MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by snvzz | 2026-02-10 06:36:35+00:00
>It should be pointed out that schools no longer forcing students with natural non-black hair to dye it black does not mean that students who do have naturally black hair are now allowed to dye it another color. Because of that, 20 high schools in 2022 will still have systems in place where students with naturally non-black hair submit a jigi shomeisho, or “certificate of natural hair” when not dying their hair black. Even this number is down from 55 in 2021, though, and overall Tokyo teens are going to enjoy greater freedoms as their schools treat them a little more like grownups.

Phew. Tradition is somewhat preserved. Children really shouldn't be dying their hair.
by jacquesm | 2026-02-10 06:36:59+00:00
I think I agree with you. It could be just a matter of static bias or some other fairly simple mechanism to explain why these numbers are the same.

Imagine an object made of only red marbles as the 'base state'. Now you somehow manage to remove one red marble: you're at -1. You add a red marble and you're at +1. It doesn't require any other marbles. Then you go and measure the charge of a marble and you and up at some 12 digit number. The one state will show negative that 12 digit number the other will show positive that 12 digit number.

Assigning charge as being the property of a proton or an electron rather than one of their equivalent constituent components is probably a mistake.
by unsnap_biceps | 2026-02-10 06:37:35+00:00
It appears that it's limited even after 18.

After the growth period (that is, starting January 1st of the calendar year in which the child turns 18), most of the rules that apply to traditional IRAs will generally apply to the Trump account. For example, this means that distributions from the Trump account could be subject to the section 72(t) 10% additional tax on early distributions, unless an exception applies with respect to the child (such as for distributions for higher education expenses or first home purchases).

https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i4547
by sarchertech | 2026-02-10 06:38:09+00:00
I’m not saying this is definitely a bot. However, this is the 7th time I’ve read a post and thought it might be an OpenAI promotion bot, clicked on the username, and noticed that the account was created in 2011.

I have yet to do this and see any other year. Was there someone who bought a ton of accounts in 2011 to farm them out? A data breach? Was 2011 just a very big year for new users? (My own account is from 2011)
by Finbarr | 2026-02-10 06:38:09+00:00
AI refusals are fascinating to me. Claude refused to build me a news scraper that would post political hot takes to twitter. But it would happily build a political news scraper. And it would happily build a twitter poster.

Side note: I wanted to build this so anyone could choose to protect themselves against being accused of having failed to take a stand on the “important issues” of the day. Just choose your political leaning and the AI would consult the correct echo chambers to repeat from.
by japoneris | 2026-02-10 06:38:10+00:00
https://github.com/Japoneris/libzim-website-converter

(Personal project, not professional one)

Working on a website archive tool for watching them offline.
It collects a website, and makes .Zim with ( equiv of .zip), then watch it when you have no internet access / only local network.

The tool use libzim, where i did not find ''easy to use'' tools to create custom archives.
by lefra | 2026-02-10 06:38:44+00:00
To get single photons, you just need to stack up enough stained glass infront of a light source. That's been acheivable for aeons (the photon will go through at random time though).

The difficult part is single photon _detectors_, they're the key technology to explore the single-photon version of Young's experiment (which originally showed that light has wave-like properties).
by threethirtytwo | 2026-02-10 06:39:46+00:00
Yeah none of those are step function changes. Video calling another continent is like a tiny step from TV. Yeah I receive video wirelessly on my tv not that amazed when I can stretch the distance further with a call that has video. Big deal.

