MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by petercooper | 2026-02-16 22:03:20+00:00
> AI optimism requires believing that you … are not among those who will be driven to psychosis, to violence, or even to suicide by LLM usage. At the very least, this means you feel secure in your own mental health

This has echoes of moral panic to me. We hear about mental health crises triggered by LLMs in the media because they’re novel, uncommon and the stories grab attention. The modern equivalent of video games cause violence, or jazz is corrupting the youth?

I’ll concede AI has many perils, and I doubt we’ve even broken the surface of it yet, but I don’t think user psychosis is either now, or going to be, a common one.
by WorldMaker | 2026-02-16 22:04:15+00:00
As with most RxJS problems the diamond dependency problem can often be fixed/solved with the right combination of even more advanced operators/combinators. Often the easiest solution is `combineLatest`, but as mention that will over-fire depending on your update patterns. Sometimes a simple `throttle` is all the backpressure fix you need on that to reduce diamond over-firing, especially in combination with a cool scheduler such as `animationFrameScheduler` [0]. However there are also other domain-specific replacement options for `combineLatest` if you know the general event firing pattern such as `withLatestFrom`, `zip` [1], `join` [2], or `and/thenDo/when` [3] (in increasing complexity). (ETA: Not to mention that many diamond dependency problems are just fan out problems that can be solved by refactoring computations to an earlier point in the pipeline before the fan out rather than trying to fan back in.)

> And even though Observables have been released natively, there is no activity in the rxjs repo to update the library accordingly.

I believe this is still reversed: "native" Observables, the WICG Observables Proposal [4] is still marked as a Draft Group Report (not even officially a Proposal, still, ouch). The Issues of the RxJS repo still seem to indicate that everything is still in a holding pattern waiting for that to move.

I still cynically think this is yet another case of WICG holding the football in front of RxJS and just as likely as Lucy would do to Charlie Brown, will pull that football again right as they try to kick it, again. The WICG has acted like there is renewed interest in Native Observables but my cynicism thinks they are just rehearing drafts on it to appease the Observables crowd just long enough to claim more interest/easier implementation in Native Signals and try to get a Native Signals Proposal passed without good Observables interop. (But again, I'm a cynic here.)

[0] https://rxjs.dev/api/index/const/animationFrameScheduler

[1] https://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/zip.html

[2] https://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/join.html

[3] https://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/and-then-when.h...

[4] https://wicg.github.io/observable/
by abeppu | 2026-02-16 22:04:25+00:00
> but the author does advocates from a position of "class privilege": of having access to good lawyers, good doctors, and good schools already, and not feeling the urgency of tools that might extend those things to people who don't

I dunno I think you can also take a really dim view of whether society as currently structured is set up to use AI to make any of those things more accessible, or better.

In education, certainly we've seen large tech companies give away AI to students who then use it to do their work. Simultaneously teachers are sold AI-detection products which are unreliable at best. Students learn less by e.g. not actually doing the reading or writing, and teachers spend more of their time pointlessly trying to catch the very common practice.

In medicine, in my most recent job search I talked to companies selling AI solutions both to insurers and to healthcare providers, to more quickly prepare filings to send to the other. I think the amount of paperwork per patient is just going to go up, with bots doing most of the actual form-filling, but the proportion of medical procedures that gets denied will be mostly unchanged.

I am not especially familiar with the legal space, but given the adversarial structure of many situations, I'm inclined to expect that AI will allow firms to shower each other in a paperwork, most of which will not be read by a human on either side. Clients may pay for a similar or higher number of billable hours.

Even if the technology _works_ in the sense of understanding the context and completing tasks autonomously, it may not work for _society_.
by isr | 2026-02-16 22:04:31+00:00
https://github.com/teclabat/tcltk-binaries

For jimtcl (the production-ready minimalistic tcl implementation which antires started (with full closures & gc'able lambdas) - probably an outgrowth of picol), you can get static "(some) batteries included" binaries at:

https://github.com/dbohdan/jimsh-static

For full tcl with the kitchen sink, bathtub & shower included, for android (hence the name) & regular Linux:

https://androwish.org/home/home
by threethirtytwo | 2026-02-16 22:04:45+00:00
I'm going to tell you the utter truth. If you worked in AI for 2 decades and you're saying you understand how they work. Then you are not an intelligent person and you're delusional. That's all you need to know. I'm not saying that to be insulting. Just facts.

Here's a video of Geoffrey Hinton, saying exactly what I am saying: https://youtube.com/shorts/zKM-msksXq0?si=exgk3rmVHRVzV37P This video, I hope, is a wake up call for you. I hope you realize the nonsense your spouting with confidence and backing it with 2 decades of "experience" makes you look like the opposite of a genius.

