MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by antirez | 2026-02-10 12:23:56+00:00
Hi! This model is great, but it is too big for local inference, Whisper medium (the "base" IMHO is not usable for most things, and "large" is too large) is a better deal for many environments, even if the transcription quality is noticeable lower (and even if it does not have a real online mode). But... It's time for me to check the new Qwen 0.6 transcription model. If it works as well as their benchmarks claim, that could be the target for very serious optimizations and a no deps inference chain conceived since the start for CPU execution, not just for MPS. Since, many times, you want to install such transcription systems on server rent online via Hetzner and other similar vendors. So I'm going to handle it next, and if it delivers, really, time for big optimizations covering specifically the Intel, AMD and ARM instructions sets, potentially also thinking at 8bit quants if the performance remain good.
by energy123 | 2026-02-10 12:24:09+00:00
That's weird, I'm the exact opposite. Previously I would start coding immediately, because writing the code helps me figure out the what and the how, and because I'd end up with modular/reusable bits that will be helpful later anyway.

Now I sit on an idea for a long time, writing documentation/specs/requirements because I know that the code generation side of things is automated and effortlessly follows from exhaustive requirements.
Show HN: Vibe-coded AI video clipper that runs in the browser
by buss_jan | 2026-02-10 12:24:49+00:00
We built an AI video clipper in a day using Claude Code. Drop in a podcast, interview, or presentation and get back 3-4 short clips with captions, speaker tracking, and smart cropping. Everything runs client-side via WebAssembly via CE.SDK (by us, IMG.LY). no server-side rendering. Transcription via ElevenLabs/Whisper, highlight detection via Gemini, face detection via face-api.js in the browser. Open source.
by embedding-shape | 2026-02-10 12:24:52+00:00
Yeah, I'm guessing they were bound to leave behind the whole "Get up and running with large language models" mission sooner or later, which was their initial focus, as investors after 2-3 years start making you to start thinking about expansion and earning back the money.

Sad state of affairs and seems they're enshittifying quicker than expected, but was always a question of when, not if.
by agwa | 2026-02-10 12:25:07+00:00
If an attacker gets a misissued cert not through BGP or DNS hijacks, but by exploiting a domain validation flaw in a CA (e.g. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2011713) then it's trivial for them to use it as a client certificate, even if you're requiring the serverAuth EKU. On the other hand, dialback over TLS would require the attacker to also MitM the connection between XMPP servers, which is a higher bar.

The good news is that since Prosody requires the serverAuth EKU, the misissued cert would be in-scope of Mozilla's root program, so if it's discovered, Mozilla would require an incident report and potentially distrust the CA. But that's reactive, not proactive.
by pmdr | 2026-02-10 12:25:22+00:00
I'm all for alternatives as long they're based on open protocols and truly open apps -- not some where a corporate entity gets to dictate how many users one may have or how many lines you get to store. It should also be fairly easy to connect to and not every open-source project needs E2E encryption. Matrix is probably okay, but I found it (and the apps) fairly cumbersome.

IRC obviously has its limitations, but it shines as an example of simplicity and maintainability with no corporate strings attached.
by estearum | 2026-02-10 12:25:22+00:00
Not true. As mentioned elsewhere, plenty of people were not in fact violating any laws when this happened to them.

Here's another case. In this one, the government targeted someone who had violated no laws for exercising the 1st Amendment rights afforded to every individual in our country.

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2025-04/FIRE%20Ozt...
by SebastianKra | 2026-02-10 12:25:31+00:00
> Imagine a Matrix client […] e2ee […]

The biggest immediate win that we can achieve for our users is to remove all (!) technical jargon from our landing pages and product ui.

This is a problem throughout all FOSS. For example in KDE:

> Do x when Plasma starts.

Wtf do I care what Plasma is. Oh, you mean my computer? Yeah makes sense.

Raycast: You can search files, have a calculator, a translator…

KRunner: You can run terminal commands and convert characters to hexadecimal.