AI is the step function change. The irony is that it became so pervasive and intertwined with slop people like you forget that what it does now (write all code) was unheard of just a couple years ago. ai surpassed the hype, now it’s popular to talk shit about it.
by andreareina | 2026-02-10 06:39:54+00:00
The fundamental theories are good enough in that we can't find a counterexample, but they're only useful up to a certain scale before the computational power needed is infeasible. We're still hoping to find higher-level emergent theories to describe larger systems. By analogy, in principle you could use Newton's laws of motion (1685) to predict what a gas in a room is going to do, or how fluid will flow in a pipe, but in practice it's intractable and we prefer to use the higher-level language of fluid mechanics: the ideal gas law, the navier-stokes equations, etc.
by sdrinf | 2026-02-10 06:41:04+00:00
can someone please try running the experiment of "but what if just forking&spinning up an OSS clone, scaling up to take in the migrants, acquire network effects, collect roughly same subscription revenue, but run on just, like, 10 people?"

Discord has a financially and politically vulnerable posture that is downstream of having to operate a very large team, raise funding, be exposed to investor market pressure. However, it is also one of the rare instances of successful consumer freemium subscription monetization. A clone does not have to pay the tuition of "what makes this specific space compelling, and want-to-pay-for"; it just have to _exists_, passively soaking up migrants from each platform shift.

ITT WTB 3rd place for my frens.
by stop50 | 2026-02-10 06:42:25+00:00
additional to some things of other posters i would like to add these things:

- 3 Strikes policy: once you commit 3 Crimes, the third trial gets you a lifesentence

- police has effective immunity: the police can do everything, from getting 3 people incarcarated for the crime that only one person commited to shooting anything that shooting anything that frightens them(backfiring of an car has caused an shooting that turned an person into sieve)

- in many states lying by the police is allowed.

- the widespread availability of Weapons of War: i mean weapons that have no usage apart from killing people

- the prisoners are used as cheap labour.
by tstrimple | 2026-02-10 06:43:26+00:00
Have you considered that we exist in a post truth era? Data doesn't matter any more. It probably never did. It's all feelings and vibes. After all, conservatives haven't been able to demonstrate their success with the economy literally ever. Every single Democratic administration since Eisenhower has improved the economy by most used metrics (GDP, Unemployment, Deficit Reduction, etc. While Republican administrations have seen them slow or go the other direction. It's not about "succumbing to my worldview" as existing within a world of data and being able to make decisions against said data. That's not conservatives and never has been. For example, conservatives think they are better with the economy despite literally decades of evidence to the contrary.
by Brybry | 2026-02-10 06:44:16+00:00
For a 90% global drug crisis comparison: Also when I was a kid my parents generally didn't let us eat sugar. They were fine if we ate sugar at a friends but they didn't themselves buy sugary cereals or ice cream or candy or soft drinks (except for special occasions like birthdays).

As a kid I hated it and it made me feel like my family was weird. I can only think of one friend growing up that didn't have soft drinks in their house and his mom was a registered dietician. I'll have to ask my folks sometime if they fielded complaints from other parents.

And, yes, the comparison of today to the 90s is not apples to apples. There are legitimate safety reasons why kids today need cell phones. In the 90s there were pay phones everywhere and that is no longer true.

But I assume parental controls on today's cell phones let parents block all apps but Contacts/Dialing/Messaging if they want to.
by pseudohadamard | 2026-02-10 06:45:06+00:00
The "the Chinese can only copy us" thing is quite common in some circles, just as the "all the Japanese can do is copy us" was 50-odd years ago. China overtook the west in a lot of areas 10-20 years ago, to see an example of this travel to any city in China. It's like travelling into the future, we're a decade or more behind them at this stage.
by lucumo | 2026-02-10 06:47:00+00:00
> Sounds like every AI KPI I've seen. They are all just "use solution more" and none actually measure any outcome remotely meaningful or beneficial to what the business is ostensibly doing or producing.

This makes more sense if you take a longer term view. A new way of doing things quite often leads to an initial reduction in output, because people are still learning how to best do things. If your only KPI is short-term output, you give up before you get the benefits. If your focus is on making sure your organization learns to use a possibly/likely productivity improving tool, putting a KPI on usage is not a bad way to go.
by frumplestlatz | 2026-02-10 06:47:27+00:00
It's frustrating just how terrible claude (the client-side code) is compared to the actual models they're shipping. Simple bugs go unfixed, poor design means the trivial CLI consumes enormous amounts of CPU, and you have goofy, pointless, token-wasting choices like this.