Here's my advice for you: you need to retire. Because you're saying things that don't make sense. You need to retire, go to the doctor and get yourself checked out.
by vessenes | 2026-02-16 22:05:23+00:00
Can someone experienced in this space explain this to me in mid-tier engineering terms? Are chiplets physically connected chips that come from different wafers? Or are they designs that can be ‘dragged and dropped’? If they’re physically connected (pre-packaging? Post-packaging?) how is this different than putting them on a board with interconnects?

If it’s design-level, and tapeout needs to happen for a given chiplet design, why does the article mention different process nodes? And also, how is this different than any fabs available IP?

Thanks!
by carshodev | 2026-02-16 22:05:43+00:00
I would want this to happen personally as there is no other way that the tech can advance at this current point.

It's clear that there is no global browser federation that works together to make standards. Every browser does things themselves and implements things differently. So the only way that it is feasible is if the browser that is used by 75%+ of sessions is the one that implements it.

Would I like it to be open source? of course. would I like it to be a separate project that was not directly controlled by google? yes. But this does not change the fact that it would ONLY be possible if they accept it into chrome.

The alternative is to forever use Javascript and never advance or change things.

Tech moves quickly and it could be possible that a new browser could take market share in 10 years but it is inconceivable now and would take some groundbreaking shift.

It feels like current browsers can never change their language and it will only be once a new platform is standard, like Vision/Glasses or a voice AI assistant.

It could have been possible if Huawei was allowed to stay in the US market as they are making their own kernal, operating systems and browsers, but they are now excluded. So only google and apple are present to control how things operate.

Over time things must adapt if they become better, there is always pushback when change occurs, but change is necessary for growth.
by jauntywundrkind | 2026-02-16 22:06:23+00:00
Intel has such a strong lead here, with Foveros doing stacked chips including ram (since the amazing, under-rated Lakefield), and with really good EIMB.

AMD is pretty famous for multi-chip, but they're only recently starting to do actually advanced integrating like Sea-of-Wires between chips. So far most of their chips have had big hot PHY to send data back & forth, rather than trying to make multiple chips that really can communicate directly with each other.

Interesting days ahead. The computer is on the chip now. A smaller domain of system building, with many of the same trade-offs & design challenges that it took to build a box.
by akoboldfrying | 2026-02-16 22:06:32+00:00
I think it will be big, but I don't think it's bigger than the automation of manufacturing that began during the Industrial Revolution.

Think about the physical objects in the room you're in right now. How many of them were made from start to finish by human hands? Maybe your grandmother knitted the woollen jersey you're wearing -- made from wool shorn using electric shears. Maybe a clay bowl your kid made in a pottery class on the mantelpiece. Anything else?
by dylan604 | 2026-02-16 22:06:44+00:00
> But that whole business is practically dead,

Good riddance. The amount of scams in the long distance industry was baffling. Legend has it one of the companies named themself "I Don't Care" so if someone said that when asked which long distance carrier you wanted, that's who you got with their ridiculously expensive rates. Calling cards were just an extension of the same idea.
by jonshariat | 2026-02-16 22:06:45+00:00
I remember doing my usual prep, did research, wrote down my range. Then they hit me with a number over my top level range that it totally threw me off balance. I should have asked for more, worst case they say no, but I just wasn't prepared for a number over my research and data.

imo giving a range before the offer stage, just gives them a potential reason not to waste their time on you. Thats what they are screening for. So its always a bad idea. Wait for them to want you, then you A. Have leverage and B. don't get cut out early. Even if you don't get the job, having an offer is data you can carry forward. If you are so blessed to have multiple at the same window, great, but even if there are months in-between, you can push the next company that much more with confidence.

Today my plan is simple:
1. If they ask early - I hit them with the market range, lets see if theres a strong fit and we can work something out. I'm not worried etc
2. Do your research, don't just pull cold numbers but factor in your situation as much as possible. Put $ to any benefits, how much is it worth to you? Put that in a spreadsheet
3. When the time comes. Ask them to make an offer. If they ask you to throw the number out first just be bold and say something like "id love to hear your offer first, and then we can chat about any details"
4. Always ask for more. Its a short conversation, quick no and its over. I've gotten 5-20% more constantly when I've asked. I've never had an offer rescinded. Just be polite, use a team/us attitude (i.e. What are your constraints? Hmm ok how can we figure this out?) and embrace the silence. Putting on them to make the solution and just let the silence hang.
5. The only rule is whatever you say you'll accept, you must accept. Never ask for more once they have budged on your request, this is why you must ask for more and if you have a range, and they offer low, maybe tell them the range from the data and say something like "I know you only hire the best and you want to raise the bar with each hire, so I was hoping to see a number at the higher end of that range"
by BoxFour | 2026-02-16 22:06:46+00:00
It would never show up as some explicit rule or document. It just sort of happens when a few things line up: execs start off-handedly praising 996, stack ranking is still a thing, and the job market is bad enough that getting fired feels genuinely dangerous.

