MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by wincy | 2026-02-08 21:45:51+00:00
I’ve been amazed that while it absolutely uses a ton of battery, so has to be plugged in, my kid is able to play 3D online games with me using my old M1 MacBook Air. Not top of the line stuff (and had to change the resolution to 1440x900), but still. It gets hot, but doesn’t thermal throttle. I had half expected it to start throttling but we played for 3 hours last night with no issues.

What’s surprising is it DOES throttle using Discord with video after an hour or so, unless the battery is already full (I’m guessing it tries to charge which generates a lot of heat). You get way less thermals with a full battery and it using power instead of discharging/charging the battery during heavy usage.
Show HN: Parametric Hubris – Beating GPT-5 on SimpleQA with forced retrieval
by LutumVeritas | 2026-02-08 21:45:54+00:00
Just finished reading "Parametric Hubris" by Martin Gehrken. It’s a fascinating deep dive into why frontier models hallucinate even when they have tools.

The core thesis: Models suffer from "Parametric Hubris". They rely on their training data (lazy) instead of using search tools, even when browsing is enabled.

Data: GPT-5 only triggers search in ~31% of prompts.

The Fix: A pipeline called "Veritas" that forces 100% retrieval (no parametric memory allowed for answers).

Results: Achieves 89.1% F-Score on SimpleQA Verified (vs 51.6% for GPT-5 and 72.1% for Gemini 3 Pro).

Cost/Model: Built on Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite (cheapest model) for ~$0.002 per query.

Trade-off: It’s slow (~115s per query), but accurate.

The paper argues that hallucination isn't a capability problem, but an architectural discipline problem. Code and data are open source.

Paper/Repo: https://github.com/lamLumae/Project-Lutum-Veritas
by u1hcw9nx | 2026-02-08 21:46:29+00:00
He has double standards and cherry-picks for everything. He selects sources, dishonestly. Quotes people out of context, makes wrong moral equivalences.

Any tyrant or autocrat who opposes America is somehow not that bad. For example: The Cambodian Genocide by Khmer Rouge in 1970s were exaggerated by "Western propaganda", The Srebrenica Massacre, some killings but not genocide.

Russia. He argues that the U.S. "provoked" Russia by expanding NATO eastward. Russian attack against Ukraine was American fault. In his logic superpower like Russia should having a "neutral" buffer zone is a legitimate security concern. Smaller European countries can't have their own sovereignty. They must be either US puppets or part of reasonable Russian sphere of influence. At the time he is against US sphere of influence in the South America.

You must also have noticed that he never engages his critics honestly. He just dismisses them as "elite propaganda".
by mancerayder | 2026-02-08 21:46:31+00:00
Re-read and think about what was written - the 2s aren'tcoming from the line managers, you're barking up the wrong tree in the stack ranking process. I just explained that stack ranking gets scaled and adjusted by the brass, and I just in this example rated everyone a 4 and 5.

Again, as an older manager today, I can see myself in my 20s in the resistance and stubbornness to 'how corporations work' espoused in comments like yours. I sympathize, but I warn you against being naive and ideological, because unfortunately human groups be human groups, and organizations for better or for worse behave in predictable patterns. You might as well know as much as possible so you can deal with it better.
by _DeadFred_ | 2026-02-08 21:47:43+00:00
My Sony died very quickly. My Apple's are on their way out. Everyone I know is past their first earbuds purchase. Inflation adjustment doesn't apply when the product life is so incredibly different.

I said Olive oil mayonnaise is an enshitified product abusing loopholes. That you can't read is on you (no offense).

$15 gym shirts aren't tshirts (you know like 3 pack Hannes, Jockey). Again why are you trying so hard to reply t something I didn't write?

That decade ago TV didn't spy on you, and I conceded TVs are an outlier if you ignore the whole 1984 aspect.

What car repairs does insurance cover? Where did I talk about maintenance? I talked about the cost to insure modern vehicles being higher especially later on. Context is important for comprehension.

