MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zzzeek | 2026-02-13 18:51:45+00:00
> - If you make your project public, it means you want and expect people to use it.

no, it doesn't, maybe I have a github project, I want to easily share it with ten of my friends for something, I don't particularly care if other people see it, so I make it public. That in no way implies I want random people to come along with bugs and PRs.

> You could at least write some documentation, so I don't waste my time and then find out, days later, i

if it doesnt have any documentation then that is a clear sign you should not expect anything from the author of that software. if reading some code and figuring out if it's useful to you or not is too much of a risk of your time, then assume it's not useful and move onto something else.

> If you set up a bug tracker, then at least have the decency to answer bug reports.

maybe the author had time and energy to answer bug reports a few years ago and maybe right now they don't. When bugs go unanswered (like, all the bugs, not just one in particular), that means the project is possibly in an unmaintained or semi-unmaintained status, might be time to move on. Or if it's just your bug, it usually means your bug is something the maintainers don't care about or dont have the cycles to spend effort on (again, could be time to move on).

certainly, if I'm an OSS author and I want people to use my project and stay with it, then yes, I'm certainly going to answer all bug reports. But I have no such obligation (indeed I have lots of projects and are in both categories and many in between).

> If you open it up to pull requests, it means you want people to contribute. Have the decency to review them. Someone took time away from their jobs, families or entertainment to write those PRs. Ignoring them because you don't need that feature, not affected by the bug, or simply because of code aesthetics is an insult to the one who wrote it.

counterpoint, people who barge in on your project with huge PRs for features or changes that were not discussed at all much less signed off on by the maintainers are incredibly rude and entitled, because they are using exactly your logic above "I starved my family to bring this to you!" to guilt you into taking your project into directions you may not have wanted, and beyond that, PRs are just as much work for maintainers as for the person contributing them. An unannounced PR to me is pretty much a bug report with a guilt trip attached, no thanks. I really wish Github would provide more options in this area.

- a maintainer
by kyralis | 2026-02-13 18:51:45+00:00
Apple has become beholden to announcements. Work that someone can shove into a feature that someone else decides is flashy enough to maybe get mentioned on stage gets resourcing and support. Work that isn't going to show up in a Keynote deck gets ignored.

That means that all of the polish work is shoved to the bottom of the stack until it reaches sufficient critical mass that someone finally makes time for engineers to pick some of it back out.

That, I think, is the critical failure of modern Apple. The company used to understand that polish could be more important than something new and flashy, and they've forgotten that in favor of marketing and Liquid Glass.
by bigstrat2003 | 2026-02-13 18:51:50+00:00
No, he's completely right on that point. There's this weird misconception in the tech community that "open source" means "you'll accept my contributions if I send them". I've seen people try to argue (in complete seriousness) that SQLite isn't open source because the developers keep contributions private.

I don't know where the mistaken conflating of "open source" and "developed by the community" comes from, but it is mistaken, and Rich was quite right to push back on it.
by tracker1 | 2026-02-13 18:51:53+00:00
Native calls from C# are MUCH better than then the Java experience. It's a massive part of why I chose it when it came out. Today, C# is pretty great... not ever MS dev shop, which is often, like Java, excessively complex for its' own sake.

On #2, I generally reach for either TS/JS with Deno if I need a bit more than a shell script, or Rust for more demanding things. I like C# okay for the work stuff that I do currently though.
by nuc1e0n | 2026-02-13 18:51:56+00:00
> but it's much closer to an "interesting lab demo" than an "obituary for human programmers."

Was it being sold as the latter? I thought it was strange that a fuss was being made over this tech demo, and that explains why.

Parsing regular languages into other regular languages is exactly what transformer based LLMs should be good at.

A while ago there was an AI system publisized that was trained to generate animations from the game doom that was sold as AI created computer games. But the output made no sense if you watched for more than a few seconds. Isn't this the same kind of scare tactics dressed up as innovation?
by sidewndr46 | 2026-02-13 18:51:56+00:00
I only take it partially seriously. I view it as a serious presentation that is misinformed. What I find unique is that people have become so interested in "the exponential" it's almost become like an axiom, or even a near religious belief in AI. It is a subtle admission that while current AI capabilities are impressive, it requires additional years of exponential growth for AI to reach the fantastic claims some people are making.

