MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 0xbadcafebee | 2026-02-05 18:32:00+00:00
If your business relies on compute, and you run that compute in the cloud, you are putting a lot of trust in your cloud provider. Cloud companies generally make onboarding very easy, and offboarding very difficult. If you are not vigilant you will sleepwalk into a situation of high cloud costs and no way out. If you want to control your own destiny, you must run your own compute.

This is not a valid reason for running your own datacenter, or running your own server.

Self-reliance is great, but there are other benefits to running your own compute. It inspires good engineering. Maintaining a data center is much more about solving real-world challenges. The cloud requires expertise in company-specific APIs and billing systems. A data center requires knowledge of Watts, bits, and FLOPs. I know which one I rather think about.

This is not a valid reason for running your own datacenter, or running your own server.

Avoiding the cloud for ML also creates better incentives for engineers. Engineers generally want to improve things. In ML many problems go away by just using more compute. In the cloud that means improvements are just a budget increase away. This locks you into inefficient and expensive solutions. Instead, when all you have available is your current compute, the quickest improvements are usually speeding up your code, or fixing fundamental issues.

This is not a valid reason for owning a datacenter, or running your own server.

Finally there’s cost, owning a data center can be far cheaper than renting in the cloud. Especially if your compute or storage needs are fairly consistent, which tends to be true if you are in the business of training or running models. In comma’s case I estimate we’ve spent ~5M on our data center, and we would have spent 25M+ had we done the same things in the cloud.

This is one of only two valid reasons for owning a datacenter, and one of several valid reasons for running your own server.

The only two valid reasons to build/operate a datacenter: 1) what you're doing is so costly that building your own factory is the only profitable way for your business to produce its widgets, 2) you can't find a datacenter with the location or capacity you need and there is no other way to serve your business needs.

There's many valid reasons to run your own servers (colo), although most people will not run into them in a business setting.
by behnamoh | 2026-02-05 18:32:03+00:00
Anthropic does anything to keep the Claude hype going; from fearmongering ("AI bad, need government regulations") to wishful thinking ("90% of code will be written by AI by the end of 2025" —Dario) to using Claude in applications it has no business being in (Cowork, accessing all your files, what could go wrong?) to releasing "research" papers every now and then to show how their AI "almost got out" and they stopped it (again, to show their models are "just that good") to prescribing what the society should do to adapt to the new reality to doing worthless surveys on "how AI is reshaping economy, but mostly our AI not others".
by hansvm | 2026-02-05 18:32:06+00:00
How did that work mechanically though? At YT we were banned from doing basically anything with pre-18yo data, even if we only suspected they might possibly not be an adult -- no A/B tests, no ML, no ad targeting, no nada. Did leadership design a system where those sorts of things would happen anyway? Were there just enough rogue teams to cause problems?
by adfm | 2026-02-05 18:32:17+00:00
How about the Iran-Contra connections? The crack epidemic ravaging Baltimore in The Wire has everything to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Ever wonder how he bought that island of his?

https://forum.agora-dialogue.com/2025/12/19/epstein-israel-a...

https://youtube.com/shorts/Z3gHFmdYZ_E?si=KPtbGy9j_whzKX_n

https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/index.html
by arturocamembert | 2026-02-05 18:32:22+00:00
> Naturally, I blamed React.

Did the author start a client-side debugging process without running any kind of diagnostics in the dev tools?

To me this sounds like "I saw some slowness in my application, so naturally I started adjusting indexes in my database." Without doing any upfront research, you're basically just throwing darts and hoping one sticks. This type of approach to debugging has never served me well.
by LorenPechtel | 2026-02-05 18:32:54+00:00
No. Pakistan supported an insurgency group for 20 years.

No insurgency like that can exist without foreign support in some form, usually from governments but it can be from resource export.

