MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by plurinshael | 2026-02-28 18:58:11+00:00
He yearns to be an autocrat, dictator, and tyrant, but this yearning nor its fulfillment will ever make him a king. Kingship is a sacred trust, a sacred role of “first servant of the people.” Kingship should never be stripped down to merely its political element — it has always been a religious position also. However corny or disingenuous or outdated it may sound to the modern ear, a king has a supreme duty to both Almighty God and the people alike. Whatever Trump’s political title, he remains a staunch nihilist and roundly anti-Christian figure. He has a bad attitude, he cuts others down, he behaves crudely. He does not gather consensus, he does not study, he does not reflect. He has never put anyone’s needs before his own gross desires. Even if 100% of Americans wanted him king, and even if the Constitution were changed to name him so, he will never be a king. He will never care enough about others, will never be capable of the self-abnegation it takes to be a real leader. He will never have the humility to go before God as a servant. And he certainly will never have the discipline, earnestness, purity, honor, or even simply, the guts, to do God’s work on Earth. He is the worst kind of rich kid, a brat, a scoundrel, a gangster, a thief. There is literally nothing kingly about him.

Your point is well-taken, but the terminology deserves more than Americans and other republican traditions tend to give it.
by AndrewKemendo | 2026-02-28 18:59:10+00:00
It’s a comment about who Gary Marcus is presenting himself as

My intention is for other people to think what I believe which is Gary Marcus is a hack and has no business being listened to with respect to technical evaluation of AI because he’s not technically competent enough to do. The existence of his polemics waste everybody’s time and generally waste resources like we’re wasting right now.

His entire schtick has been as the debunker in chief of claims of AI capabilities

If you actually look at his polemics they increasingly have nothing to do with his original argument because his original argument not only is flawed but is ignorant of the technical capabilities
by SirensOfTitan | 2026-02-28 18:59:13+00:00
LLM-assisted development feels a lot like trend-driven development. When dealing with technique and heterogenous prompts and goals, it’s easy to gain somewhat of a gambler’s fallacy with respect to a particular technique.

Spec-driven development feels pretty questionable to me. I’m sure it works fine for feature work that is predictable or has been done before, but then I wonder why you’d waste your time with it.

Prior to LLMs, the whole vibe was to iterate rapidly toward a working thing so you can see what works and what doesn’t. Why would we abandon that strategy as an industry when the cost of writing code is ostensibly getting cheaper?

If I’m using LLMs at all, I’m using them to do a breadth search of prior art or ideas, then I’m doing what I might call a prototype onion: successive clean room attempts at a novel problem, accumulating what I learn at each attempt in each successive prompt. I usually then take the prototype and write the final version myself so I’m properly internalizing the idea.

Ultimately a lot of this prompt work feels like procrastination. It is not about understanding where these tools is useful and where they are not but trying to have them consume every aspect of the work.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-02-28 18:59:14+00:00
there is a recent post about how one of the top OpenAI exec has given 25 million$ to a Trump PAC before publicly supporting Anthropic/signing this deal.

One got characterized as supply chain risk and so much for OpenAI to get the same.

And even that being said, I can be wrong but if I remember, OpenAI and every other company had basically accepted all uses and it was only Anthropic which said no to these two demands.

And I think that this whole scenario became public because Anthropic denied, I do think that the deal could've been done sneakily if Anthropic wanted.

So now OpenAI taking the deal doesn't help with the fact that to me, it looks like they can always walk back and all the optics are horrendous to me for OpenAI so I am curious what you think.

The thing which I am thinking OTOH is why would OpenAI come and say, hey guys yea we are gonna feed autonomous killing machines. Of course they are gonna try to keep it a secret right before their IPO and you are an employee and you mention walking out of openAI but with the current optics, it seems that you/other employees of OpenAI are also more willing to work because evidence isn't out here but to me, as others have pointed out, it looks like slowly boiling the water.

OpenAI gets to have the cake and eat it too but I don't think that there's free lunch. I simply don't understand why DOD would make such a high mess about Anthropic terms being outrageous and then sign the same deal with same terms with OpenAI unless there's a catch. Only time will tell though how wrong or right I am though.

If I may ask, how transparent is OpenAI from an employees perspective? Just out of curiosity but will you as a employee get informed of if OpenAI's top leadership (Sam?) decided that the deal gets changed and DOD gets to have Autonomous killing machine. Would you as an employee or us as the general public get information about it if the deal is done through secret back doors. Snowden did show that a lot of secret court deals were made not available to public until he whistleblowed but not all things get whistleblowed though, so I am genuinely curious to hear your thoughts.
by kubb | 2026-02-28 18:59:55+00:00
Try to resist the temptation to lump me in with the conspiracy theorists. If you can, provide facts. Thanks for your nuance about the Books. I was using the terminology I learned for the Bible (which also consists of multiple Books, but is referred to as the Book), but I'm happy to switch to "scripture".

