MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by moffkalast | 2026-02-28 08:29:28+00:00
With this amount of competition it's almost weird to be paying anyone anything when one can just switch between free tiers of GPT, Claude, Gemini, Kimi, Qwen, Deepseek, Le Chat and an endless firehose of local models. The more your usage is randomly spread out, the less each provider can presumably profile you too as nobody has the full picture.
by echelon | 2026-02-28 08:30:00+00:00
> You've been reliably adamant that AI will demolish this or that entire industry overnight for years at this point

We'll see who's right. I never said "overnight". Let's check in at the decade's end.

Y'all dunked on me in 2019 when I said AI was coming for Hollywood. Have you seen Seedance 2.0?

It's coming for us too. I've written five nines, active-active systems that handle billions of dollars of money movement daily. These systems can work in those contexts. I didn't think we'd be here this soon, and I actually thought LLMs were a dead end. I was wrong.

I'm not trying to sell Claude Code. I hate the concept of hyperscaler companies. I want there to be viable open source coding models - there just aren't. I'm merely reporting on my findings.

I sit at my machine for hours now in a prompt, review, test cycle. It's addictive. I'm getting more done at a faster rate than any time in my professional career. I'm excited, and I'm also worried. I don't know what happens after this.

If you've seen how much I praise AI, then you've also seen how much I rail against monopolies. I am worried these giant companies are going to take the means of production from us. I don't think enough people are freaking out about this. It's a very real possibility.

I'm just going to keep building. But you should pay close attention to what's happening.
by spwa4 | 2026-02-28 08:30:09+00:00
Iran is not the middle east. In the actual middle east, there has been permanent war for >1500 years. And during all that time the middle east has started wars from Zimbabwe to Norway to Hong Kong.

On might think muslims would have learned something after the defeat of islam (as in the last coherent country/state structure) in 1919-1923 at the hands of muslims. Of course, islam as in the state, started a Naval war with the US, to defend the great institution of slavery ... and when they failed ... they started a second one.

And let's just not discuss whether some muslims (such as IS, but certainly not limited to them) are still trying to bring back slavery. Because we all know the answer.
by jaen | 2026-02-28 08:30:24+00:00
I mean, for an article that's titled "clean room", that would be the first thing to do, not as a "maybe follow up in the future"...

For the handwavy point about the x86 assembler, I am quite sure that the LLM will remember the entirety of the x86 instruction set without any reference, it's more of a problem of having a very well-tuned agentic loop with no context pollution to extract it. (which you won't get by YOLOing Claude, because LLMs aren't that meta-RLed yet to be able to correct their own context/prompt-engineering problems)

Or alternatively, to exploit context pollution, take half of an open-source project and let the LLM fill in the rest (try to imagine the synthetic "prompt" it was given when training on this repo) and see how far it is from the actual version.
by siddbudd | 2026-02-28 08:31:03+00:00
ah, Eastern Europe is a homogeneous slop, good to know. The 25th is only celebrated as a national holiday in like 90% of Eastern European countries. Russia and Serbia celebrate it on January 7th instead, and even that is only due to their use of the old Julian calendar. But sure, normal day in a very narrow and obscure definition of Eastern Europe.
by bjackman | 2026-02-28 08:31:10+00:00
> there are at least a dozen companies that provide non-Anthropic/non-OpenAI models in the cloud, many of which are dirt cheap because of how fast and good open weights are now.

Oh yeah, seems obvious now you said it, but this is a great point.

I'm constantly thinking "I need to get into local models but I dread spending all that time and money without having any idea if the end result would be useful".

But obviously the answer is to start playing with open models in the cloud!
by latexr | 2026-02-28 08:31:13+00:00
> My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons

And you believe the US government, let alone the current one will respect that? Why? Is it naïveté or do you support the current regime?

> If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit.

So your logic is your company is selling harmful technology to a bunch of known liars who are threatening to invade democratic countries, but because they haven’t lied yet in this case (for lack of opportunity), you’ll wait until the harm is done and then maybe quit?