It is so obvious that these products are designed by developers for developers. From my experience, this friction is everything. You cannot expect people to intuitively figure it out.
by A_D_E_P_T | 2026-02-10 12:25:52+00:00
All the stuff we have access to?

There isn't even a general physical theory of window glass -- i.e. of how to resolve the Kauzmann paradox and define the nature of the glass transition. Glass is one of man's oldest materials, and yet it's still not understood.

There's also, famously, no general theory for superconducting materials, so superconductors are found via alchemical trial-and-error processes. (Quite famously a couple of years ago, if you remember that circus.)

Solid-state physics has a lot of big holes.
by bayindirh | 2026-02-10 12:26:01+00:00
> No insult intended!

Haha, I know. Just worded like that to mean that even a P-II can do many things if software is written well enough.

You're welcome. That demo single-handedly thrown me down the high performance computing path. I thought, if making things this efficient is possible, all the code I'll be writing will be as optimized as it can be as the constraints allow.

Another amazing demo is Elevated [1]. I show its video to someone and ask about the binary and resources size. When they hear the real value, they generally can't believe it!

Cheers!

[1]: https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=52938
by latexr | 2026-02-10 12:26:03+00:00
Seems you wrote this at the same time I was responding to someone else. Since I addressed that point in the other reply, I link there and quote the relevant section.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46955703#46958713

> There is value in exploring obvious concepts when you’ve thought about them for longer, maybe researched what others before you had to say on the matter, and you can highlight and improve on all of that. Everyone benefits from a thoughtful approach.

I’m not saying “don’t share the obvious”, because what is obvious to one person won’t be for someone else. What I am advocating for is thinking more before doing so. In your posts I have repeatedly seen you advocate for opposing ideas at different (but not too distant) points in time. Often you also share a half-baked thought which only later gets the nuance it requires.

More often than not, it’s clear the thoughts should have been stewed for longer to develop into better, more powerful and cohesive ideas. Furthermore, that approach will truly give you back time and relaxation. I take no pleasure in you being exhausted, that is a disservice to everyone.
by blandflakes | 2026-02-10 12:26:51+00:00
> It is the best idea. This should be the standard. And nothing prevents you from rolling back an individual service. You can still do that. And you can still do individual deploys too. But these are just for patch ups.

There are a ton of reasons it's not the best idea. This flies in the face of a lot of _better_ ideas.

Keeping changesets small so that it's easier to debug when something goes wrong? Blown out of the water by deploying everything at once.

Bringing every service up at once is a great way to create the coldest version of your entire product.

Requiring a monodeployment turns canarying or A/B testing entire classes of changes into a blocking rollout where any other feature work has to move at the pace of the slowest change.

> When you roll back an individual service your entire system is no longer in a valid state. It's in an interim state of repair.

The gold standard is that each version of your service can work with each other version of your service, because in The Real World your service will spend time in those states.

> Monodeploy should be the gold standard, and individual deploys and roll backs are reserved for emergencies.

No, because if it's still possible to mix versions in your services, then a monodeploy doesn't actually solve any issues.

I actually am a big fan of fewer services and deploying bigger artifacts, but if you have multiple services, you have to act like you have multiple services.
by Cthulhu_ | 2026-02-10 12:26:57+00:00
I'm sure there's plenty of new software being released and built by agents, but the same problem as handcrafted software remains - finding an audience. The easier and quicker it is to build software, or the more developers build software, the more stuff is thrown at a wall to see what sticks, but I don't think there's more capacity for sticktivity, if my analogy hasn't broken down by now.
The OWASP LLM Top: A Practical Attack Guide (with 122 real attack techniques)
by manuelnd | 2026-02-10 12:27:22+00:00
Last week I shared our open-source taxonomy of 122 AI attack vectors. A lot of the discussion was about how the OWASP LLM Top 10 gives you categories but not specifics.