Honestly you seem to have reading comprehension problems. No offense. Or take offense after your passive aggressive 'you problem' snark.
by insuranceguru | 2026-02-08 21:47:47+00:00
It’s less about denying coverage and more about accurate risk pooling. If an insurer knows a specific marker leads to a 90% chance of a million-dollar claim, they have to price for that. If they don't, the 'healthy' people in the pool end up subsidizing the high-risk ones until the premium becomes too expensive for everyone and the pool collapses (adverse selection). The real challenge is that regulators often won't let insurers price high enough for those risks, which is why many companies just stop offering LTC (Long-Term Care) altogether.
by kace91 | 2026-02-08 21:47:49+00:00
>driving the LLM instead of doing it yourself. - sometimes I just can't get the activation energy and the LLM is always ready to go so it gives me a kickstart

There is a counter issue though, realizing mid session that the model won’t be able to deliver that last 10%, and now you have to either grok a dump of half finished code or start from scratch.
by D-Machine | 2026-02-08 21:48:17+00:00
Let's be more precise: LLMs have to model the world from an intermediate tokenized representation of the text on the internet. Most of this text is natural language, but to allow for e.g. code and math, let's say "tokens" to keep it generic, even though in practice, tokens mostly tokenize natural language.

LLMs can only model tokens, and tokens are produced by humans trying to model the world. Tokenized models are NOT the only kinds of models humans can produce (we can have visual, kinaesthetic, tactile, gustatory, and all sorts of sensory, non-linguistic models of the world).

LLMs are trained on tokenizations of text, and most of that text is humans attempting to translate their various models of the world into tokenized form. I.e. humans make tokenized models of their actual models (which are still just messy models of the world), and this is what LLMs are trained on.

So, do "LLMS model the world with language"? Well, they are constrained in that they can only model the world that is already modeled by language (generally: tokenized). So the "with" here is vague. But patterns encoded in the hidden state are still patterns of tokens.

Humans can have models that are much more complicated than patterns of tokens. Non-LLM models (e.g. models connected to sensors, such as those in self-driving vehicles, and VLMs) can use more than simple linguistic tokens to model the world, but LLMs are deeply constrained relative to humans, in this very specific sense.
by thrance | 2026-02-08 21:48:25+00:00
At the time, the quality of machine-made clothes was noticeably worse than human-made. It's debatable wether the "consumers" (the term certainly wasn't used at the time) won in the end. Terry Pratchett's "Boots theory" feels relevant here:

> Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

> But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
by prmph | 2026-02-08 21:48:55+00:00
What are you talking about?

Have you heard about the Epstein files? Was that a failure of multiculturalism?

Not only that, some people from western cultures are also preying on poor women in 3rd world countries with sex tourism.

Western cultures are supporting the rape of resources and corruption in poor countries around the world.

Capitalism, as practiced in western cultures, is in many ways a sad scam that leads to a lot misery for a lot of people.

These are just a few examples to show: all cultures have bad in them. No culture is good
by jbeninger | 2026-02-08 21:49:18+00:00
I've found small features helps. If I ask the ai "do this", I wait 10 minutes for it to be finished, then another 30 understanding what was written

Instead, I start out broad. "I'm thinking of this feature. Let's talk about what components will go into it and where that code will live... Here are my initial thoughts. Let me know if I get anything wrong..."

This puts it in a conversation mode and gets you on the same page, and best of all it's quick. The llm agent isn't searching files and building, it's just giving general opinions

Once I have a good idea of the architecture, I move on to "write this class. Here is an overview of how I would do it", or point the agent to an existing file with the right conventions in place. Once again, if you've done your conversation doesn't take long. 20-second turnaround.

Then it's time to refine. "Move this function here, refactor that"

If you're going to have to understand the code anyway, read it while your writing it. Line by line, function by function, class by class. "Growing" a feature this way keeps you and the llm in sync. It doesn't go off on tangents. And building incrementally keeps you in the loop and in your flow. You don't have 5 things going at once. You have 1, faster.