I’ll go out on a limb and say you won’t. You seem to be trying really hard to justify to yourself what’s happening so you can sleep at night.

Know that when things go wrong (not if, when), the blood will be on your hands too.
by dwedge | 2026-02-28 08:31:44+00:00
I was reading your other blog post about storing them in bitwarden I have to disagree with this point:

> Unless you were forced to by some organisational policy, there’s no point setting up 2FA only to reduce the effective security to 1FA because of convenience features.

2FA both stored in your password manager is less secure than storing than separately, but it still offers security compared to a single factor. The attack methods you mentioned (RAT, keylogger) require your device to be compromised, and if your device is not compromised 2fa will help you.

To slip into opinion mode, I consider my password manager being compromised to be mostly total compromise anyway.

Also I really like the style and font of your blog.
by raincole | 2026-02-28 08:31:57+00:00
> If a project in an unsafe language has ever had a memory bug (I'm looking at you, Bun), the maintainers objectively have a track record of not being capable of manual memory management

That's an interesting way to navigate the world. Do you hold this attitude towards other professionals? For example, if a lawyer ever lost a case by misinterpreting a law, they have a track record of not being capable to practice laws and should be disbarred?
by tombert | 2026-02-28 08:32:14+00:00
You haven’t really gone through my comment history here, which is fine, I haven’t gone through yours, but if you had you would see that today I posted about how you can’t trust anything billionaires say because there’s no negative consequences for lying.

I am arguing that he posted on Twitter not even 24 hours ago a post laying out what looked like principles. Not even 24 hours later he decided that those principles aren’t actually important.

I am not a psychic because psychics don’t actually exist, so I can’t read minds, so I cannot know what he is actually thinking. I am claiming that he’s a piece of shit for not following his own stated principles. I actually do think billionaires should face consequences for lying.
by swiftcoder | 2026-02-28 08:32:24+00:00
> At any point, if you provide any conterpoints or fair criticism towards the language objectively, just expect lots of fans to remind you that it is the best programming language ever created and yours is "unsafe" by default.

This is mostly just a disagreement about what the word "unsafe" means in this context?

"safe" and "unsafe" in the sense Rust uses them aren't a moral judgment about a language, it's a specific (and limited in scope) feature of the language, where memory safety is enforced by the compiler.
You might be falling behind without realizing it
by hoangnnguyen | 2026-02-28 08:32:41+00:00
If you are still coding the same way you did two years ago, you might be falling behind without realizing it.

Not because you are not capable.
Not because you are not using AI.
But because you are using AI the same way you did when it first appeared.

A year ago, we talked how much faster AI could make engineering teams. At that time, speed was the headline. Write a requirement, generate code, move faster than before. The improvement was obvious.

After a year of working with AI every day, I’ve realized something more important.

Speed is no longer the advantage.
Workflow discipline is.

Today I see two types of engineers.

Both use AI.
Both move faster than before.

One uses AI as an upgraded autocomplete. Prompt, review the diff, merge, move to the next task.

The other treats AI as a system component. Before coding, they let the agent clarify the requirement. They separate planning, implementation, and review into explicit phases. They generate tests and extend them with edge cases. They validate critical constraints, the parts of the system where small mistakes create long-term consequences.

The difference may look small in the first few months.
Over time, it compounds.

One engineer can only focus on one problem at a time because their workflow is still single-threaded. Prompt, wait, review, merge, repeat.

The other can scale the number of things they build by increasing the number of agents they can clearly define, coordinate, and control.

The difference is not just productivity.
It is leverage.
by ulrikrasmussen | 2026-02-28 08:32:43+00:00
Something I have really wondered is, why aren't there stronger incentives to build mines with a mechanism that disables them after a certain time has passed? There must be tactical and strategical reasons which are regarded more important, but surely the party using them for defending their own land ought to have an interest in not having to deal with this threat for decades after the war has ended, and an aggressor who wishes to take over an area should have the same incentives.

