 2026-02-18 09:17:15+00:00
The world has changed. Cars belong to a consumerism-driven, globalized economy. Humanoid robots and AI belong to a technofeudal, fascist-like state with a government-driven economy. The ruler relies on his elite. The elite relies on AI, humanoid robots, and drones to project the ruler’s power and maintain the status quo. The peasants are no longer needed. They are now seen only as a burden.
by jaapz | 2026-02-18 09:17:36+00:00
What's also bewildering is the complete opposite of the spectrum of calling something "dogshit" when it is quite obviously a very powerful tool. It won't replace workers. But it will make those workers more productive. You don't need to vibe-code to be able to do more work in the same amount of time with the help of an LLM coding agent.
by hackrmn | 2026-02-18 09:18:54+00:00
I think your wish is self-contradicting. `#fff` is so-called _device_ colour -- a device like a LED-based display uses it directly to drive the LEDs, where `#fff` means that the red, the green and the blue channel are already "cranked to 11". The `f` here is equivalent to 11. HDR uses a different color format, I think -- exactly because `#fff` is otherwise either ambigous, or has to map to a different colour gamut -- where, for instance, `#fff` actually means the whitest white cranked up to 11, at however many nits (say 1500) the monitor may emit, which would make your "standard" or "SDR" white (per sRGB, say) that's usually has the emitted strength of around 100 nits, be somewhere at `#888` (I haven't taken into account the _curve_ implied here, at any rate I don't think it's going to be a linear relationship between nits and device primary N-bit colour numbers).

Also, `#fff` is ambigous -- if you mean device colour, then there's no brightness (nits) specified at all, it may be 200 or 2000 or 10,000. If sRGB is implied, as in `#fff in sRGB colour space` then the standard specifies 80 nits, so when you say you don't want brighter than that, then you can't have much of HDR since sRGB precludes HDR by definition (can't go brighter than 80 nits for the "whitepoint" aka white).

I think if you want HDR you need a different colour space entirely, which either has a different peak brightness, or one where the brightness is specified additionally to e.g. R, G and B primaries. But here my HDR knowledge is weak -- perhaps someone else may chime in. I just find colour science fascinating, sorry to go on a tangent here.
by mark_l_watson | 2026-02-18 09:20:07+00:00
I have been using vector based RAG for about two years now, I am not knocking the tech, but last year I started experimenting with going way back in time and also in parallel trying BM25 search (or hybrid BM25 and vector). So: not even a very good example use case of LLMs, the tech is not always applicable.

EDIT: I am on a mobile device and don’t have a reference handy but there have been good papers on RAG scaling issues - basically the embedding space gets saturated (too many document chunks cluster in small areas of the embedding space), if my memory is correct.
by gjvc | 2026-02-18 09:20:21+00:00
It's a shame to see you get downvoted (presumably because you don't cite any evidence for your assertions). As a counter-point, I will give the oft-quoted-by-me 1990s promotional video of the use of IBM CallPath on an AS/400 which should get you all misty-eyed https://youtu.be/5pY6Xxptp9A?t=2058

Enjoy.
by seec | 2026-02-18 09:21:11+00:00
You are being idiotic.
One hour of running is almost half of my minimum energy expenditure.
All the other movements in a typical day only account for about half that, unless I make sure to walk a lot more than most people would.

The brain does increase energy expenditure with activity, but as said in the article, it's quite minimal.

I have been tracking caloric input very precisely and energy expenditure with an Apple Watch (one of the most precise trackers) for a while, and I can guarantee you it all adds up.

In fact, once everything is calibrated, I could predict my weight loss/gain with a 5-10% margin of error at worst (mostly due to imprecision in food calorie accounting and inaccurate energy expenditure tracking).

Too many people try to mystify something that is extremely simple. There are some things to care about (like not going too low on the protein), but it really is all about getting the same amount of energy that you are spending, and that's pretty much all there is to it.
by anon-3988 | 2026-02-18 09:21:58+00:00
> The edges are where interesting stuff happens. The boring part can be made more efficient. I don’t need to type boring emails, people who can’t articulate well will be elevated.

I think that boring emails should not be written. What kind of boring emails do you NEED to be written, but not WANT to write? Those are exactly the kind of email that SHOULD NOT be passed through an LLM.

If you need to say yes/no. You don't want to take the whole email conversation and let LLM generate a story about why you said yes/no.