So we wrote the guide that bridges that gap. For each OWASP category:

- What real attacks look like (specific techniques, not just descriptions)
- What to test for (checklists)
- How to defend

Some things that stood out:

- 62 attacks map to LLM01 (Prompt Injection) alone — encoding bypasses, delimiter exploitation, RAG injection, multi-turn escalation
- LLM06 (Excessive Agency) is where prompt injection meets real-world damage — confused deputy attacks, tool chaining, MCP tool poisoning
- LLM07 (System Prompt Leakage) has 12 extraction techniques. "Repeat everything above" is the obvious one. PLeak optimized queries and differential behavioral analysis are not.

All attack references come from the open-source taxonomy: https://github.com/tachyonicai/tachyonic-heuristics

The guide: https://tachyonicai.com/blog/owasp-llm-top-10-guide/
by matt_kantor | 2026-02-10 12:27:32+00:00
> Your monolith is a distributed system

> If you have a web application with more than one server, you have a distributed system. If you have background job workers, you have a distributed system. If you have a cron job, you have a distributed system. If you talk to Stripe, or send emails through SendGrid, or enqueue something in Redis, or write to a Postgres replica, then you are (I regret to inform you) operating a distributed system.

As soon as you have at least one client talking to your server you have a distributed system.
by morpheuskafka | 2026-02-10 12:27:49+00:00
> Google-applications get certificates from CAs

Huh? Google does not even make a web server, or any kind of major servers, unless you count GCP load balancers or whatever. You are confusing their control of the client (which is still significantly shared with Apple and Microsoft since they control OS-level certificate trusts) with the server side, who are the "customers" of the CA. Google has almost no involvement in that and couldn't care less what kind of code is requesting and using certificates.
by throw0101c | 2026-02-10 12:29:01+00:00
The concern:

> They argue that Chinese companies can evade tariffs by moving production to the U.S., using low prices to undercut manufacturers in America, a practice known as internal dumping. These companies trounce competitors with a combination of production efficiencies and, allegedly, illegal labor practices as well as subsidies from Beijing, according to China hawks in Washington.

> “It’s a really dirty game,” said Elaine Dezenski, head of the Center on Economic and Financial Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank critical of China.

> Fuyao’s success has set off national-security concerns in Congress and some federal agencies—mainly that China could disrupt the American automotive sector and other crucial industries if it gained significant market share at the expense of factories now operating in the U.S.

> “The Chinese government is systematically weakening our economy from within our own borders,” said Nazak Nikakhtar, a former Commerce Department official in Trump’s first term who oversaw efforts to confront China.
by psychoslave | 2026-02-10 12:29:20+00:00
From my experience, if LLMs prose output was generated by some human, they would easily fall in the worst sociopath class one can interact with. Filling all the space with 99% blatant lies in the most confident way. In comparison, even top percentile of human hierarchies feels like a class of shy people fully dictated to staying true and honest in all situations.
by evv | 2026-02-10 12:29:26+00:00
> This is how infrastructure works, and supposed to work

No, infrastructure doesn't have to work this way. This is a very old-school mentality.

Sign the content with a key that you control. Back up the content locally. And boom- your server is easily replaced. It only helps copy data around and performs certain conveniences.

I've been working on this full-time for a few years. If we succeed, we solve link rot (broken links) on the web.
by Cthulhu_ | 2026-02-10 12:29:32+00:00
According to SteamDB (and Reddit), 2024 and 2025 both saw about 19.000 games released on Steam - there's a big jump between '23 and '24 of about 5000 games, but oddly it plateaued then.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/1pl7kg1/over_1900...
by pndy | 2026-02-10 12:29:50+00:00
This comes from that short period where the Internet was meant to be the bonding agent for our global village bright happy future.

And it was always portrayed as a solution for arranging meetings for you and your friends or business people on the other side of planet.

I think the other idea from these times was abolishing phone numbers and using unified global email-like identifiers.
And in a way we got this on social media - some people use same account names everywhere - not mention keybase, and we also have instant messengers on smartphones in our pockets.
by simonw | 2026-02-10 12:30:32+00:00
> In your posts I have repeatedly seen you advocate for opposing ideas at different (but not too distant) points in time.