And the reality is nobody has ever defeated a foreign sponsored insurgency. Some have ended because the sponsor quit sponsoring them, but that is not the same thing as defeated.
by ElevenLathe | 2026-02-05 18:33:03+00:00
Three instances of TARP fraud (which obviously happened after the crisis started since it was a response to the crisis) and one small time fraud case whose victim was a bank.

The fact remains that nobody who caused the crisis day saw a day in prison, and the banks who did were bailed out when it easily could have been the soon-to-be-homeless citizens instead.
by ynac | 2026-02-05 18:33:04+00:00
Not nearly on the article's level, but I've been operating what I call a fog machine (itsy bitsy personal cloud) for about 15 years. It's just a bunch of local and off-site NAS boxes. It has kinda worked out great. Mostly Synology, but probably won't be when their scheduled retirement comes up. The networking is dead simple, the power use is distributed, and the size of it all is still a monster for me - back in the day, I had to use it for a very large audio project to keep backups of something like 750,000 albums and other audio recordings along with their metadata and assets.
by somebehemoth | 2026-02-05 18:33:13+00:00
> There's more people saying AI doesn't live up to the hype.

It is possible they are correct and nothing you have written suggests otherwise.

> The people who are saying it's utterly useless is still quite large on HN.

Are these people's opinions less valid than your own? Are you angry your opinion might be a minority on this one website?

> It's just that most of them are midway through changing their story because reality is smashing them in the face.

You made this up.

> But if you're not using it you're behind.

Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man
by notesinthefield | 2026-02-05 18:33:22+00:00
I dont know if youre referring to his music as "his work" - quite the opposite, we have a lot!

His family recently began releasing many albums on Bandcamp. Ive been a fan for awhile and this is likely the best collection youll find online : https://felakuti.bandcamp.com/

The Best of the Black President is a good place to start. Dive in! Fela is the godfather of Afrobeat and highlife.
by dndhdhfjf | 2026-02-05 18:33:52+00:00
All of their browser extensions have been unusuably glitchy and janky for me for about four years, I recently gave up and switched to manually copying passwords over from the desktop or mobile apps.

Personally, I can tolerate that, but there are so many small friction points with the application that just have never been improved, since they started focussing on enterprise customers the polish and care seems to have disappeared
by linguae | 2026-02-05 18:33:56+00:00
C++ is not my favorite language, and if I had full control, I’d prefer a more beginner-friendly language. However, most of our students intend to transfer to a university. We have articulation agreements with universities defining what is transferable. Most undergraduate CS programs in California teach their intro courses in Python, Java, or C++; there’s even the rare intro courses taught in C. Some universities don’t care about the intro language from community college intro courses as long as those classes teach their same concepts of programming, but there are other universities that insist on particular languages. What’s nice about C++ is that it pleases most universities. If a student can grasp C++, then that student could easily learn Python or Java.

I have a feeling we’ll have to revisit this topic in the next five years as college and university CS departments grapple with the implications of generative AI coding tools such as Claude Code, but that’s another story…
by itay-maman | 2026-02-05 18:34:04+00:00
There's an interesting historical angle here: Church's lambda calculus actually predates Turing machines by a few months (both 1936), and they're provably equivalent in computational power. Church even proved undecidability of the Entscheidungsproblem first, using lambda calculus.

Yet despite this head start, the Turing machine formalism became the dominant framework for CS theory—complexity classes, computability, formal verification. Whether that's path dependence, historical accident, or something deeper about how humans reason about computation, I'm not sure.

But it does make me wonder: if the imperative, state-based model proved more tractable even for theorists, maybe FP's learning curve isn't purely about unfamiliarity. There might be something genuinely harder about reasoning in terms of pure functions and recursion vs. "do X, then Y, update Z."

Fully acknowledge this is handwavy—curious if others have thoughts.
by munificent | 2026-02-05 18:34:11+00:00
People have had several thousand years to develop immunity to flattery and yet here we are with a President where aides have to put his name in every paragraph of a memo to get him to read it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-tru...

