MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by TeMPOraL | 2026-02-24 07:40:51+00:00
Skimming the API docs on MDN, it makes sure the site vendor gets to run filtering code over anything you'd want to inject via e.g. user script or console, securing it with CSP. I expect this to make user scripts work as well as they do on Chrome now. If there's a workaround, I'd love to hear about it.
by adrian_b | 2026-02-24 07:41:37+00:00
When backward jumps are allowed you can create loops that are much more tangled and incomprehensible than when you are nesting the loop structures of modern languages.

With backward jumps, you can make multiple loops that are not nested, but you could visualize them as a complex graph that has sequences of instructions in the nodes and which has multiple cycles through which the execution may or may not pass and which intersect each other. Good luck to understand how the code works, because you cannot separate parts of it that can be understood independently, like when using the "structured programming" that is ubiquitous in modern programming languages.

Such indecomposable complex multiple loops were not uncommon before 1970 in languages like FORTRAN, and precisely this kind of control structures were the reason why the use of GOTO was criticized and considered harmful.
by markelic | 2026-02-24 07:41:44+00:00
The Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) is “a highlight of linear algebra” to quote Prof. Strang ( [1] p. 371). However, I must confess that when I studied it I had a difficult time understanding it and this was due to how it was presented. The SVD is often introduced as a given formula which is then shown to just work. But it always felt very unsatisfying to me not knowing why. So – here is the SVD explained the way I wish I had been taught, which is deriving it from first principles.
by tovej | 2026-02-24 07:42:22+00:00
Lol, you still don't get it.

Standardization means you only need to become an expert in the standard. You still need to know the standard.

And to your point in the quoted part: I absolutely could, as could any of the people who I studied with (in this century).

When you add abstraction laters you do still need to understand how the underlying layers work in order to manage upper layers.

Look, I accept that I've posted more than I should about this. But it's only because you keep saying "nuh-uh". And when you start arguing in bad faith about what I've said, that should be called out.

Saying you disagree is fine, but becoming so flustered you respond dishonestly is not.
by usefulposter | 2026-02-24 07:42:52+00:00
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47077431, by dang, 4 days ago:

All:

(1) Generated comments aren't allowed on HN - this rule predates LLMs but obviously applies even more now: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22generated%20comments%22&sort=byDate&type=comment

(2) If you see accounts that look like they're mostly posting genAI comments, please let us know at hn@ycombinator.com. That's how I found my way to these cases.

>"But I use it to help my English!!!! Who cares if it's AI if the comment is good??????????"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46747998, by dang, 1 month ago:

Please don't post generated or AI-filtered posts to HN. We want to hear you in your own voice, and it's fine if your English isn't perfect.

If you don't flag this shit when you see it, HN is fucked. The commons is fucked. And you all keep upvoting and replying to comments from accounts that start posting 30 comments a day after 2 years of silence that are all one tightly packed paragraph of pablum with the same structure and tells that are harder to fix than replacing the em dash with a double hyphen.

---

P.S. The actual comment is (surprise!) completely wrong. Visit Settings -> AI Controls and you will see a granular set of feature switches under the master kill switch. Each has a clear title and description and is independent.
by citizenpaul | 2026-02-24 07:44:13+00:00
Thanks for that info. I was certain it was some janky ultra low or negative reward system that people just click a random answer to get through.

Had to be since their site lists no way to be a tester. In other words their service is a bunch of 7-13 year olds playing some loot box game.

Wonder where that is in the disclaimers.
by harsh-trvth | 2026-02-24 07:44:20+00:00
Go look at any web proposal. The Mozilla team consistently rejects proposals then relies on WebKit to piggyback on their decision.

This is what I mean by holding the web back. Don't even get me started with WebGPU still not being stabilized in Firefox, or the myriad of features WebKit has not implemented yet with respect to PWAs and service workers.

Really, the situation is more like "Chrome vs two modern IEs".
by socalgal2 | 2026-02-24 07:45:00+00:00
> I would also try to add a human-readable slug at the end, because…

No? Because what would it be based on and if you edited the thing that it's based on then the URL would either change, or get out of sync which woudl suck. You could ignore the suffix meaning flickr.com/mwichary/sets/72177720330077904-<everything-past-the-previous-dash-is-ignored> I'm not sure if that would be a positive, although I guess S.O. does something like that. The issue is other sites really want to know if it's a link to the same resource or a different resource. And while you could redirect to the new one that just makes more work for everyone.

> I would get rid of /photos

I wouldn't because then you'd had have https://flickr.com/settings but that would not be a user named "settings" and the same for every other alternate purpose URL
by puzpuzpuz-hn | 2026-02-24 07:45:57+00:00
Allocation rates are also compared. Long story short, vanilla map + RWMutex (or a sharded variant of it like orcaman/concurrent-map) is the way to go if you want to minimize allocations. On the other hand, if reads dominate your workload, using one of custom concurrent maps may be a good idea.
by rustyhancock | 2026-02-24 07:46:09+00:00
> Note: This section is extremely technical and contains a lot of decompiled code. It details the process of me reverse engineering the drivers for the display, LEDs and keyboard. If you’re not interested in that, feel free to skip ahead to section 7.