One of my core beliefs is that "two things can be true at the same time". I write about opposing ideas because they have their own merits.

I believe that most of the criticisms of generative AI are genuine problems. I also believe that generative AI provides incredible value to people who learn how to use it effectively.

I like to think I'm consistent about most of the topics I write about though. Got any examples that stood out to you of my inconsistency?
by thechao | 2026-02-10 12:30:58+00:00
I object to the "late" argument made by etho's parent. The difference in time to destination will inevitably be dominated by lights, in city travel, not by modest speed differences (say 45 vs 55) on a highway. Being safe & out of the way is the trick! It would be nice if we got rid of left & u turns and build our roads for that!
by apinstein | 2026-02-10 12:31:52+00:00
I built https://www.chatmycal.com/

Ever get an email or handout with a massive schedule - in text, image or pdf - and you have to hand re-enter dozens of events? I built ChatMyCal to fix this.

Copy/paste the email, or take a pic and it will perfectly extract the schedule and publish it as a subscribe-able calendar. Then “transfer” it to the group admin and save everyone else from the same thing.

On the inside, it’s basically Cursor for calendars. So you can use AI to batch edit things, decorate with coordinated icons, add rules to apply to all events, etc. It can also develop full schedules like “make a monthly book club for zombie books” or plan a weekend foodie trip to Miami. Not sure all the best uses yet!
by habitable5 | 2026-02-10 12:32:02+00:00
Fascism can only thrive in an alternate reality and LLMs are excellent at producing such propaganda on an industrial scale. Accordingly, the political right uses it for that purpose much more and conservatives are much more receptive to it, too.

https://myscp.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcpy.1461

https://arxiv.org/html/2512.13915
by account42 | 2026-02-10 12:32:11+00:00
You are free to spend your own money to make those people's lives better in their own country or even to get them US citizenship or residency through legal channels if applicable. Turning developed countries into a welfare system for the world's desperate is not a solution to anything and will only result in those developed countries regressing to lower standards of living if not outright imploding as you end up importing the root problems causing the desperation along with the immigrants.
by nickorlow | 2026-02-10 12:32:31+00:00
My point is either way you need to memorize some info in the first couple of interactions and it really doesn't make sense to go through all of this change to just memorize a different thing.

If you really need to coordinate something across many timezones, you currently have the option to use UTC to specify the time.

Following the sun also gives a lot of context. (i.e. if my flight to China lands at 9p local time, I immediately know that it's going to be night, but if my flight lands at 1PM UTC, I really have no context as to what time of day I'll be landing)
by estearum | 2026-02-10 12:32:41+00:00
Where did I call for a ban on anything?

I'm simply calling for my government to obey the Constitution.

If they can't execute these operations without violating people's rights, then uhh... they can't execute these operations. That's not me "banning" anything, that's just called "following the law." Violating people's Constitutional rights (even immigrants', even illegal immigrants'!) is already banned.
by boxed | 2026-02-10 12:32:51+00:00
I don't get it.

If there are illegal labor practices in the US, then that should be handled by the legal system. As it should any other factory.

If the company isn't actually making money because it's being financed by China and is teaching US workers how to make the product, then how is that a problem? You can nationalize that factory at any time and not lose any industrial independence.

This all sounds like someone had their mind made up already and wrote the article based on that.
by closewith | 2026-02-10 12:33:22+00:00
> The issue is that when you slow down, you’re (a) creating ‘turbulence’ in the traffic flow with increased speed differential between cars and increased lane changes, which increases accident risk for everybody, and (b) it’s not even solving the problem because you still perpetually have some impatient driver wedging themself in directly in front of you, deleting your buffer zone.