It's not like the client-side involves hard, unsolved problems. A company with their resources should be able to hire an engineering team well-suited to this problem domain.
by mennanov | 2026-02-10 06:48:46+00:00
https://github.com/mennanov/blockwatch

BlockWatch - a language agnostic linter that keeps your code, documentation, and configuration in sync and enforces strict formatting and validation rules.

It helps you avoid broken docs and messy config files by enforcing rules directly in your comments. You can link code to documentation, enforce sorting order, ensure uniqueness, and validate code with Regex or AI.

It works with most major languages.
by dgently7 | 2026-02-10 06:49:06+00:00
real question, how much would you be willing to pay a month for access to a healthy social network? (borrowing another comments clarification on the term vs social media)

healthy as in: has real people that you really know. Has no ads or bots or ai slop. Isn't full of dark patterns that are designed to turn you into a doom
scrolling zombie? and maybe even has features that actually help you to stay connected in a real way to other people? oh and you are actually the customer and not the product so won't just be a service to gather bulk data on your "consumer preferences" so other places can target ads...

because while the thing you want isn't a technology or a business model I think if you actually wanted it to exist you need both, and we all mostly agree the old model where the social internet is just ad/data supported is not a path to something good. so the very real question is how much would you be willing pay in dues for that social network? how much would your friends pay? if it existed would you push for them to go there?

its hard to imagine a paid service that is basically the web version of kale being popular enough to get to network effects scale vs tiktok's double fudge oreos, but it would need to start somewhere... and some people
do choose kale over oreos.
by RupertSalt | 2026-02-10 06:49:24+00:00
That's an outright and verifiable lie.

I have never seen or visited that website ever in my life. Why would I? I wrote my comment completely originally, and your accusation of bad faith is, in itself, bad faith.

In fact, none of the content which I typed into my comment is found in that blog article. How and why did you even find it? Anyone else here can read and confirm that I copied nothing. I quoted nothing. I owe nothing to anyone. My comment is original and copyrighted by myself (c) 2026, all rights reserved.

With respect to the content or other materials you upload through the Site or share with other users or recipients (collectively, “User Content”), you represent and warrant that you own all right, title and interest in and to such User Content, including, without limitation, all copyrights and rights of publicity contained therein. By uploading any User Content you hereby grant and will grant Y Combinator and its affiliated companies a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty free, fully paid up, transferable, sublicensable, perpetual, irrevocable license to copy, display, upload, perform, distribute, store, modify and otherwise use your User Content for any Y Combinator-related purpose in any form, medium or technology now known or later developed.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2026-02-10 06:49:53+00:00
I leave a lot of distance, but people rarely change lanes to get in front of me, because the person I'm following isn't going any faster; the separation is in d not v. Most people who do change in front of me are there only briefly on their way to an exit, which means I'm increasing the fluidity of the traffic flow, so I'm happy about that. If I didn't leave space, they'd likely hard-brake in front of someone, causing a slowdown.
by T-A | 2026-02-10 06:51:49+00:00
> the standard model neutrinos can't participate in the Higgs mechanism due to always being left-handed

This again? It's only true if you insist on sticking with the original form of Weinberg's "model of leptons" from 1967 [1], which was written when massless neutrinos were consistent with available experimental data. Adding quark-style (i.e. Dirac) neutrino mass terms to the Standard Model is a trivial exercise. If doing so offends some prejudice of yours that right-handed neutrino can not exist because they have no electric and weak charge (in which case you must really hate photons too, not to mention gravity) you can resort to a Majorana mass term [2] instead.

That question (are neutrinos Dirac or Majorana?) is not a "contradiction", it's an uncertainty caused by how difficult it is to experimentally rule out either option. It is most certainly not "a problem for the standard model".