I've let agents do their thing for a dozen minutes and usually end up having to rewind the whole thing piece by piece to understand what's actually happening

If you're truly vibe coding, maybe you don't have to read the code and can have a dozen agents on a dozen projects. But if you're making Serious Software, I don't see how you can commit code unseen. And in that case, you're not losing anything working incrementally and reading code as it's written?
by rstuart4133 | 2026-02-08 21:49:41+00:00
> It is fashionable to disable swap nowadays because everyone has been bitten by a swap thrashing event.

If they disable swap they will get hit by the OOM killer. You seem to prefer it over slowing down. I guess that's a personal preference. However, I think it is misleading to say people are being bitten by a swap thrashing event. The "event" was them running out of RAM. Unpleasant things will happen as a consequence. Blaming thrashing or the OOM killer for the unpleasant things is misleading.

> You assume that leaked memory is inactive and goes to swap. This is not true.

At best, you can say "it's not always true". It's definitely gone to swap in every case I've come across.

Also, I have seen browsers chew up a lot of memory, but I've never noticed a leak in the sense you are using it. My laptops always have at least 16GB of RAM, and I don't think I've seen a browser go beyond 8GB. (I don't keep a lot of tabs open.) But if you have a laptop with 8GB or 4GB of memory, you will see the same browser workload bring your system to a near halt (or the OOM killer wreck the place) and perhaps think the browsers had a leak. They don't. You just don't have enough RAM. They would have stopped growing if you did. (Some web pages definitely do leak but it goes away when you close the page, so it ain't the browser that's leaking.)

> It means that the system wasn't out of memory yet.

Of course it wasn't out of memory. It had lots of swap. That's the whole point of providing that swap - so you can rescue it!

> When it is unresponsive, you won't be able to enter commands into an already open shell.

Again that's just plain wrong. I have entered commands into a system is trashing. It must work eventually if thrashing is the only thing going on, because when the system thrashes the CPU utilization doesn't go to 0. The CPU is just waiting for disk I/O after all, and disk I/O is happening at a furious pace. There's also a finite amount of pending disk I/O. Provided no new work is arriving (time for a cup of coffee?) it will get done, and the thrashing will end.

If the system does die other things have happened. Most likely the OOM killer if they follow your advice, but network timeouts killing ssh and networked shares are also possible. If you are using Windows or MacOS, the swap file can grow to fill most of free disk space, so you end up with a double whammy.

> By default, the kernel OOM-killer selects one single largest (measured by its RSS+swap) process in the system.

Yes, it does. And if it is a single large process hogging memory you are in luck - the OOM killer will likely do the right thing. But Chrome is not a single large process. Worse if the out of memory is caused by say someone creating zillions of logins, they are so small they are the last thing the OOM killer chooses. Shells, daemons, all sorts of critical things go first. The "largest" process first is just a heuristic, one which can be and in my case has been wrong. Badly wrong.
by bartread | 2026-02-08 21:50:32+00:00
I'm more than old enough to remember the original GTA and GTA II, and I have friends who played and loved both of them. For me, I thought the first GTA had graphics from the past (I'd got too used to playing 3D shooters on PC - along with Wipeout on the Playstation - so struggled to get past the top down presentation), and just felt janky to play. GTA II was more polished, but I still didn't love it. Yet people raved about them.

Anyway, the negative associations I had with GTA I and GTA II stopped me from playing any other GTA game until 4 came out in 2008, at which point I was like, OK, FFS, people won't stop banging on about this so I suppose I'll try it again. I ended up really liking it but, because I only played it on friends' consoles, and I started the game several times over, I never played it all the way through until 2018. I then played through both the expansions, along with GTA V in 2019. I've subsequently gone back to play III and Vice City, both of which I also like - as well as Vice City Stories on the PSP. I've barely touched San Andreas, but the few minutes I have played suggest that I'll also enjoy it.