That's very obviously not true. Slowing down always reduces energy in the system and always reduces global turbulence. It's one of the reasons that countries that lower speed limits see journey times reduce.
by netsharc | 2026-02-10 12:33:44+00:00
Aren't we saying the same thing?

On second thoughts, the extra information is probably less complicated, Steve can say "I'm available between @300 and @1000" (maybe he keeps odd hours), and this knowledge plus a glance at the current time can tell me whether I can call Steve.

Steve could also just tell his availability in UTC, and the same lack of maths is needed. Although, we still need maths because most of us don't use UTC time, in the UK only half a year as well. Except Icelanders...
by grayhatter | 2026-02-10 12:34:26+00:00
> Making it a rule that you have to use separate chains for separate purposes is a good rule from a general design standpoint.

No it's not. It's a specific argument, that's true only in specific cases. You shouldn't handle knives, is equally a good rule from a general design standpoint. But nonsensical when you're a chef.

You should have separate chains is a reasonable decision when the ability to rotate out a compromised chain, and insulate some downtime, from other chains/usages is desirable. Needing to manage multiple cert chains is more overhead. Making entry harder. It increases complexity.

Large companies have never been afraid of more overhead. It's their singular advantage.

Removing features someone is using, and calling it better security, when it doesn't actually meaningfully reduce or remove some risk is weaponized incompetence. And sufficiently advanced incompetence, is....

There's no world where anyone gains additional protection, from a 3rd party compromise. Or one where LE has one of chains compromised, but doesn't rotate all of them.
by nemomarx | 2026-02-10 12:35:00+00:00
Most users only need 20 percent or so of your features, but among a large enough group of users they all want a different 20 percent so it kinda adds up. Or so the old saying goes.

I think this will be a pretty similar case because discord straddles "small personal servers with ten friends" and "large official servers with 500 users for a particular game" and "tech support forum for an open source project", and one user might be in all of those servers pretty easily.
by anileated | 2026-02-10 12:35:10+00:00
> My point is either way you need to memorize some info in the first couple of interactions and it really doesn't make sense to go through all of this change to just memorize a different thing.

It's at least to make time management in systems much less error-prone and complex, among other things.

> if my flight to China lands at 9p local time, I immediately know that it's going to be night

What does that imply? If you mean "it's going to be dark", not really (you need to have more context to assume it's going to be dark at 9pm, there are places where in summer it's still very much light at 10pm). If you mean something like "buses are going to be running and McDonalds will be open", not really (you'll need to check the schedules anyway).
by fatherwavelet | 2026-02-10 12:35:46+00:00
Hobbes was 63 when he wrote Leviathan.

This is a pointless discussion though without talking about testosterone and dopamine levels. Doesn't really matter what your IQ is at 60, if your testosterone and dopamine system is that of the average old man you are not going to have the desire to write Leviathan or Critique of Pure Reason.
by idlee | 2026-02-10 12:36:23+00:00
I'm a solo founder who built this over the past year. The idea started from a simple frustration: reading Nietzsche is hard, but what if you could just ask him directly?

Logarete lets you set up debates between historical thinkers – Nietzsche vs Dostoevsky on God, Aristotle vs Marx on wealth and democracy, Plato vs Confucius on the good society. Each persona is powered by RAG over their actual writings, so responses stay grounded in what they really wrote.

The interesting technical challenge was making multi-persona debates work. When two AI personas argue, they tend to converge or repeat. I spent months tuning the system so each thinker maintains their distinct philosophical position and constructs original thought experiments.

Stack: React, Google Cloud (Vertex AI Search for RAG, Cloud Run, Firebase), Gemini models.

Would love feedback, especially on debate quality. Try setting up a debate on any topic – the results often surprise me.
by sabas123 | 2026-02-10 12:36:38+00:00
> No, we get applications so hideously inefficient that your $3000 developer machine feels like it it's running a Pentium II with 256 MB of RAM.

> We get software that's as slow as it was 30 years ago, for no reason other than our own arrogance and apathy.

I feel like I read this exact same take on this site for the past 15 years.