[1] https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorana_equation#Mass_term
by threethirtytwo | 2026-02-10 06:52:48+00:00
The article is about coping mechanisms for a world where we already accepted fragmented systems: polyrepos, heterogeneous languages, independently versioned databases, queues, infra, and time-skewed deployments. Given that world, yes, you need sophisticated techniques to survive partial failure, temporal mismatch, and evolution over time.

That is not what I’m arguing against.

My point is more fundamental:
we deliberately designed away static safety at the foundation, and then act surprised that “systems problems” exist.

Before Kafka versioning, schema migration strategies, backward compatibility patterns, or temporal reasoning even enter the picture, we already punched a hole:

Polyrepos break global static checking by construction.

Databases are untyped relative to application code

SQL is strings, not programs

Deployments are allowed to diverge by default

That entire class of failure is optional, not inherent.

When I say “we haven’t solved square one,” I’m saying:
we skipped enforcing whole-system invariants, then rebranded the fallout as unavoidable distributed systems complexity.

So when you say “the article already offers solutions,” you’re misunderstanding what kind of solutions those are. They are mitigations for a world that already gave up on static guarantees, not solutions to the root design mistake.

I’m not claiming my position is practical to retrofit today.
I’m claiming a huge portion of what we now call “hard systems problems” only exist because we normalized avoidable architectural holes decades ago.

You’re discussing how to live in the house after the foundation cracked.

I’m pointing out the crack was optional and we poured the concrete anyway.

I’m telling you this now so you are no longer uncertain and utterly clear about what I am saying and what my position is. If you are unclear please logically point out what isn’t clear because this phrase: “ The article talks about database solutions that help with this problem.” shows you missed the point.
by lemax | 2026-02-10 06:53:13+00:00
I've tried all the Q&A skills, confidence meters and little hacks to get agents to clarify and propose better solutions. Clarification and planning has gotten a lot better using some skills (e.g. obra/superpowers), but counterproposals and negative feedback are rarely up to snuff with something a staff level colleague would come up with - this seems to be amplified when you already have an extensive PRD or plan together. If a plan is already fleshed out but is inefficient or contains some anti-patterns, I've had better results just throwing these out, taking what I've learned and summarizing tradeoffs in a brand new chat.

Once you have a comprehensive plan together, or a fairly full context window, agents have a lot of issues zooming out. This is particularly painful in some coding agents since they're loading your existing code into context and get weighted down heavily by what already exists (which makes them good at other tasks) vs. what may be significantly simpler and better for net-new stuff or areas of your codebase that are more nascent.
by stingraycharles | 2026-02-10 06:54:08+00:00
It wasn’t intended as criticism of Haskell at all, I love that language. I have a whole bunch of open source Haskell projects under my name.

It was intended as a criticism of the article, that its whole assumption “FP == making invalid states impossible to represent” is incorrect.

I recognize that it’s very much possible to embrace chaos with Haskell, and I should probably have worded that better.
by directevolve | 2026-02-10 06:54:46+00:00
Good design allows systems to work without anyone knowing how the whole thing works.

AI and humans are labor that can be put to work designing and vetting such systems. The problem with AI isn’t that it builds things we don’t understand. It’s that we do not have much experience with its failure modes, limitations and risks. There are many unknown unknowns.

It’s directly analogous to the problem of hiring, management, outsourcing and contacting. Sure, we know that labor can produce massive, highly reliable systems nobody fully understands. But how do we coordinate labor, AI and human, to successfully produce the systems we actually need? What failure modes and advantages does AI introduce into the mix for specific projects?

That’s where the uncertainty comes from, not the lack of comprehensive knowledge of the systems themselves.
by refulgentis | 2026-02-10 06:57:12+00:00
It's not fast enough to be realtime, though you could do a more advanced UI and a ring buffer and have it as you describe. (ex. I do this with Whisper in Flutter, and also inference GGUFs in llama.cpp via Dart)

This isn't even close to realtime on M4 Max. Whisper's ~realtime on any device post-2022 with an ONNX implementation. The extra inference cost isn't worth the WER decrease on consumer hardware, or at least, wouldn't be worth the time implementing.
by shiroiuma | 2026-02-10 06:57:51+00:00
>For people looking for a simple chat that stays simple, is this a bad thing?