Or are the reasons technical, that it is simply too difficult to develop a reliable mechanism for disabling them?
by bawolff | 2026-02-28 08:33:37+00:00
Its probably not the reason they are attacking (except in as much that it makes the iranian regime vulnerable). However i would say that yes, humanitarian intervention is one of the only non self-defense justifications for war that anyone has ever accepted in the post-ww2 era. (Edit: to clarify, im saying its the type of thing people build justifications for war around. Whether its a justification on this specific case is probably highly debatable. I think a reasonable argument could be made)
by ifh-hn | 2026-02-28 08:33:52+00:00
Passkeys to me come across as a part solution to a valid problem. Education is part of the solution. Treating the user as too dumb to understand why they need strong passwords or passkeys is important.

I actually despair about when my family members are forced into passkeys and then lose access to their accounts because they get a new device.

I use passkeys from keepasxc because the native workflow for passkeys is opaque and easy to misunderstand what you are actually doing. And it's predicated on having an account with big us tech companies.
by procaryote | 2026-02-28 08:34:07+00:00
check further down this discussion for immediately downvoted comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47191837
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47191619

Post anything negative about rust, or anything about a severe bug in some non-rust code, for examples of your own

I have nothing against rust, although the learning curve is too steep and development in rust is too slow to be a practical general purpose language for a regular company.

The culture around dependencies also means you pay for your memory safety by increased supply chain risk.

Golang or Java gets you memory safety, faster compilation, easy hiring and have better standard libraries
by somethoughts | 2026-02-28 08:34:38+00:00
It was mostly in response to the secwar tweet:

"Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic,"

If this tweet is taken to the nth degree that'd effectively put Anthropic out of business since they have pretty significant Amazon[1] and Microsoft[2] cloud provider/funding relationships that would need to be nullified within 6 months.

[1] https://aws.amazon.com/federal/defense

[2] https://military.microsoft.com
by goku12 | 2026-02-28 08:34:44+00:00
> Yes. It's the syntax alongside prose explaining the behavior in detail. Go give it a read.

Bold of you to assume that I or the others didn't. I made my statement in spite of reading it. Not because I didn't read it. So my opinion is unchanged here.

The point here is simple. Documentation is a very important addition. But you can't paper over other deficiencies with documentation, especially if you find yourself referring the same documentation again and again. It's an indication that you're dealing with an abstraction that can't easily be internalized. Throwing the book at everyone isn't a good solution to every problem.

> Have you read the [0] docs for Python's 'subprocess' library? The ...

Yes, I have! All of those. Their difference with bash documentation is that you get the idea in a single glance. I spend much less time wondering how to make sense of it all. Python's abstractions are well thought out, carefully selected, consistently and orthogonally implemented and stays out of the way - something I can hardly say about bash. If that's not enough for you, Python has something that bash lacks - PEPs. The documents that neatly outline the rationale behind their decisions. That's what a lot of programmers want to know and every programmer should know.

Fun fact: The Epstein files contain a copy of the bash manual! Of course they weren't involved in his crimes. It was just one of the documents found on his system. A sysadmin is believed to have downloaded it for reference. But it's telling that it wasn't the Python manual, or the Perl manual, or something else. Meanwhile, I don't really think that Epstein was running Linux on his system.

> Unless you want to underdocument and leave important parts of the behavior for users to incorrectly guess, such documentation is going to be much larger than a cheat sheet would be.

If properly designed, such expansive documentation would be unnecessary, as they would be obvious even with the abstractions. For example when you use a buffer abstraction in modern languages, you have a fairly good idea what it does and why you need it, even though you may not care about its exact implementation details. That's the sort of quality where bash and other POSIX shells fail on several counts. In fact, check how many other shells break POSIX compatibility to solve this problem. Fish and nushell, for example.