When I realised I was in for a good time over the next few sections.

Amazing work! Porting doom to something bizarre is on my bucket list. Even as it becomes a meme.
by bfbf | 2026-02-24 07:46:44+00:00
In my experience, it’s even more effort to get good code with an agent-when writing by hand, I fully understand the rationale for each line I write. With ai, I have to assess every clause and think about why it’s there. Even when code reviewing juniors, there’s a level of trust that they had a reason for including each line (assuming they’re not using ai too for a moment); that’s not at all my experience with Codex.

Last month I did the majority of my work through an agent, and while I did review its work, I’m now finding edge cases and bugs of the kind that I’d never have expected a human to introduce. Obviously it’s on me to better review its output, but the perceived gains of just throwing a quick bug ticket at the ai quickly disappear when you want to have a scalable project.
by someguyornotidk | 2026-02-24 07:46:53+00:00
This, honestly. I used to get so angry when the US subjected foreigners to treatment that no human with morals would consider, but then I noticed that, without fail, almost every thing the US did to foreigners gets done to US citizens eventually, either by foreign governments or by the US government itself. The only thing that I haven't seen yet are drone killings on US soil, but I suspect that too is only a matter of time.

Like it or not, we're all stuck on the same boat. Normalizing the abuse and mistreatment of some parts of the world means normalizing it for everyone.
by raxxorraxor | 2026-02-24 07:47:49+00:00
For me it is disqualified for usage because I need to buy into a Google or Apple ecosystem. At least the reference implementation does. This is just the next level of enshitification. And no, I don't need a digital blockwart at all.

And I have zero illusion privacy is compromised, it is trivial to identify devices these days, so it doesn't even work technically.

Next sentence we hear some empty bickering about digital sovereignty. This is all bullshit.
by jonahx | 2026-02-24 07:48:12+00:00
There are many, many people (math majors, competitive programmers, chess players, etc) who devote incredible effort to becoming better, and simply cannot reach elite levels. And while in most cases elite players are also putting in a lot of effort, there are many cases where it is still relatively less than their peers who are trying harder but still lagging them.

Would you ever be tempted to make such a claim (that everyone is close to the same in ability and effort is the main determiner of success) about athletes? It's so obviously untrue that it's laughable. Why would you think that mental ability is magically distributed evenly?
by jononor | 2026-02-24 07:48:18+00:00
That something is useful does not necessarily mean that it will be doable for companies the capture enough of value to make up for the billions in investments they have/will have make in the coming years.

Right now the frontier AI companies are explicitly running a kind of chicken race - increasing the burn rates so much that it gets harder and harder. With the hopes that they (and not their competitor) will be the one left standing. Especially OpenAI and Antropic, but non-AI companies like Oracle have also joined.
If they keep it going, the likely outcome is that one of them folds - and the other(s) reap the rewards.

Utility (per cost) will go up the tougher the competition. Money captured by single entity possibly down with increased competition.
by vasco | 2026-02-24 07:48:21+00:00
Alzheimer isn't new. You should compare it with a situation like:

Imagine you're born and you eventually learn that there's an asteroid on a collision course with earth, from way before you were born. It's going to take many years to get here and you may die before it hits and so far no scientists have been able to come up with a way to deflect it. Do you care?

Adding newness to the situation makes it wildly different.
by brazzy | 2026-02-24 07:48:38+00:00
> We can build such a society. I am not sure why you think this is never possible.

Maybe we can, but it is A) a far bigger, older, and more difficult problem than how to structure a computer network, and B) fundamentally not solvable through technological means.

No matter how much technologists love the idea of technology as a liberating force, our worst instincts and dynamics always reassert themselves and soon figure out how to use that same technology to destroy liberty.
by ryandrake | 2026-02-24 07:49:17+00:00
I figure, hey, at least Mozilla listened and provided the opt-out. It could be worse. I also happen to be in the "food defecating analogy" camp, and I can give the developer an unenthusiastic thumbs up for at least listening to the peanut gallery this time.

Ideally they wouldn't make the product bad, with a badness opt-out, in the first place, but everyone in Silicon Valley's got to feed the AI monkey. So I guess this is the best we can expect.
by bscphil | 2026-02-24 07:49:29+00:00
I don't think this is quite right. It's not that the question is inherently underspecified, it's that the context of being asked a question is itself information that we use to help answer the question. If someone asks "should I walk or drive" to do X, we assume that this is a question that a real human being would have about an actual situation, so even if all available information provided indicates that driving is the only reasonable answer, this only further confirms the hearer's mental model that something unexpected must hold.