If the application does everything you want it to do, then no, it's fine. How much new development does grep get these days?

However, it was mentioned that it has no mobile apps, and that's a deal-breaker for probably most organizations and teams. If you can't access your team's communications channel when you're away from your desk, that probably isn't acceptable to many. And of course, developing and supporting mobile apps (on at least 2 platforms these days) is a large effort, and also requires constant maintenance since the two dominant platforms are continually evolving and changing their APIs.
by jacquesm | 2026-02-10 06:58:52+00:00
I would just attempt it all and see where you get stuck. But one step at the time with total focus on that one step. I've done a lot of instrument repair over the years and the first one of a new class is always the hardest. So rather than to take the whole thing to pieces I'd fix just one aspect of it, reassemble and enjoy the improvement. Then fix the next thing. It's much more work than stripping the whole thing down but it keeps the gaps in your understanding small enough that you won't end up with a pile of parts rather than an instrument.

I've been trying to remember the name of a particular instrument for you for the last 24 hours but so far no success, if I recall it I will post it here.
by UqWBcuFx6NV4r | 2026-02-10 06:59:56+00:00
If you aren’t able to differentiate anthropomorphising shorthand vs actual anthropomorphising then you are far from intelligent enough to writing comments like this.

People have anthropomorphised computers in similar ways forever, I guarantee that you have, and it means absolutely nothing.

You’re only saying this because AI is a hot culture war topic.
by hvb2 | 2026-02-10 07:01:01+00:00
Keep in mind that, especially for performance cars, the instant torque and low center of gravity (because those cells can go in the floor) really helps.

Yes, the added weight is bad for handling which is a shame especially in a car like this.

The weight savings aren't that big of a deal, they do that in every car and it's mostly marketing. But if you're one of those brands that can sell the same car, but use some fancy metals and such for a 50k markup, why would you not.
by nfg | 2026-02-10 07:01:14+00:00
Sure I love Claude Code too - I use it plenty outside of work. But funnily enough I’ve been asking myself about whether to get my org on board with internal Claude Code trials and was struggling to truly articulate what we were losing versus the Copilot cli. There are some feature gaps - but the pace of work is super and experience is pretty good for me.

No one should hit Microsoft over the head for giving people access to Claude code - choice and competition is good!
by altairprime | 2026-02-10 07:01:33+00:00
More groups than authoritarians support online age checks of various sorts, and any for-profit enterprise would far rather externalize the heavy lifting of profitless identity verification to a government agency or contract. Coincidentally, I noticed Discord doesn’t seem to accept ID.me; how curious! If anyone has a larger database of verified ages with online proofs, I’m not sure who it would be.
by ocdtrekkie | 2026-02-10 07:02:42+00:00
> Hacker News is made possible by Section 230

This is false. Basically everyone that's argued this has been funded by tech companies. The reality is Section 230 is at best, an inconvenience for good actors, while being an incredible gift to bad actors. It lets a good actor avoid a possible lawsuit. (And law requires intent, Section 230 does not meaningfully protect someone who didn't intend to enable bad actors.) It guarantees a bad actor can profit off crime with impunity.

And I think the financial incentives in participating the Internet absolutely make it worth the risk for a well-run business, including one with UGC, to make reasonable risk decisions about their liability. (HN, selling no ads, nor hosting image or video files, probably has extremely minimal risk.) The marketing about the importance of 230 is crucially about protecting tech companies' immunity and ultimately, their bottom line, but it doesn't mean everything stops existing overnight.

But again, my position remains consistent: If it can't survive without Section 230, it shouldn't.