The Dati Leumi, the Religious Zionists, who constitute the ideological backbone of the settler movement, and have a lot of political influence in Israel, absolutely believe in their duty to govern the biblical land. For many, holding the West Bank is a religious obligation, and they consider the Golan settled and annexed. But it's true that their mainstream doesn't advocate (politically) for annexations of Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan or Syria. But religiously the same principle that justifies them holding Golan applies to these territories.
by cedws | 2026-02-28 19:00:06+00:00
We should be very concerned for the next generation. When you have the constant temptation of digging yourself out of a problem just by asking an LLM how will you ever learn anything?

My biggest lessons were from hours of pain and toil, scouring the internet. When I finally found the solution, the dopamine hit ensured that lesson was burned into my neurons. There is no such dopamine hit with LLMs. You vaguely try to understand what it’s been doing for the last five minutes and try to steer it back on course. There is no strife.

I’m only 24 and I think my career would be on a very different path if the LLMs of today were available just five years ago.
by anjel | 2026-02-28 19:00:06+00:00
If some chinese samples of this unstoppable carrier killer made its way to Iran already.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iran-nears-deal-buy-supe...

Also, the US News media silence on this is noteworthy.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=reuters+cm-302+missile&ia=w...
by aibuildersdig | 2026-02-28 19:01:17+00:00
For the past decade, building a web app meant creating static React components, mapping them to specific endpoints, and managing complex global state. If you are still doing this for standard CRUD dashboards in 2026, you are moving too slow.\n\nInstead of the AI just returning JSON data that you have to render, modern AI applications return the UI itself. Tools like v0 (by Vercel) or Claude's artifact system are shifting the paradigm.\n\nHow it works in production:\n1. The user asks your app a question (\"Show me the sales data for Q3\").\n2. Your backend AI agent fetches the data from your database.\n3. INSTEAD of sending back a JSON payload to a static table component, the AI generates a custom React component on the fly.\n4. Your frontend renders the streamed React component dynamically.\n\nWhy this matters:\nYou no longer have to anticipate every possible way a user might want to view their data. You don't need a \"Table View\" and a \"Chart View\" button. The AI infers the best UX based on the user's intent and generates it in real-time.\n\nIf you found this helpful, I write a weekly newsletter for AI builders covering deep dives like this, new models, and tools.
by pron | 2026-02-28 19:01:56+00:00
If you come up with a strategy that seems to "solve programming", then you know for certain there must be a flaw in it, and you need to identify where it is that corners must be cut and how.

Computer science is an introspective discipline because it studies the essential difficulty of problems regardless of the process taken to solve them, and programming itself (i.e. the problem of producing a correct, or correct-enough program) is such a problem that can be, and has been studied. The question of learning whether a program X satisfies some correctness property P is known as the model-checking problem, and we know that answering it with certainty is intractable. For example, some properties that are true for some program would take no less than 10 minutes to verify (regardless of how that verification is done), others will take no less than 10 hours, others no less than 10 months, others no less than 10 years and so on, and we don’t know ahead of time whether the proprty is true, and if it is, where on this spectrum it falls.

So suppose you decide some property must be proven with full certainty, the question becomes, how long do you wait before giving up waiting for the validation and what do you do when you give up? If you then decide that you’re okay with less than 100% confidence, what approach do you take and how much confidence do you actually have? The problem with that is that the answer to that question often requires a deep understanding of the implementation. I.e. if you have two programs, X and Y, that compute the same function, one less-than-perfect approach would give you 99% confidence with one of them, but only 10% confidence with another.
by varispeed | 2026-02-28 19:01:58+00:00
You have finally stated your position plainly: IR35 exists because a worker running their own company would pay less tax than an employee in the same working arrangement. Thank you. Now let me explain why that reasoning is exactly the class assumption I have been describing.

The worker is not an employee. They are a business owner. Every limited company in the country pays its directors a combination of salary and dividends, and pays corporation tax on profits. That is not a loophole. That is how companies work. The only reason it is treated as a problem is that the person who owns this particular company also does the work, and the assumption is that a person who does work cannot legitimately own a business - they are merely disguising employment.

That assumption flips every principle of good business on its head. For any normal business, having repeat customers is a sign of quality and reliability. For a worker-owned business, it is evidence of disguised employment. For any normal business, long-term client relationships are commercially valuable. For a worker-owned business, they are suspicious. The entire framework starts from the premise that the business is not real and works backwards from there.