I've even fired up GTA and GTA II again... but still don't really get on with either of them. I presume there must be others out there who were put off enough by them that it meant they've never touched the rest of the series, or only got into again several games later, but it doesn't seem to be a particularly common experience.
by ramon156 | 2026-02-08 21:50:36+00:00
Sorry, but this seems like a privileged solution.

Let's say you're a one-of-a-kind kid that already is making useful contributions, but $1 is a lot of money for you, then suddenly your work becomes useless?

It feels weird to pay for providing work anyway. Even if its LLM gunk, you're paying to work (let alone pay for your LLM).
by secretballot | 2026-02-08 21:50:36+00:00
Similar effect with the Fallout series. A whole lot of the fanbase has never played any of the three 2D games (Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics). The series started, for them, with Fallout 3.

I’m kinda that way with Elder Scrolls. My first one was III (Morrowind) and I’ve still never played the first two.
by throw310822 | 2026-02-08 21:50:49+00:00
Funny, because riding a bicycle or speaking a language is exactly something people don't have a world model of. Ask someone to explain how riding a bicycle works, or an uneducated native speaker to explain the grammar of their language. They have no clue. "Making the right movement at the right time within a narrow boundary of conditions" is a world model, or is it just predicting the next move?

> You are falling IMO into exactly the trap of the linguistic reductionist, thinking that language is the be-all and end-all of cognition.

I'm not saying that at all. I am saying that any (sufficiently long, varied) coherent speech needs a world model, so if something produces coherent speech, there must be a world model behind. We can agree that the model is lacking as much as the language productions are incoherent: which is very little, these days.
by fsckboy | 2026-02-08 21:50:57+00:00
>There needs to be a legal means for property owners to keep drones off their property

no, there really doesn't need to be.

i'm not saying that i'm in favor of autonomous drones flying around, i'm simply not in favor of individual people getting their own say about everything we as a society do. democracy: live with the results

it's not shooting at drones that is the big worry, it's missing the drones, and shooting at things if the law doesn't give a peaceful alternate way to get your own way is also not "great" in the pantheon of ideas.
by toomanyrichies | 2026-02-08 21:51:23+00:00
Roger Ebert was a national treasure. The saga of his review of director Vincent Gallo's "The Brown Bunny" [1] always makes me laugh:

> American critic Roger Ebert has hit back at Vincent Gallo in the latest round of a public spat over whether the actor-director did or did not apologise for his derided Cannes contender The Brown Bunny. Earlier this week Gallo denied having apologised and claimed the critic was "a fat pig" for saying that he had. He added: "The only thing I'm sorry for is putting a curse of Roger Ebert's colon."

> Yesterday, in his column for the Chicago Sun Times, Ebert stuck to his guns - quoting the editor of trade magazine Screen International, who says that they have Gallo's apology on tape. On the question of his cursed colon, Ebert said: "I am not too worried. I had a colonoscopy once, and they let me watch it on TV. It was more entertaining than The Brown Bunny."

> The critic rounded off his article (as it were) by casually conceding that he is overweight. "It is true that I am fat," Ebert wrote. "But one day I shall be thin, and he will still be the director of The Brown Bunny."

Later on, Gallo went back to the editing room and cut a quarter of the film. Ebert re-watched it and actually ended up giving it a thumbs' up.

1. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2003/jun/05/news2
by user2722 | 2026-02-08 21:51:40+00:00
And you could reach 1 million $ on those 10 mins, just had to put a bomb car south to the start point, get the orange guys to follow you, get inside the car, trigger the bomb and wait for detonation inside the car.

Additionally, you could go under the fences if you parked a heavy vehicle next to them and crawled below it.

Don't forget walking below the city entering the spot where the water was solid on northwest pier.

And finally, if you left the train in the precise spot, you could exit the train on top of the (eletrified) tracks and would not die.
by mancerayder | 2026-02-08 21:52:01+00:00
As a manager, I love being hands-off - I like directs that take ownership and I try to give people projects and roles that they want. They use their creativity and I help unblock, expand, course correct or suggest as needed. It saves them from the politics and they get high level mentoring.