If you want to apply for a leave, just make it optimal "Hi <X>, I want to take leave from Y to Z. Thanks". You don't want to create 2 pages of justification for why you want to take this leave to see your family and friends.

In fact, for every LLM output, I want to see the input instead. What did they have in mind? If I have the input, I can ask LLM to generate 1 million outputs if I really want to read an elaboration. The input is what matters.

If I have the input, I can always generate an output. If I have the output, I don't know what was the input (i.e. the original intention).
by imtringued | 2026-02-18 09:22:03+00:00
They've already ceded the entire GPU programming environment to their competitor. CUDA is as relevant as it always has been.

The primary competitors are Google's TPU which are programmed using JAX and Cerebras which has an unrivaled hardware advantage.

If you insist on an hobbyist accessible underdog, you'd go with Tenstorrent, not AMD. AMD is only interesting if you've already been buying blackwells by the pallet and you're okay with building your own inference engine in-house for a handful of models.
by mort96 | 2026-02-18 09:22:15+00:00
I agree. I always customize the blue color on my terminal because dark blue on black is completely unreadable to me (and I'm not even color blind!). For some reason, every single terminal emulator defaults to a blue that's unreadable on a black background (I think typically #00f).

If a tool overrides my color settings, it too usually picks a dark blue that's unreadable on my black background.
by viraptor | 2026-02-18 09:22:18+00:00
Looks like you're mixing up two things when testing: the correct answer and format following. If you want both, why not use https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/struct... ? If you don't care about the structure, why penalise the correct answers? In realistic usage people don't say "I really care about the format a lot... but not enough to guarantee it".
by srean | 2026-02-18 09:22:37+00:00
Coroutine idea is very old. I am not 100% sure but they were heavily used in Telecom applications.

It's easier in C and old C++ if one can drop down to assembly to switch between different call stacks.

Among modern languages there is Lua. Take a look at Felix too.

https://felix-tutorial.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tut110.html

https://felix.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fibres.html
by kuhaku22 | 2026-02-18 09:22:40+00:00
This is the same Microsoft that promised to indemnify any of its customers sued over copyright lawsuits as a result of using its AIs. [0] So I'm sure legal reviewed it the same way, saying "Yep, our war chest is still ample".

[0]: https://www.reuters.com/technology/microsoft-defend-customer...
by dgoldstein0 | 2026-02-18 09:23:02+00:00
And thenb potentially suffer from integration hell.

The benefit of using off the shelf software is that many of the integration problems get solved by other people. Heck you may not even know you have a problem and they may already have a solution.

Custom software on the other hand could just breed more demand for custom software. We gotta be careful how much custom stuff we do lest it get completely out of hand
by arthurcolle | 2026-02-18 09:23:15+00:00
> Its also worth noting that if you can create a business with an LLM, so can everyone else.

False. Anyone can learn about index ETFs and still yolo into 3DTE options and promptly get variation margined out of existence.

Discipline and contextual reasoning in humans is not dependent on the tools they are using, and I think the take is completely and definitively wrong.
by azath92 | 2026-02-18 09:23:40+00:00
This whole comment thread here is really echoing and adding to some thoughts ive had lately on the shift from considering LLMs replacing engineering to make software (much of which is about integration, longevity and customization of a general system), vs LLMs replacing buying software.

If most software is just used by me to do a specific task, then being able to make software for me to do that task will become the norm. Following that thought, we are going to see a drastic reduction in SASS solutions, as many people who were buying a flexible-toolbox for one usecase to use occasionally, just get an llm to make them the script/software to do that task as and when they need it, without any concern for things like security, longevity, ease of use by others (for better or for worse).

I guess what im circling around is that if we define engineering as building the complex tools that have to interact with many other systems, persist, be generally useful and understandable to many people, and we consider that many people actually dont need that complexity for their use of the system, the complexity arises from it needing to serve its purpose at huge scale over time. then maybe there will be less need for enginners, but perhaps first and foremost because the problems that engineering is required to solve are much less if much more focused and bespoke solutions to peoples problems are available on demand.

As an engineer i have often felt threatened by LLMs and agents of late, but i find that if i reframe it from Agents replacing me, to Agents causing the type of problems that are even valuable to solve to shift, it feels less threatening for some reason. Ill have to mull more.
by inglor_cz | 2026-02-18 09:23:40+00:00
Socialist economies larger than kibbutzes could only be created and sustained by totalitarian states. Socialism means collective ownership of means of production.