It starts with people who feel they’ve got more to lose (like those supporting a family) working extra to avoid looking like a low performer, whether that fear is reasonable or not. People aren’t perfectly rational, and job-loss anxiety makes them push harder than they otherwise would. Especially now, when "pushing harder" might just mean sending chat messages to claude during your personal time.

Totally anecdotal (strike 1), and I'm at a FAANG which is definitely not the median tech job (strike 2), but it’s become pretty normal for me to come back Monday to a pile of messages sent by peers over the weekend. A couple years ago even that was extremely unusual; even if people were working on the weekend they at least kept up a facade that they weren't.
by dogmayor | 2026-02-16 22:06:48+00:00
Important sentences immediately before the ones you quote.

> For our evaluation, we inserted names to signal race / gender while keeping the resume unchanged. Interestingly, the LLMs were not biased in the original evaluation setting, but became biased (up to 12% differences in interview rates) when we added realistic details like company names (Meta, Palantir, General Motors), locations, or culture descriptions from public careers pages.
by anvevoice | 2026-02-16 22:06:48+00:00
One pattern I've found useful alongside this: Postgres advisory locks (pg_advisory_xact_lock) for cases where the contention isn't row-level but logic-level. For example, if two requests try to create the "first" resource of a type - there's no existing row to SELECT FOR UPDATE against.

Advisory locks let you serialize on an arbitrary key (like a hash of the entity type + parent ID) without needing a dummy row or separate lock table. They auto-release on transaction end, so no cleanup.

The barrier testing approach from the article would work nicely here too - inject the barrier between acquiring the advisory lock and the subsequent insert, then verify the second transaction blocks until the first commits.
by Loughla | 2026-02-16 22:06:58+00:00
>People regularly ask questions that are structured poorly or have a lot of ambiguity.

The difference between someone who is really good with LLM's and someone who isn't is the same as someone who's really good with technical writing or working with other people.

Communication. Clear, concise communication.

And my parents said I would never use my English degree.
by Aurornis | 2026-02-16 22:07:13+00:00
> Intermittent variable rewards, whether produced by design or merely as a byproduct, will induce compulsive behavior, no matter the optimization target.

This is an incorrect understanding of intermittent variable reward research.

Claims that it "will induce compulsive behavior" are not consistent with the research. Most rewards in life are variable and intermittent and people aren't out there developing compulsive behavior for everything that fits that description.

There are many counter-examples, such as job searching: It's clearly an intermittent variable reward to apply for a job and get a good offer for it, but it doesn't turn people into compulsive job-applying robots.

The strongest addictions to drugs also have little to do with being intermittent or variable. Someone can take a precisely measured abuse-threshold dose of a drug on a strict schedule and still develop compulsions to take more. Compulsions at a level that eclipse any behavior they'd encounter naturally.

Intermittent variable reward schedules can be a factor in increasing anticipatory behavior and rewards, but claiming that they "will induce compulsive behavior" is a severe misunderstanding of the science.
by lirbank | 2026-02-16 22:07:52+00:00
Interesting! The barrier approach is more targeted: you specify the exact interleaving you want to test rather than exploring all of them. Trade-off is you need to know which interleavings matter, but you get deterministic tests that run against a real database instead of a simulated runtime. Exploring exhaustive interleaving testing against a real Postgres instance could be a fun follow-up - I'd be curious if it's practical.
by marginalia_nu | 2026-02-16 22:07:57+00:00
Seems to be what is happening in a lot of the places it's encroaching.

AI journalism is strictly worse than having a human research and write the text, but it's also orders of magnitude much cheaper. You see prompt fragments and other blatant AI artifacts in news articles almost every day. So we get newspapers that have the same shape as they used to, but that don't fulfill their purpose. That's a development that was already going on before AI, but now it's even worse.

Walked past a billboard the other day with advertisement that was blatantly AI-generated. Had a logo with visible JPEG artifacts plastered on top of it. Real amateur hour stuff. It probably was as cheap as it looked.

You see the trend in software too. Microsoft's recent track record is a good example of this. They can barely ship a working notepad.exe anymore.

Supposedly some birds will eat cigarette butts thinking they're bugs, and then starve to death with a belly full of indigestible cigarette filters. Feels a lot like what is happening to a lot of industries lately.
by al_borland | 2026-02-16 22:08:12+00:00
You’re expecting kids in 5th grade to pick a career and start building focused projects on par with the experience one would get in a full time position at a company?

This can’t be serious?

How does AI solve the unknown unknowns problem?