At an individual level, we have a lot of psychological plasticity and can work to overcome our limitations. At societal scale, though, we are social primates and any system that takes advantage of natural social primate behavior is likely to succeed indefinitely.
by modeless | 2026-02-05 18:34:17+00:00
It's so difficult to compare these models because they're not running the same set of evals. I think literally the only eval variant that was reported for both Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex is Terminal-Bench 2.0, with Opus 4.6 at 65.4% and GPT-5.3-Codex at 77.3%. None of the other evals were identical, so the numbers for them are not comparable.
by xiphias2 | 2026-02-05 18:34:19+00:00
,,GPT‑5.3-Codex is the first model we classify as High capability for cybersecurity-related tasks under our Preparedness Framework , and the first we’ve directly trained to identify software vulnerabilities. While we don’t have definitive evidence it can automate cyber attacks end-to-end, we’re taking a precautionary approach and deploying our most comprehensive cybersecurity safety stack to date. Our mitigations include safety training, automated monitoring, trusted access for advanced capabilities, and enforcement pipelines including threat intelligence.''

While I love Codex and believe it's amazing tool, I believe their preparedness framework is out of date. As it is more and more capable of vibe coding complex apps, it's getting clear that the main security issues will come up by having more and more security critical software vibe coded.

It's great to look at systems written by humans and how well Codex can be used against software written by humans, but it's getting more important to measure the opposite: how well humans (or their own software) are able to infiltrate complex systems written mostly by Codex, and get better on that scale.

In simpler terms: Codex should write secure software by default.
by Aurornis | 2026-02-05 18:34:49+00:00
> Yes, but how good will the recall performance be? Just because your prompt fits into context doesn't mean that the model won't be overwhelmed by it.

With current models it's very good.

Anthropic used a needle-in-haystack example with The Great Gatsby to demonstrate the performance of their large context windows all the way back in 2023: https://www.anthropic.com/news/100k-context-windows

Everything has become even better in the nearly 3 years since then.

> Sure, but then you're dependent on (you or the model) picking the right phrases to search for. With embeddings, you get much better search performance.

How do are those embeddings generated?

You're dependent on the embedding model to generate embeddings the way you expect.
by sfink | 2026-02-05 18:34:51+00:00
Thank you. I am in the confusing situation of being extremely good at interpreting the nuance in human writing, yet extremely bad at detecting AI slop. Perhaps the problem is that I'm still assuming everything is human-written, so I do my usual thing of figuring out their motivations and limitations as a writer and filing it away as information. For example, when I read this article I mostly got "someone trying really hard to drive home the point that this is a dangerous problem, seems to be over-infatuated with a couple of cheap rhetorical devices and overuses them. They'll probably integrate them into their core writing ability eventually." Not that different from my assessment of a lot of human writing, including my own. (I have a fondness for em-dashes and semicolons as well, so there's that.)

I haven't yet used AI for anything I've ever written. I don't use AI much in general. Perhaps I just need more exposure. But your breakdown makes this particular example very clear, so thank you for that. I could see myself reaching for those literary devices, but not that many times nor as unevenly nor quite as clumsily.

It is very possible that my own writing is too AI-like, which makes it a blind spot for me? I definitely relate to https://marcusolang.substack.com/p/im-kenyan-i-dont-write-li...
by sharkjacobs | 2026-02-05 18:35:03+00:00
> on July 26, CIA was officially born. Just a few months later, on October 1, CIA assumed all responsibility for the JANIS basic intelligence program. Shortly thereafter, JANIS was renamed the National Intelligence Survey (NIS), but continued along the same tradition, providing policymakers and military leaders with up-to-date data, maps, and other reference materials.

> In 1971, the Factbook was created as an annual summary of the NIS studies and in 1973 it supplanted the NIS encyclopedic studies as CIA’s publication of basic intelligence. It was first made available to the public in 1975 and in 1981 was renamed The World Factbook.

https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/history-of-the-world-factb...
by hnthrow0287345 | 2026-02-05 18:35:12+00:00
Gonna need quite a large swing back in the favor of regular people since we're being squeezed by endless subscriptions already before I have any sympathy for the multi-billion dollar corporations.