And people won't give up their shops and fields and other means of production to the government voluntarily, at least not en masse. Thus they have to be forced at a gunpoint, and they always were.

All the subsequent horror is downstream from that. This is what is inherent to building a socialist economy: mass expropriation of the former "exploitative class". The bad management of the stolen assets is just a consequence, because ideologically brainwashed partisans are usually bad at managing anything including themselves.
by unkulunkulu | 2026-02-18 09:24:16+00:00
Ok, this article inspired some positivity in my view. Here comes, of course a disclaimer that this is just "wishful thinking", but still.

So we are in the process of "adapting a technology". Welcome, keep calm, observe, don't be ashamed to feel emotions like fear, excitement, anger and all else.

While adapting, we learn how to use it better and better. At first, we try "do all the work for me", then "ok, that was bad, plan what you would do, good, adjust, ok do it like this" etc etc.

A couple of years into the future this knowledge is just "passed on". If productivity grew and we "figured out how to get more out of the universe", then no jobs had to be lost, just readapted. And "investors" get happy not by "replacing workers", but by "reaping win-win rewards" from the universe at large.

There are dangers of course, like "maybe this is truly a huge win-win, but some loses can be hidden, like ecology", but "I hope there are people really addressing these problems and this win-win will help them be more productive as well".
by RealityVoid | 2026-02-18 09:24:22+00:00
> * The lack of open source hardware tools, workflows, high-quality examples, relative to the gross abundance of open source software, doesn’t help the situation, but I think it is more a symptom than it is a cause.

To this, I would point to librelane/yosys/TinyTapeout/waferspace and say there are quite a bit of opportunities to learn stuff and there are oss initiative trying to _do stuff_ in this field. I wouldn't know how it applies to the wider industry, but the ecosystem deff piqued my interest. I do write quite a bit of embedded systems in my day to day though, so I got a rough idea what is in a chip. Would love to have the time to dive deeper.
by johncoltrane | 2026-02-18 09:24:39+00:00
Yes, I know that (see the venerable https://github.com/trapd00r/colorcoke, etc.) but those tricks are not used widely enough for them to be a concern. Using those tricks is also a deliberate choice so it is definitely on the user if my lovingly crafted 256c colorscheme is broken.

Having all terminal emulators run the equivalent of colorcoke without asking the user is not a very bright idea.
by gf000 | 2026-02-18 09:25:25+00:00
I won't argue with you on the project-related part of it, you obviously know best there :) Thank you for all the work!

But how would you "rate" for example desktop "GNU/Linux" with this in mind? Quite clearly privacy is important here and none of the major components leak/store unnecessary personal data. But the security story is quite sad, everything runs as the same user so a random `npm install` can just do whatever it wants with my browser caches, ssh keys, etc. I would say that GNU/Linux is privacy-friendly, but has terrible security. Would you not agree here? How does this fit with the "privacy and security are not separate things" part? Genuinely curious about your opinion here, not arguing for the sake of it, they are just not as closely connected in my mind. For example Google has a good track record of having safe practices regarding data storage -- but privacy is not their strong suit/hard to define what it means for a company to begin with.
by UqWBcuFx6NV4r | 2026-02-18 09:25:31+00:00
If this pattern is so pervasive, and so many people care enough to attempt to explain it to you, yet you remain unconvinced, I’m not sure how you reach the conclusion that you are right, and correct, and that it’s such a shame that the world does not conform to how you believe that things should be.

Besides a bit of a puritan argument about “git gods”, you haven’t really justified why this matters at all, let alone why you care so much about it.

On the other hand, the model that you are so strongly against has a very easy to understand mental model that is analogous to real-world things. What do you think that the flow in git flow is referring to?

I’m sorry that you find git flow so disgusting but I think your self-righteousness is completely unjustified.
by AlienRobot | 2026-02-18 09:25:52+00:00
I actually often have the opposite problem. The AI overview will assert something and give me dozens of links, and then I'm forced to check them one by one to try to figure out where the assertion came from, and, in some cases, none of the articles even say what the AI overview claimed they said.

I honestly don't get it. All I want is for it to quote verbatim and link to the source. This isn't hard, and there is no way the engineers at Google don't know how to write a thesis with citations. How did things end up this way?