I think it's useful to think about it through the lens of Gricean pragmatic semantics. [1] When we interpret something that someone says to us, we assume they're being cooperative conversation partners; their statements (or questions) are assumed to follow the maxim of manner and the maxim of relation for example, and this shapes how we as listeners interpret the question. So for example, we wouldn't normally expect someone to ask a question that is obviously moot given their actual needs.

So it's not that the question is really all that ambiguous, it's that we're forced (under normal circumstances where we assume the cooperative principle holds) to assume that the question is sincere and that there must be some plausible reason for walking. We only really escape that by realizing that the question is a trick question or a test of some kind. LLMs are generally not trained to make the assumption, but ~70% of humans would, which isn't particularly surprising I don't think.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle#Grice's_...
by curtisblaine | 2026-02-24 07:50:09+00:00
Yes, but:
1) Cooperatives inevitably transition into centers of power. If a cooperative becomes powerful enough, it becomes another mini-government that "unpublishes" you if you say something they don't like.
2) Your freedom ends at the ISP boundary; you don't own the cables. If the ISP doesn't like what you publish, they just disrupt, throttle or disconnect your upload link. They probably have the legal right already.
3) Even if you own the wires (or you invent a LoRa mesh stable enough to provide an alternative Internet), the government will disrupt you (or worse) if you say something they don't like. It's very likely the will disrupt you preventively because you could potentially say something they don't like. This is not right wing vs left wing: look at the UK, for example (left-wing government, abysmal freedom of speech on the Internet)

The issue with publishing content has always been censorship. Anyone in power has incentives to apply as much censorship as they can. It's never been a technical problem.
by godelski | 2026-02-24 07:50:52+00:00
Firefox does what some people want, people complain. Firefox does what other people want, people complain. Firefox does what both people want, people complain.

I'm sorry, but we'll never get corporations to do what we want if we don't throw them the smallest bone when we get our way. You need positive reinforcement too, not just negative. If it's all negative they just stop caring and you get companies lot Google who just don't give a shit anymore.

And yes, there are some AI features I like and I want in the browser. I get a lot of utility out of translation as well as semantic search of my history. I don't want agents in my browser but get, Firefox is giving us choices.

Look, no one needs to like Firefox, but let's also be honest, it's the best we got right now. Google, Apple, and Microsoft are shoving agents down our throats and putting us in walled gardens that are getting harder and harder to break from. I don't care what flavor of chromium you use, Google is still using it to control the way the web works. Everyone loves to say how chromium is has greater coverage of standards but never takes a second to question who sets those standards.

I'm sorry guys, that's the state of things now. You can't fight Google by switching to chromium. It's still their vehicle to eat the internet. Our choices right now are Safari, Firefox, and maybe ladybird. It's slim pickings and nothing is close to perfect. At this point it doesn't even matter if Mozilla is evil, because at least they're the enemy of our enemy. Google is keeping them on life support to avoid monopoly claims but how long will they need that?

So what, we're just going to hand the keys of the kingdom to the guys selling artisian turd sandwiches because what, there isn't enough mayo on your ham sandwich? Because you don't like ham?

We got a win. Celebrate. Take the break from being cynical. There's bigger battles to fight and there'll be more tomorrow. Take the night off and don't be a sore winner
by VogonPoetry | 2026-02-24 07:50:55+00:00
I took the "granularity doesn't cut it" comment to mean there aren't enough entitlements to eliminate the need for custom SBPL. Followed by a sentence about apps that have temporary exception SBPL. Combining the two seems to imply that if there were more entitlements the custom SBPL might not be necessary. In the followup you noted; the split in reasoning and evaluation is rough and potentially not needed. I read this as a conclusion of wanting to do something, but could not as there were not enough entitlements to make it work, so custom SBPL would be necessary.
by raybb | 2026-02-24 07:50:56+00:00
This UI is great but do you get this horrible thing where sometimes the browser is shows a white screen and you have to force stop the app? Happens all the time on the latest version for my Pixel 9a. And did on my Pixel 7 too before. It's really horrible and I can't pin down any rhythm or reason other than loosely seeming to happen more often when I'm in battery saver mode.
by gck1 | 2026-02-24 07:50:57+00:00
Yeah, third party harness repos that utilized OAuth tokens have lots of reports, so it is enforced.

Google does the same, and it seems Google is much more aggressive about it, I've seen way more reports of Google bans than Anthropic.

Just one example here: https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/issues/6930
by jabl | 2026-02-24 07:51:07+00:00
I don't think the situation is that comparable to python, since in python the library has to be present at runtime. And with the dysfunctional python packaging there's potentially a lot of grey hairs saved by not requiring anything beyond the stdlib.