All glory to the exponential!
by ethmarks | 2026-02-13 18:52:17+00:00
I read the original version a few years ago and read the new version when it came out, and I thought that the name changes were pretty amusing. qntm kept the story as close to the original as possible while still making it a legally distinct work for copyright purposes. It's like those off-brand Froot Loops called "Fruit Spins" that are juuust different enough to not get into trademark issues. Except in Antimemetics' case, the "knockoff" version was made by the creator of the original, which I think is pretty funny.
by reducesuffering | 2026-02-13 18:52:20+00:00
Dario defines it as:

'By powerful AI [he dislikes the baggage of AGI, but means the same], I have in mind an AI model—likely similar to today’s LLMs in form, though it might be based on a different architecture, might involve several interacting models, and might be trained differently—with the following properties:

In terms of pure intelligence, it is smarter than a Nobel Prize winner across most relevant fields – biology, programming, math, engineering, writing, etc. This means it can prove unsolved mathematical theorems, write extremely good novels, write difficult codebases from scratch, etc.

In addition to just being a “smart thing you talk to”, it has all the “interfaces” available to a human working virtually, including text, audio, video, mouse and keyboard control, and internet access. It can engage in any actions, communications, or remote operations enabled by this interface, including taking actions on the internet, taking or giving directions to humans, ordering materials, directing experiments, watching videos, making videos, and so on. It does all of these tasks with, again, a skill exceeding that of the most capable humans in the world.

It does not just passively answer questions; instead, it can be given tasks that take hours, days, or weeks to complete, and then goes off and does those tasks autonomously, in the way a smart employee would, asking for clarification as necessary.

It does not have a physical embodiment (other than living on a computer screen), but it can control existing physical tools, robots, or laboratory equipment through a computer; in theory it could even design robots or equipment for itself to use.

The resources used to train the model can be repurposed to run millions of instances of it (this matches projected cluster sizes by ~2027), and the model can absorb information and generate actions at roughly 10x-100x human speed. It may however be limited by the response time of the physical world or of software it interacts with.

Each of these million copies can act independently on unrelated tasks, or if needed can all work together in the same way humans would collaborate, perhaps with different subpopulations fine-tuned to be especially good at particular tasks.

We could summarize this as a “country of geniuses in a datacenter”.'

https://darioamodei.com/essay/machines-of-loving-grace
by the_gastropod | 2026-02-13 18:52:27+00:00
I never worked at a company that could broadly be considered unethical, I don't think. But it was always a bit disheartening how many little obviously unethical decisions (e.g., advertised monthly plans with a small print "annual contract" and cancellation fee) almost every other employee would just go along with implementing, no pushback whatsoever. I don't know what it is, but your average employee seemingly sees themselves as wholly separate from the work they're paid to do.

I have friends who are otherwise extremely progressive people, who I think are genuinely good people, who worked for Palantir for many years. The cognitive dissonance they must've dealt with...
by modeless | 2026-02-13 18:52:37+00:00
He has been wrong about timelines and about what specific approaches would ultimately solve ARC-AGI 1 and 2. But he is hardly alone in that. I also won't argue if you call him smug. But he was right about a lot of things, including most importantly that scaling pretraining alone wouldn't break ARC-AGI. ARC-AGI is unique in that characteristic among reasoning benchmarks designed before GPT-3. He deserves a lot of credit for identifying the limitations of scaling pretraining before it even happened, in a precise enough way to construct a quantitative benchmark, even if not all of his other predictions were correct.
by holtkam2 | 2026-02-13 18:52:37+00:00
No matter how fast and accurately your AI apps can spit out code (or PowerPoints, or excel spreadsheets, or business plans, etc) you will still need humans to understand how stuff works. If it’s truly business critical software, you can’t get around the fact that humans need to deeply understand how and why it works, in case something goes wrong and they need to explain to the CEO what happened.