"The developer is too lazy to read the documentation" isn't the appropriate stance to assume when so many are expressing their frustration and displeasure at it. At some point, you have to concede that there are genuine problems that cannot be blamed on the developer alone.
by zozbot234 | 2026-02-28 08:37:10+00:00
> But there will be other languages in the future that will continue to deliver small improvements until one day they result in another phase change. The honeymoon with Rust will be over and it will start feeling more antiquated.

That language may well be Rust itself, especially if they manage to figure out the "how to deprecate standard library features across language editions and allow reuse of their idiomatic syntax?" problem.
by rustyhancock | 2026-02-28 08:37:46+00:00
I cancelled my anthropic sub yesterday and the dark patterns are so frustrating.

You go to billing. Then don't click change my subscription. Your only option to change the subscription is to "upgrade" to an annual plan. Instead you have toScroll down past your card details etc to a red button that says cancel.

Who comes up with this crap?

At least OpenAI puts cancelling within the Manage Plan section.
by js8 | 2026-02-28 08:39:00+00:00
These people, who make purchasing decisons, also make them on behalf of someone's preferences, mixed with their own, to the extent they have a say. Like the market, government represents certain weighted subset of people. With the market, the people in the government are under influence just as much as anybody else. You can't really say that preferences flow a certain way, from government to business.
by eranation | 2026-02-28 08:39:42+00:00
After the "upside down cup" debacle, and the "walk vs drive to the carwash" conundrum, and so many other examples where GPT 5.2 thinking failed miserably and Opus 4.6 and (even Sonnet 4.6 extended thinking) nailed it, I think they earned people wanting to cancel their subscription regardless of yesterday's events.
by paganel | 2026-02-28 08:40:22+00:00
Jeff Dean could have done a lot of good and add his name to the list of signatories, seeing as how leaf of AI at Google or some such. He was supposed to be this super-smart dude, I guess he’s far from that.

Huge props for the the Google and OpenAI engineers that did sign this, for those that did realize that they’re fighting for a greater thing, not just for an extra zero or two added at the end of their bank accounts. Especially as they’re taking a great amount of risk by doing it, first of all, imo they are risking their current employment status.
by api | 2026-02-28 08:41:30+00:00
The Iranian people overthrow their government and establish what they want?

My point is that an outside force coming in will help the current regime and/or the ideas behind it. Even if the current regime falls, democratic or pro-Western ideas in Iran will be seen as aligned with the invading force and rejected by many people who might otherwise be open to them.

Is there anyone who likes being invaded by a foreign power, ever?
by pjc50 | 2026-02-28 08:41:36+00:00
Yes, when you ask the basic Clauzewitz question about "continuation of politics by other means": what are the war aims, and how is this action connected to them?

What are the strikes even against?

Do they seriously think that after Iran shot all the street revolutionaries, another group will come forward and collapse the government?

Are they treating Iran as Big Serbia? It's a very different situation!

Or is this just for the Posting?
by 47282847 | 2026-02-28 08:42:36+00:00
Looking through the comments here, I am repeatedly surprised how quickly we seem to have lost a shared understanding of fundamentals ever since Trump came into power. I still need inner adjusting to fully realize that it must have always been a misunderstanding?

1. I don’t understand what is controversial about any supplier making their own rules for trade. I don’t have to agree with their beliefs, but I find it the basis of a functioning society to allow others to hold beliefs that I do not share, and to develop products as they want, as long as they don’t pose any dangers. If I don’t like the product, I am free to shop elsewhere or develop my own.

2. I thought that there is was a shared understanding of the line between voluntary business deals, and coercion and punishment. I thought we agreed that the law should protect people and businesses in ways so that nobody can exert power over another. Not on the hows, but on the why. And not based on ethical considerations (beliefs) but purely on logical grounds that we know how violence begets violence, use of it will only escalate conflict, and we will ultimately lose.