Even if someone may hear about potential problems or good ideas from AI, without experience very few of those things are incorporated into how a person operates. They have never felt the pain of missing those steps.

There are plenty of signs at the pool that say not to run, but kids still try to run… until they fall and hurt themselves. That’s how they learn to respect the sign.
by scottlamb | 2026-02-16 22:08:33+00:00
> Systematic tracking that isn't subject to the constraints of human memory and apathy fundamentally changes the equation.

I definitely don't approve of mass collection across many cameras, accessible to who-knows-who with minimal if any privacy controls (Flock). But it wouldn't surprise or bother me if my next-door neighbor had ALPR enabled, as long as it's not part of that cloud. YMMV.

Full disclosure: I develop an open source home/hobbyist-oriented NVR, although it doesn't have an ALPR feature or any other analytics today.
by Aurornis | 2026-02-16 22:08:41+00:00
> Anthropic's optimization target is getting you to spend tokens, not produce the right answer.

The majority of us are using their subscription plans with flat rate fees.

Their incentive is the precise opposite of what you say. The less we use the product, the more they benefit. It's like a gym membership.

I think all of the gambling addiction analogies in this thread are just so strained that I can't take them seriously. Even the basic facts aren't even consistent with the real situation.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-16 22:08:42+00:00
> You can call it whatever you want but people make inferences

This is an incorrect definition of a signal. I agree that intention is irrelevant. But a powerful person blending in with their dress isn’t actually sending a signal. There is nothing to perceive because they look like everyone else. The signal is only in if they’re recognized. Your definition of signal is congruous with any trait someone thinks a powerful person has whether it’s real or imagined.
by Windchaser | 2026-02-16 22:08:57+00:00
> I think a good rule of thumb is to default to assuming a question is asked in good faith (i.e. it's not a trick question).

Sure, as a default this is fine. But when things don't make sense, the first thing you do is toss those default assumptions (and probably we have some internal ranking of which ones to toss first).

The normal human response to this question would not be to take it as a genuine question. For most of us, this quickly trips into "this is a trick question".
by znpy | 2026-02-16 22:09:00+00:00
I think that rest and html could probably be already used for this purpose BUT html is often littered with elements used for visual structure rather than semantics.

In an ideal world html documents should be very simple and everything visual should be done via css, with JavaScript being completely optional.

In such a world agents wouldn’t really need a dedicated protocol (and websites would be much faster to load and render, besides being much lighter on cpu and battery)
by kpil | 2026-02-16 22:09:06+00:00
I think that is Hofstadter grieving his wife, and reflecting on how we embed models or predictions of others in our own neural networks, more than anything else.

We build models of the world in order to predict it.

But I guess you could say other people are objectively shaping the neurons in our brains. But so is that fiddly printer tray or whatever, to a small extent.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2026-02-16 22:09:35+00:00
Why is anyone upvoting this? It's incredibly stupid. There was supposedly "a hack" of a corporation that specializes in security, and these hackers just happened to discover 1) backdoors in world leaders' devices, 2) an archive of blackmail material, 3) transcribed conversations of world leaders, 4) evidence of the development of nuclear and bioterror weapons specifically for ukraine against russia, 5) evidence of Palantir being responsible for "most" (??) deaths in Gaza, 6) all of this will be given to China "and/or" Russia, but 7) they kindly gave it all to Kim Dotcom for safe keeping.

It's like a 4chan post by an 11 year old. His Twitter feed looks like he's mentally ill.
by jauntywundrkind | 2026-02-16 22:09:40+00:00
There's also this annoying flash perception that wins. As the big companies abandoned XMPP, less people considered it.

It's pretty good today! Lots of things improved a lot! Some big clean ups!

But think of how much better it would be if people stayed woke, if they didn't just throw up their hands call defeat & say it was never going to work. If there wasn't such a bleak rot in our soul, if we could try to play slightly longer games, I think in the medium & long run it would be much much better for us all.

It feels so easy to spread sedition, to project these fatalisms that only big dumb lumbering central systems win. I'm so tired of this bleakness, this snap to convenience as the only perceived possible win. Let the prophecy self fulfill no more, let us arise from this torpor. A little Ubuntu would be ao good for us all. Ubuntu the old saying (that the distro was inspired by) goes: "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together"
by mirashii | 2026-02-16 22:09:58+00:00
> You got a source for that? Because the only communication I've seen from Discord implies no data is sent when these scans take place, its supposed to all take place locally FIRST is my understanding.

> The only exception is if the local scan goofs in some way.

Basically this, if it fails or if you wish to escalate past that, then there's a path that would hit Persona (or, would have, they've since ended their relationship with Persona. Previously, you'd open a ticket in Zendesk, which is where data was breached from before).

https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/30326565624343...