Even in a world where the software is 100% written by AI in 1 millisecond by a country of geniuses in a data center, humans still need to have their hands firmly on the wheel if they won’t want to risk their businesses well being. That means taking the time to understand what the AI put together. That will be the bottleneck regardless of how fast and smart AI is. Because unless the CEO wants to be held accountable for what the AI builds and deploys, humans will need to be there to take the responsibility for its output.
by sathish316 | 2026-02-13 18:53:08+00:00
13 Markdown files have erased 285 billion dollars of wealth in the stock market - https://martinalderson.com/posts/wall-street-lost-285-billio...

Why are you surprised that it takes only 65 lines of Markdown to create the next Linus Torvalds or Donald Knuth!

I’m learning Haskell by Thinking before Coding, without working through the difficult exercises. I finally understand Monads because of Thinking first.
by guywithahat | 2026-02-13 18:54:12+00:00
When Tesla engineers/Elon talk about it it's usually pitched as a safety thing, by standardizing on one sensor they reduce "sensor contention". Famously Karpathy once described radar as a source of noise that held their vision sensors back.

I don't know who will end up being right in the long term, however I don't think this was a form choice, I think they believe a pure camera system will be more functional.
Show HN: Kintsugi – A desktop app for reviewing Claude Code sessions
by vikvorona | 2026-02-13 18:54:14+00:00
Hey HN, I'm an engineer at Sonar (SonarQube).

The small team I lead in company had a cool opportunity to spend several months doing almost anything we want that is somehow related to AI generated code and Code Review. And we end up doing an IDE-like desktop app that called Kintsugi - basically a complementary tool to Claude Code that adds a bunch of features that helps working with a CLI Agent.

Now, we built it for our needs and for the way we work. More specifically - we care about code quality and security and we believe that you own the code generated by agents and it has to be verified. But at the same time we want to ship fast and Claude Code is really-really good at this. So we decided to create a tool, that would allow developers to ship fast, but have control over the produced code. Here are the main features:
- Orchestrate parallel agents — see all sessions by status (In Progress, Interrupted, Awaiting Input, Ready for Review) so you know which needs attention
- Review AI code like PRs — leave comments, push back for changes, ask for explanations, run independent AI review
- Plan review — review well-formatted plans with inline comments like Google Docs (my personal favorite)
- Code quality — integrated Sonar analysis to catch issues locally while developing; connects to your SonarQube Cloud config if you have one

The tool is built almost entirely by Claude Code, and we use Kintsugi itself while building it. It's a prototype — expect rough edges. We have a big list of planned features but need feedback on what to prioritize.

It is macOS only for now. Linux and Windows are available internally, but we are not comfortable to give them to people yet.

Now let me be honest - the link leads to landing page with sign up for download (I know it is not recommended), but since it is a prototype we are required to have a way to send updated versions to users if needed. There is no verification of email, no confirmation and we obviously will not use it for marketing purposes. Only as a way to ask for a feedback and provide an updated version if necessary.

Would love honest feedback and happy to chat about the tool.
by gwbas1c | 2026-02-13 18:55:27+00:00
> But I came crawling back to iOS because I'm weak and the orange iPhone was pretty and the Pixel 10 was boring and I caved to the blue bubble pressure.

My Pixel 10 is in a pretty orange case. Furthermore, if I get sick of it, it's not too big of a deal to change. Maybe I'll even figure out how to 3d print one!

FWIW: Pretty much everyone keeps their phone in a case today. Seems to make a lot more sense to focus on the case instead of the aesthetics of the phone.
by blemasle | 2026-02-13 18:55:34+00:00
> I'm switching to Android for good. (Good = at least 2 calendar years)

wow, such a commitment. Not only it's as said only one customer but it is a customer who thinks "for good" is just skipping one phone. Which means she/he usually buys phone every single year.

What a bold and committed move. It's astonishing...
by thewebguyd | 2026-02-13 18:55:40+00:00
Sure there is. But not for wha people use their phones for.