The worst manager is the micromanager - either because he's nervous about his job security, because he doesn't know how to delegate, or because he's been hands-on forever and can't let go.
by threecheese | 2026-02-08 21:52:20+00:00
We are missing some building blocks IMO. We need a good abstraction for defining the invariants in the structure of a project and communicating them to an agent. Even if we had this, if a project doesn’t already consistently apply those patterns the agent can be confused or misapply something (or maybe it’s mad about “do as I say not as I do”).

I expend a lot of effort preparing instructions in order to steer agents in this way, it’s annoying actually. Think Deep Wiki-style enumeration of how things work, like C4 Diagrams for agents.
by mbrumlow | 2026-02-08 21:53:28+00:00
I think it is funny they all these companies are spending a ton and racing to have a AI story. It’s almost like none of the executives understand AI.

If you are changing your product for AI - you don’t understand AI. AI doesn’t need you to do this, and it doesn’t make you a AI company if you do.

AI companies like Anthropic, OpenAI, and maybe Google, simply will integrate at a more human leave and use the same tools humans used in the past, but do so at a higher speed, reliability.

All this effort wasted, as AI don’t need it, and your company is spending millions maybe billions to be an AI company that likely will be severely devalued as AI advances.
by D-Machine | 2026-02-08 21:53:33+00:00
> Funny, because riding a bicycle or speaking a language is exactly something people don't have a world model of. Ask someone to explain how riding a bicycle works, or an uneducated native speaker to explain the grammar of their language. They have no clue

This is circular, because you are assuming their world-model of biking can be expressed in language. It can't!

EDIT: There are plenty of skilled experts, artists and etc. that clearly and obviously have complex world models that let them produce best-in-the-world outputs, but who can't express very precisely how they do this. I would never claim such people have no world model or understanding of what they do. Perhaps we have a semantic / definitional issue here?
by alephnerd | 2026-02-08 21:53:40+00:00
> It’s strange that we still haven’t setup any sort of authenticated form of communication with official parties

Because this would add compliance and regulatory overhead which the Telco industry has lobbied against, and activist organizations like the EFF will screetch muh liberties while taking donations from those very companies, and HNers will dutifully complain about the descent into authoritarianism.
by troupo | 2026-02-08 21:53:41+00:00
Ah yes. I really enjoy watching Dune (or Openheimer, or even less bombastic movies) on my 65" TV with two rather tiny speakers [1].

Streaming killed theaters because movie advertisement basically stopped (the lesser problem), and movies are immediately released on streaming platforms (the bigger problem). Why go to a theater when it will be released on Netflix/Hulu/Amazon within a week or two?

Movies used to get several weeks (sometimes months) of theatrical runs, and then there was at least a 90 day window (often longer) before home releases on VHS/DVD/BluRay. Now theaters are fighting for at least a 45-day window.

[1] Well, a 2015-ish Sonos soundbar and two IKEA Sonos speakers.
Show HN: WrapClaw – a managed SaaS wrapper around Open Claw
by kushagraagent | 2026-02-08 21:53:46+00:00
Hi HN

I built WrapClaw, a SaaS wrapper around Open Claw.

Open Claw is a developer-first tool that gives you a dedicated terminal to run tasks and AI workflows (including WhatsApp integrations). It’s powerful, but running it as a hosted, multi-user product requires a lot of infra work.

WrapClaw focuses on that missing layer.

What WrapClaw adds:

A dedicated terminal workspace per user

Isolated Docker containers for each workspace

Ability to scale CPU and RAM per user (e.g. 2GB → 4GB)

A no-code UI on top of Open Claw

Managed infra so users don’t deal with Docker or servers

The goal is to make Open Claw usable as a proper SaaS while keeping the developer flexibility.

This is early, and I’d love feedback on:

What infra controls are actually useful

Whether no-code on top of terminal tools makes sense

Pricing expectations for managed compute

Link: https://wrapclaw.com

Happy to answer questions.