With Rust, it's an issue at compile-time only. You can then copy the binary around without having to worry about which crates were needed to build it.

Of course, there is the question of trust and discoverability. Maybe Rust would be served by a larger stdlib, or some other mechanism of saying this is a collection of high-quality well maintained libraries, prefer these if applicable. Perhaps the thing the blog post author hints at would be a solution without having to bundle everything into the stdlib, we'll see.

But I'd be somewhat vary of shoveling a lot of stuff into stdlib, it's very hard to get rid of deprecated functionality. E.g. how many command-line argument parsers are there in the python stdlib? 3?
by sshine | 2026-02-24 07:51:17+00:00
Concrete memories in a generic context suck:

Every time I ask Claude Kubernetes question, it relates it to that one time I was deploying Kubernetes on VMs. It's not helpful!

Every time I ask Claude a question related to projects, it starts mentioning where I work, as if that helps.

Asking it to forget these concrete memories sometimes results in remembering to not mention them.

Thoroughly useless.

I started out disabling it because it's creepy. I tried it out, and it just doesn't work well.
by locknitpicker | 2026-02-24 07:51:27+00:00
> I find that even though the cost of writing code is immensely cheap, reviewing and validating that it works in certain code bases (like the millions of line mono repo I work in at my job) is extremely high.

That is my observation as well. Churning code is easy, but making sure the code is not total crap is a completely new challenge and concern.

It's not like prior to LLMs code reviews didn't required work. Far from it. It's just that how the code is generated in a completely different way, and in some cases with barely any oversight from vibecoders who are trying to punch way above their weight. So they generate these massive volumes of changes that fail in obvious and subtle ways, and the flow is relentless.
by orthoxerox | 2026-02-24 07:51:44+00:00
This is great news. I recently updated AMD Adrenalin, and the "minimal" version doesn't let you change the distribution of unified RAM on Strix Halo. I installed the "full" version, and it wanted me to install a 10GB "local AI assistant" to "help" me configure it. When I opened the program, it showed me a non-dismissable fake chat that occupied 25% of the screen, prompting me to click it and replace it with a real one.

I remember when every other software prompted you to install Bonzi Buddy or some other intrusive search bar. This AI push is even worse.
by OneMorePerson | 2026-02-24 07:52:10+00:00
I don't think it's ambiguous, but I have been wondering how much LLMs model human behavior that we just don't recognize due to the subset of people on this site. I recently saw a comment online that "Mandarin isn't anyone's first language, people in China's first language is a dialect". It just struck me at that moment that people also hallucinate information confidently all the time.
by PeterStuer | 2026-02-24 07:52:24+00:00
Academic institutions have internal IP scouting monitoring every lab for monetizable research.

On top of that, and often competing with the former, professors are constantly exploring (heavily subsidized with public grants and staffed with free grad students) spin-offs to funnel any commercial potential of their research into their own or their buddie's pockets. It's just like in politics with revolving doors and plushy 'speaking engagements' or 'board seats' galore.
by DaanDL | 2026-02-24 07:53:05+00:00
Correct, my ex couldn't even be bothered to update the notification settings on her iPhone, let alone she'd be generating and deploying an app using an LLM. Most people just don't want to have anything to do with tech, they just want it to work and get out of their way.

I did the same with my car, technically I could do maintenance myself and troubleshoot and what not, but I just couldn't be arsed, so I outsource it at a premium price.
by em-bee | 2026-02-24 07:53:26+00:00
on the contrary, it makes less sense if you want women to get equal chance of a career at work. the likelihood of women staying at home reduces their chances at being promoted, causes them to get paid less, etc. the pay gap, which is supposed to disappear comes from this difference.

if you want to equalize this then you effectively need to force dads to stay at home for the same amount of time as moms, so that their careers are affected in the same way.[1]

of course this won't work without a massive change in culture. men have no interest in spending time with children because that's what they learned from their own parents.

i wanted to stay with my children, but when i did i hated it because i had no role model to draw on. i didn't know what to do with them.

[1]that then leaves the issue of childless people having a career advantage. well if you want people to keep having children that advantage must be eliminated, hence making the case for child support for everyone. germany pays almost 300$ per child per month regardedless of income. and even that is not enough. stay at home parents should have their time count as worked for their pension, or they may need a full salary for example. i don't know what would really work here.
by hulitu | 2026-02-24 07:53:33+00:00
> We worked with the ICC throughout the whole period, and they were fully aware of all of the discussions that were taking place between us, the US government, and the ICC around this individual, and it was the ICC's decision to terminate and to respond to that...sanction, not Microsoft's. So we were not...put in a position where we were terminating the agreement. We were working with the ICC throughout."

Except that the Email was terminated in May 2025 and they come in February 2026 with this "statement".
But, people forget easily , especially with so many "stein" and Microsoft's business continues as usual, like nothing happened.