Can I call an Uber from a Linux app? Pay for things with tap to pay? Food or grocery delivery? Public transit passes? Etc.

Windows phone tried to unseat the duopoly. The OS was surprisingly good. But, no one made apps so it died.

Same thing for Linux phones.

edit if Apple didn’t go through great lengths to cripple PWAs then it wouldn’t be as big a problem. But even all the various services are crippling their own websites to direct people to apps for that sweet sweet data harvesting.
by pllbnk | 2026-02-13 18:56:37+00:00
I never knew about him until a few months ago when he started appearing in my YouTube recommendations, and naturally I thought the same thing because a 'nobody' like him (not in a derogatory sense) started doing interviews with the top AI bros. And the interviews are terribly boring because they feel like a cheap PR campaign. You could sit Lex Fridman instead of Dwarkesh Patel and it would feel exactly the same.
by magicalhippo | 2026-02-13 18:57:04+00:00
I've heard it watching people tear down broken low-milage engines, and there's articles like this[1].

However, always good to question what you know. After some digging I found this very informative video[2] with Lake Speed Jr as a guest, which showed a vehicle benefiting from the stop-start technology. The key finding was that it reduced the amount of fuel contamination in the oil. Lake Speed Jr said he had found fuel contamination to be the most reliable indicator for oil lifetime.

Perhaps a confounder is that stop-start does seem to require more from the oil[3], so if the user has gone with a cheap oil that doesn't have the necessary additive package, then that might indeed hurt the engine using stop-start.

[1]: https://amsoil.lube-direct.com/2019/10/engine-start-stop-tec...

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMWWtA4YCio

[3]: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.104344 (can be found on the hub of science)
by nickthegreek | 2026-02-13 18:57:28+00:00
aqara g410 can be setup so that it uploads to your private iCloud and is viewable within Apple Home. I found it to be the most polished setup that is also light work and alleviates some of the concern. Quality is great as well. But for a on prem setup, frigate and armcrest seems to get alot of love.
by WalterBright | 2026-02-13 18:57:28+00:00
In the 1980s, my dad was the head of the finance department at a small college. He taught finance classes, and he taught how free markets worked. Student after student would come to him, and say this amazed them. They said they had never heard of a case for free markets.

I attribute this to the complete lack of any school teachers or professors having any business experience whatsoever.

None of my K-12 grade school classes said anything about free markets. None offered any accounting instruction, or finance instruction, or anything about managing money.

It's a sad state of affairs.
by coffeefirst | 2026-02-13 18:57:53+00:00
That’s the point.

AI marketing is dystopian. They describe a world where we’re all starving and homeless, and just when you start to think “hey this sounds like the conditions to create something like a French Revolution but bastille is a data center” they pivot to BUY MY PRODUCT SO YOU DONT GET LEFT BEHIND.

It’s advertising straight through the amygdala.

I have no idea if they actually believe this. But it’s repulsive behavior.
by gus_massa | 2026-02-13 18:57:56+00:00
The specific case looks interesting. (I didn't read it yet.) Anyway, the title will make people ignore the blog because there are too many false claims about P=/!=NP that is boring t read them.

My suggestion is to repost this with a very specific title "Solving the TSP in the special case when there are only two distances" or something like that.

Anyway, I get a 404 in https://www.pvsnp.blog/
by bcrosby95 | 2026-02-13 18:58:11+00:00
There's a kernel of truth in your comment but there's also lots of pejoratives in your post and its hard to know the exact line you're talking about here. If people literally tell Timothy "fuck you" that's not cool and now they're the asshole, not me. But if they quietly decide to not go to his birthday that's fine. If they are disappointed by my party and decide not to go in the future that's fine. If they quietly inform people that my parties don't have music or snacks that's fine. If they decide to throw a tantrum because they didn't like my party they're an entitled twat.
by bonsai_spool | 2026-02-13 18:58:35+00:00
What is there to improve? Very genuinely.