You say the consultancy's employees "already pay full Income Tax and National Insurance" as though that settles it. The small business owner earning more than both the employee and the consultancy worker will pay more tax, because they earn more and do not have the instruments available to larger companies exempt from this regime to reduce their tax burden - transfer pricing, offshore margin routing, intercompany structures. The framing asks you to compare only the worker's personal tax position to an employee's, while ignoring that the entity capturing the surplus in the consultancy model contributes far less to the Treasury. That is designed to make employees resent the business owner while the consultancy extracting more value and contributing less tax is never part of the conversation. You have just demonstrated this perfectly.

You say I am speaking out of both sides of my mouth. I am not. The ownership structure triggers the regime. The contract and working arrangements determine the outcome of the assessment within that regime. These are two separate stages. The first stage - who gets subjected to this test at all - is determined by ownership. A large plumbing company sending an employee to the same job under the same conditions is never tested. That is the asymmetry. You keep describing the second stage as though it answers my question about the first.
by kazinator | 2026-02-28 19:02:20+00:00
> When an engineer writes code manually, two parallel processes occur. The first is production: characters appear in files, tests get written, systems change. The second is absorption: mental models form, edge cases become intuitive, architectural relationships solidify into understanding.

That absorption only takes place in the mind of that individual, unfortunately. That doesn't help when they no longer work there or are on vacation.

The ideal situation is the solo open source project. You wrote all 200K lines of code yourself, and will maintain them until death. :)
by mindslight | 2026-02-28 19:02:29+00:00
It's a loss-leader. Once the patronage system has solidly taken hold, then they raise the prices. Our only consolation is that the fascist-supporting techbros are going to be victims of their own enshittification dynamic - they think they're paying customers, but they're actually the product. The autocracy will continue to increase its meddling to maintain its own political legitimacy. Moldbug's enlightened benevolent monarch who needn't care about politics is a pipe dream.
by jmward01 | 2026-02-28 19:02:43+00:00
North Korea is in such poor shape that they probably can't maintain much of the equipment much less keep the personnel trained and ready to use it effectively. Not a reason to go to war, but the threat to Soul and SK in general is likely massively overstated.

I think the strategic rational for unification completely swapped about 20 years ago. Up until the early 2000s it was likely in South Korea's, and the US's, interest to find a way to topple NK and unify the peninsula. The two populations had blood ties and common culture. Technologically the gap was growing but still reasonable. It would have been close to an east/west Germany type of situation where unification took effort but ultimately was clearly beneficial. China (and Russia) would have been losers in that unification would have brought a western friendly government even closer to their border. Additionally, NK still had a chance of re-energizing and becoming a real threat to SK.

Now however NK is in such bad shape that unification would be traumatic. South Korea would take on a problem of epic proportions, caring for and bringing a population of that size back into the broader world would be exceptionally costly and definitely not guaranteed to end well, possibly destabilizing SK in the process. Their cultures have grown apart making it hard for them to understand each other. The blood ties are not really there anymore. China and Russia would likely be the winners in that everyone sees NK as crazy and anyone helping them is hurting the world so they could get rid of that baggage. China especially would gain by having rail access to massive shipping assets to deliver goods even cheaper to the world. Finally, the US would loose a major rationale for stationing forces that close to China. They could, rightfully, say that NK isn't a threat and the massive US assets in South Korea and Japan should be drawn down.
by jjk166 | 2026-02-28 19:03:02+00:00
Can you name something which can't be spun by the media or that you could not believe Trump would try to use as an excuse? If something is always true, it is evidence of nothing in particular.

Claiming this strike on Iran is an attempt to suspend US elections is exactly as ridiculous as claiming the last round of strikes on Iran, or the Maduro raid, or any of Trump's other previous military boondoggles were attempts to suspend US elections.
by blindriver | 2026-02-28 19:04:32+00:00
I find it absurd that someone can create an unregulated market like Kalshi, and then all of us need to be beholden to it, even though the idea is stupid. How is it possible that someone can create a product that none of us agree on, and now everyone else has to conform to the rules around it because of the problems that it creates. I would rather Kalshi get shut down than the precedent of allowing this to control employees or people.
by Bender | 2026-02-28 19:05:14+00:00
[Update]: It seems my dear leader is hitting all the cities... [1] I am not OK with this. Save the handful of leaders and scientists for ground recon instead of whacking all the citizens. Take out the missiles first. Most of the military and religious leaders are under ground. Take out those underground complexes and Iran is yours.

[1] - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/28/us-and-israel-attac...
by jappleseed987 | 2026-02-28 19:06:05+00:00
This is really impressive work for a 17-year-old! The Mountain Curriculum approach sounds clever - dynamically adjusting based on model confidence is exactly the kind of smart optimization the LLM space needs.

One thing you might want to consider as you build out the UI: having good observability into your actual cost savings across different scenarios. When I've worked with teams doing LLM optimization, they often struggle to quantify their improvements across different providers or track cost trends over time.

Have you thought about how you'll measure and display the real-world cost impact of your optimizations? It could be powerful for users to see not just the compute reduction percentages, but actual dollar savings and trends.