So maybe it's just that. Life feels like it should be better although it's the best it's ever been in many first-world countries. I am sure that entitled attitude is very common among rich people too.
by jorl17 | 2026-02-05 18:35:32+00:00
This is the first model to which I send my collection of nearly 900 poems and an extremely simple prompt (in Portuguese), and it manages to produce an impeccable analysis of the poems, as a (barely) cohesive whole, which span 15 years.

It does not make a single mistake, it identifies neologisms, hidden meaning, 7 distinct poetic phases, recurring themes, fragments/heteronyms, related authors. It has left me completely speechless.

Speechless. I am speechless.

Perhaps Opus 4.5 could do it too — I don't know because I needed the 1M context window for this.

I cannot put into words how shocked I am at this. I use LLMs daily, I code with agents, I am extremely bullish on AI and, still, I am shocked.

I have used my poetry and an analysis of it as a personal metric for how good models are. Gemini 2.5 pro was the first time a model could keep track of the breadth of the work without getting lost, but Opus 4.6 straight up does not get anything wrong and goes beyond that to identify things (key poems, key motifs, and many other things) that I would always have to kind of trick the models into producing. I would always feel like I was leading the models on. But this — this — this is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Insane.

This "key poem" thing is particularly surreal to me. Out of 900 poems, while analyzing the collection, it picked 12 "key poems, and I do agree that 11 of those would be on my 30-or-so "key poem list". What's amazing is that whenever I explicitly asked any model, to this date, to do it, they would get maybe 2 or 3, but mostly fail completely.

What is this sorcery?
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2026-02-05 18:35:59+00:00
Congrats on missing my point.

1. old situation: currency backed by full (gold) reserve
2. actual political decision: currency no longer backed by full reserve
3. result: currency no longer backed by full reserve

1. possible political decision: return to currency backed by full (gold) reserve
2. possible political decision: currency no longer backed by full reserve
3. result: currency no longer backed by full reserve

To whatever extent government could return a full-reserve backed currency, government can move away from that again. Thus, there's no builtin security for anyone in a return to a full reserve backed currency.

If no government in the history of the world had ever done this, then arguing for a full-reserve backed currency might have a bit more weight. But they have, and it really has done.
by nja | 2026-02-05 18:36:26+00:00
I have been wanting a pocket-notebook-size tablet since the day I got my RM2. I've been considering the Move since it came out, but the stylus change was worrying me, and the price is pretty high -- I feel like I would have bought release day if they offered a lower priced monochrome one in the same form factor, especially if it used the RM2 stylus...

It's encouraging to hear you have had a good experience with it. Maybe I'll grab one if they ever go on sale!

Is there anything beyond your minor nits that you would caution someone like me about before buying?
by noefingway | 2026-02-05 18:36:35+00:00
As a teen I first learned to program on a pdp-8 with a teletype terminal. Then moved on to mainframes - we wrote out the code on paper (lined in 80 columns), then punched the cards out and submitted the deck to be run. punch card machines were available all over the university campus. BTW, I had a colleague programmed by plugging wires in a plug board. So, yeah, punch cards are definitely computing.
by GenerWork | 2026-02-05 18:36:41+00:00
I find it very, very interesting how they demoed visuals in the form of the “soft SaaS” website and mentioned how it can do user research. Codex has usually lagged behind Claude and Gemini when it comes to UX, so I’m curious to see if 5.3 will take the lead in real world use. Perhaps it’ll be available in Figma Make now?
by EtienneDeLyon | 2026-02-05 18:36:59+00:00
In some areas, you can 'pirate' live TV directly from the sky!