A car has had largely the same shape since its creation, indeed since antiquity.

Sometimes, a problem space is explored to most humans' needs, and no more innovation is needed.

(edit: this said, I'm hopeful there is something new, and people like Bret Victor may show the way with things like https://dynamicland.org/ )
by w10-1 | 2026-02-13 18:58:44+00:00
> in fact, Uber drivers choose to drive for Uber, can choose to do something else instead

Funny that you take that as a "fact" and doubt exploitation. I'd wager most Uber drivers or prostitutes or maids or even staff software engineers would choose something else if they had a better alternative. They're "choosing" the best of what they may feel are terrible options.

The entire point of "market power" is to force consumers into a choice. (More generally, for justice to emerge in a system, markets must be disciplined by exit, and where exit is not feasible (like governments), it must be disciplined by voice.)

The world doesn't owe anyone good choices. However, collective governance - governments and management - should prevent some people from restricting the choices of others in order to harvest the gain. The good faith people have in participating cooperatively is conditioned on agents complying with systemic justice constraints.

In the case of the story, the initial agreement was not enforced and later not even feasible. The horror is the presumed subjective experience.

I worry that the effect of such stories will be to reduce empathy (no need to worry about Uber drivers - they made their choice).
by gleipnircode | 2026-02-13 18:59:03+00:00
I completely agree. So many tools started out minimal and good, then success hit and features kept stacking up. More menus, more settings until you need a manual just to find what you're looking for.

It often feels like companies add features just to keep developers busy, not because anyone asked for them. And with complexity comes bugs.

Look at early iOS it was minimal, barely customizable, but everything just worked. Clean and simple. Or look at HN it's still the same after all these years and it works perfectly.

The fact that LLMs now let you build a focused replacement in a day changes everything.
by Nevermark | 2026-02-13 18:59:19+00:00
There are only two real choices in mobile.

Simple diversity of what people want means lots of people buy Apple because it is better for them. It isn't like anyone gets what they really want across many features, whatever they buy.

And iPad's are optimized for different uses than the switch. Those are entirely different form factors. (You can turn an iPad mini into a switch like device with controller add ons. But those are add ons so the software does not put that form factor first.)
by kevstev | 2026-02-13 18:59:21+00:00
I don't love all the new tahoe stuff, and do wish I could go roll back, but this hand wringing around Apple is way overblown IMHO. What he is reporting is real, but in my actual usage I haven't noticed this at all- in other words, if this wans't called out, I am not sure I would have ever realized it.

Tbh I have always found window management on Macs to be annoying and something to be avoided- Rectangle or something similar is one of the first things I install and try to use the shortcuts to just put windows in either a quarter or half of the screen.

That said, I use Macbooks for the hardware, if for whatever reason I had to switch to Linux I would just shrug and not care one bit. It took me a few years to realize, but MSFT just disappeared from my life one day and I didn't even notice.
by jmchuster | 2026-02-13 18:59:35+00:00
> I understand what the author means, but I think that in any human-2-human interaction, we are all entitled to at least basic courtesy.

This only holds up for the "small" number of human interactions the average person gets. If my neighbor comes and rings my doorbell to say hello, I'm fine answering and shooting the shit, maybe invite them in for a quick coffee.

If every 5 minutes a strange comes in and rings my doorbell, I'm not getting up and answering it. And some people visiting will get angry and start pounding on the door and coming to my window and pounding on it glaring at me inside. And say, hey, I drove all the way from hours away to come visit you, the least you could do is open the door and say hello.

For them, it's their first human-2-human interaction that day, with someone they slightly admire even, and they're expecting basic human courtesy. To me, they're just the 42nd doorbell ringer today.
by dark-star | 2026-02-13 18:59:40+00:00
The problem with that approach is that S3 object names are not compatible with POSIX file names. They can contain characters that are not valid on a filesystem, or have special meaning (like "/")

A simple litmus test I like to do with S3 storages is to create two objects, one called "foo" and one called "foo/bar". If the S3 uses a filesystem as backend, only the first of those can be created