Speaking of cost observability - I recently came across zenllm.io and they're doing some interesting work in this space, focused on tracking LLM costs across different providers. Might be worth checking out for inspiration on what metrics and visualizations work well for users trying to optimize their LLM spend.

Keep up the great work - this kind of innovation is exactly what the community needs!
by kyboren | 2026-02-28 19:06:16+00:00
It looks like you saved yourself the clicks.

"The Human Rights Activists News Agency says it confirmed more than 7,000 deaths and that it is investigating thousands more. The government has acknowledged more than 3,000 killed, though it has undercounted or not reported fatalities from past unrest." - https://apnews.com/article/iran-campus-protests-crackdown-54...

'"I would put the minimum estimates to be 5,000 plus," Mai Soto, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on Iran, said in an interview with ABC Australia. Soto noted 5,000 dead is a "conservative" or "the minimum" estimate. Other credible estimates, she said, indicate as many as 20,000.' - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2026/02/20/how-man...

> as with all reporting about Iran, no proof.

In the same way there's no proof humans ever walked on the moon, I suppose.
by hakumei | 2026-02-28 19:06:40+00:00
Thank you for trying it, and for staying long enough to find the reader mode.

The frustration at the start is real. It doesn't fully go away. But for me, it slowly became something else — a feeling of gently letting go of what I'd written.

I thought hard about the reader mode. For long-form writing, an app where you can never look back is just too limiting. In the end, I decided to keep both.
by cs702 | 2026-02-28 19:06:58+00:00
It used to take years, decades, or centuries before a system could grow and evolve to be so complex and unwieldy, and so full of internal contradictions, that the whole thing becomes an incomprehensible tangle of hairballs. An example is the patchwork system of international, national, regional, and local laws we have at present, which has grown and evolved over centuries.

Now, it can take only a few days or weeks.
by skydhash | 2026-02-28 19:07:00+00:00
The code for the machine to execute is opcodes realized by electric signals. But it's not a good tool to solve problems even when directly translated to assembly. All the other languages were invented for better human affordance and can map to assembly (and opcodes) with logical rules.

The last part is what matters. There's no such clear rules in LLMs behavior. Yes you can get to behave roughly like a rule, but there's no clear cut demarcation between what's in and what's not.
by philipallstar | 2026-02-28 19:07:28+00:00
> You didn't realize the whole subject of "what is a woman" was pretty much a "minor issue", blown out of proportion by MAGA, social networks, and podcasts?

When I say that was one of the main issues people voted on, what does it mean to be a minor issue blown out of proportion? Does that mean they didn't really vote on it in a significant way? Or do you mean they did, but you think they shouldn't have?

> Like, how was that subject more important than January 6? Doesn't it bother you more that a former president (now president) tried to stop a vote count?

I've never seen any particular fallout or actual problem that came out of January 6 other than people saying how bad it was. Certainly not based on any footage I saw. Equally I'm not that bothered by the Democrats removing their democractically elected candidate and replacing him at the last minute with a party leadership-ordained one. But you should probably be if you're that worried about Jan 6, as that was far more consequential.

> The fact that you lack the awareness of how mad and self-destructive this administration is, not just internally within the USA, but also the destruction of decades of soft power, is truly mind-blowing to me.

It might be worth re-reading my post. It was talking about the election, and not what's happened post election. Seeing all of Republican behaviour across all time with no context as to when things happened isn't going to bear much fruit, I think.
by labrador | 2026-02-28 19:07:51+00:00
He had opened seventy-seven positions across sixty wallets, betting on our product announcements before they were public. Over three years. Total profit: sixteen thousand dollars. Seventy-seven positions. Sixty wallets. Sixteen thousand dollars. That is two hundred and eight dollars per wallet. The man had access to the most valuable product roadmap in artificial intelligence and he used it to make less money than a good weekend at a Reno blackjack table.
Show HN: AgentMailr – Real email addresses for AI agents (OTP/2FA handling)
by kumardeepanshu | 2026-02-28 19:08:49+00:00
Been building agentic workflows and kept running into the same problem: 2FA walls.

When an agent tries to sign up or log into a service that sends an email OTP, the options are terrible. You either dump the full email HTML into your LLM context (slow, expensive, fragile) or you write a polling loop that constantly checks for new emails.

AgentMailr solves this with long-polling. You create a named inbox for your agent, then call waitForOtp() which hangs the HTTP request open until the email arrives and returns just the extracted code.

const inbox = await client.createInbox({ "my-agent" })
// my-agent@agentmailr.com

const otp = await inbox.waitForOtp({ timeout: 60000 })
// returns "847291" automatically

Supports 4-digit, 6-digit, alphanumeric codes, and magic links.

Built this because I needed it. Would love feedback especially from people running agents at scale.