3. I thought we all agreed that government agencies were bound by the law and its policies. If you were to use the designation of Supply Chain Risk, you would at least have to sufficiently provide logical arguments. Here, they even openly disclose how they plan to use the mechanism purely as punishment, against the spirit of the law, not because a product carries any risk and should be limited, but because it is too limited.

Is this some form of collective narcissistic psychosis? The desire to burn it all down in suicide?
by gib444 | 2026-02-28 08:42:45+00:00
I was expecting this - they're just copying everyone else (LOVE that kind of inflation...)

They've amassed enough users who depend on something so critical (family accounts being even more entrenched). They're now in the enshittification era.

As a year of 1Password for about years, my perception is that their software quality is declining.

I recently bagged a free 1-year trial family account after looking at the alternatives (they're all way less polished) but I will re-evaluate the tradeoffs when the renewal is up.

In terms of price, if they've stopped innovating, I expect them to work on fixing bugs and compatibility. But they don't seem to be doing that, so I feel I'm just being milked for cash

--

Later

Also Bitwarden just hiked family accounts from $24 -> $48 a year...
by latexr | 2026-02-28 08:42:53+00:00
> some I suppose will stay in their jobs because leaving isn't an easy decision to make.

Anyone who chooses to stay shouldn’t have signed the letter. What’s the point of doing it off you’re not going to follow through? If you sign the letter and don’t leave after the demands aren’t met, you’re a liar and a coward and are actively harming every signatory of every future letter.
Ask HN: Why are some websites locking or using the audio device on Windows?
by ezconnect | 2026-02-28 08:43:02+00:00
When X or Aliexpress is open on a tab even if they are not the active tab or the browser is minimize I can't change the input device or output device because they are using the audio device even if they are not playing sounds. Do they use it to stream data or they use for other purpose?
by avsm | 2026-02-28 08:43:13+00:00
(one of the paper coauthors here)

While diamond dependencies are indeed one of the big complicating factors, the implementation and engineering details that remain matter a lot too. Section 4 covers the spectrum of quality-of-life features that do introduce subtleties: for example the order of resolution, peer dependencies, depops/features. These are all important for the ergonomics of package constraint expressions, irrespective of whether diamond dependencies are present or not.

The engineering details also flow from the practical implementation constraints: it makes a big difference if solving can done in linear time or if there's a noticeable pause or (worse) you need a big centralised solver. The determinism also guides the implementation of chains of trust.
by nananana9 | 2026-02-28 08:43:26+00:00
> it always leads to UB, which means you can't say anything about what happens next.

If you read a language standard and try very hard to forget that the actual computer exists, sure.

If you remember computers are real, you can pretty easily tell what will happen when you write to address 0x00000000 on a CPU with virtual memory.
by array_key_first | 2026-02-28 08:43:34+00:00
Yes, in the same way a rape victim is "free" to not be raped if they instead opt to get shot by the rapist holding a gun to their head.

Does nobody understand simple words like "free" or "voluntary" anymore? Is coersion no longer a concept that the human brain is able to understand? Or, are some people collectively choosing to act so unbelievably stupid they're falling below the intelligence of an average second grader?
by tl2do | 2026-02-28 08:43:35+00:00
In Japan, Omron developed early ATMs that looked similar to American and European machines. Though those early forms have changed significantly over time, Omron remains a top maker today (their ATM division later became a joint venture with Hitachi, so the Omron name is no longer used).

Unlike IBM, Omron specializes in ATM hardware, not bank internal systems. That difference in focus could have mattered.
by bravetraveler | 2026-02-28 08:44:24+00:00
No complaints here, I use a Framework Desktop with this chip. 32G given to RAM and the rest plays VRAM. Can use large models like 'gpt-oss:120b' fine. Splurged and got a second SSD for mirroring, hoping to speed up reads/model loads. Haven't tested this for efficacy, but it also gives redundancy. Shrugs!

Haven't paid a subscription in years or even signed up for $EMPLOYER offerings; handles the rare outsourcing well enough.