You need this thing called an 'antenna' which captures invisible radio waves and decodes them into a picture with audio. You can't pause or rewind, and you have to be in front of the TV at specific times, so it is not precis the same, but you can access TV this way.
Show HN: Yeehaw – Infrastructure as Farm
by camcamcam | 2026-02-05 18:37:07+00:00
This is not an ai-agent virtual vibe coding ecosystem. It's an organizational pattern that helps me mentally keep track of my projects and their infrastructure. Servers are barns, deployed repositories are livestock, system services are critters, herds are environments. The running process itself acts as an MCP server for Claude Code sessions providing this information to sessions based on the context.

I have been working on this tool for a few weeks now, both developing on it and from within it. It's a central place for me to keep track of my projects, servers I run code on, and what is running on what server. It also helps me run multiple instances of Claude Code in an organized way.

I'm a fan of working in my terminal, and I love using Claude Code. This tool mentally helps me keep track of various issues and tasks I'm working on. It's built on top of Tmux so it can be detached and remain running in the background. I have some fun ideas in the future to bring in more automation in a structured way to help extend dev processes even further.

The code is open source. If you find it useful or interesting I'm curious to know your thoughts or suggestions. There are more features as well that are sort of half-built, like syncing environments based on IaC tools, issue tracking with github/linear, a project wiki feature, visualizer, and more.

Let me know what you think!
by staticshock | 2026-02-05 18:37:21+00:00
Nailed it. I think about prescriptivism / descriptivism in terms of these archetypes:

- "Rule followers" think an org will be better off if everyone agreed on a set of rules to follow. At the boundaries, they will think about establishing new rules to clarify and codify new things. Charitably, I'd add that they might remove rules that are obsolete, but we all know this is not sufficiently true in practice: governments, for example, are much more likely to add new rules than to remove old ones.

- "Rule breakers" think that most rules are suggestions. At the boundaries, they will see rules other people are needlessly bound by, and translate those into strategic openings for whatever game they're playing. For better and for worse, start-up ecosystems are full of people like this.

Rule followers want to be told what's allowed, while rule breakers try to figure out what _should_ be allowed from first principles. At the extreme, they tug the world towards authoritarianism or towards anarchy.

This is obviously a spectrum, so everyone has both of these archetypes in them, albeit in different proportions (e.g. most people pay taxes, but almost no one drives the speed limit).
by madmax96 | 2026-02-05 18:37:48+00:00
This is exactly what model-based systems engineering tools like SysML v2 are designed for. Model-based systems engineering aims to generate _all_ engineering artifacts from a formal model.

Imagine it -- security policies, infrastructure, etc. all codified in a formal model.

- Push-button generation of ISO-27001 documentation.

- Push-button generation of Terraform.

- Push-button generation of SpiceDB policies.

- ...

There is _a lot_ of missing technology, but this is critically important because it will help us ensure regulatory compliance at far greater speeds in fields like nuclear and automotive. And it enables automated reasoning over the models, to make sure you're actually doing what you set out to do.
by tjr | 2026-02-05 18:37:58+00:00
People often compare working with AI agents to being something like a project manager.

I've been a project manager for years. I still work on some code myself, but most of it is done by the rest of the team.

On one hand, I have more bandwidth to think about how the overall application is serving the users, how the various pieces of the application fit together, overall consistency, etc. I think this is a useful role.

On the other hand, I definitely have felt mental atrophy from not working in the code. I still think; I still do things and write things and make decisions. But I feel mentally out of shape; I lack a certain sharpness that I perceived when I was more directly in tune with the code.

And I'm talking, all orthogonal to AI. This is just me as a project manager with other humans on the project.

I think there is truth to, well, operate at a higher level! Be more systems-minded, architecture-minded, etc. I think that's true. And there are surely interesting new problems to solve if we can work not on the level of writing programs, but wielding tools that write programs for us.

But I think there's also truth to the risk of losing something by giving up coding. Whether if that which might be lost is important to you or not, is your own decision, but I think the risk is real.