MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nickysielicki | 2026-02-28 21:27:47+00:00
> > Do you think Anthropic should be designated as a “supply chain risk”?

> No, and we have made our position on this clear to the government.

Look, this is the most important thing that everyone needs to understand: Your opinion on this is not welcome here. Your opinion on how the government uses the tools it purchases are unimportant and a non-factor. It is not appropriate for you to share your opinion on this. The government that was elected by the people is the sole decision maker. That’s the agreed social norm that we have in this country. What you’re doing is a minor subversion of our democratic republic, even if it feels like you’re standing on firm moral ground.

The DoD can and will deploy eye watering amounts of capital in the pursuit of its mission. That mission includes artificial intelligence based war systems. If you want a piece of that pie, even indirectly, you need to shut the fuck up and kiss the ring. That’s the reality. You don’t have to like this, but you’re shockingly naive if you didn’t know the world worked this way. The DoD spends nearly a trillion dollars a year, did you really think that was entirely spent on raw materials?

Their systems will be built to their spec, one way or another. They will seize your source code and training sets. They will build data centers. Nothing can stop this. People are making this about Trump and Hegseth, but it’s bigger than that. This transcends political parties. Obama’s DoD would make the same stand, and you’re naive if you don’t think so. Our war machine never loses in the game of politics.
by dwb | 2026-02-28 21:29:09+00:00
Can you give some examples of uses of "fascism" where it is merely referring to "bad people that I don't like", and not one of the many instances of fascism in the world today? If you're unfamiliar with the detailed thinking about the subject, I recommend this list:

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
by NoLinkToMe | 2026-02-28 21:29:10+00:00
Hard to say. Netanyahu has been calling for Iranian regime change since the 90s, and Trump is his most successful lobbying effort yet. US wants regime change, they just never saw a possibility. So the objective isn't new or driven by Epstein, perhaps the timing is though.

Even now most experts agree the chance of success is extremely small, every time this was tried you got shit returns (think Libya, still a failed state after Ghadaffi fell, and Iraq is reasonably stable now but we're 2 decades in and +1m dead Iraqis).

So it's certainly a useful distraction for Trump. It's also certainly true Trump would want to pursue this objective (despite it being a stupid move to reach it) regardless of the Epstein files.
by kubb | 2026-02-28 21:29:22+00:00
> You are confusing politics and religion.

Religious Zionism is a religious denomination.

National Religious Party–Religious Zionism is a political party.

It feels unfair and unjustified that you are accusing me of confusing them without substantiating your accusation. I am still open to learn anything that you might want to share with me that you think is important.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-02-28 21:29:28+00:00
mass surveillance is explicitly unlawful in the US. it is in the bill of rights. By definition it is injustice under the law. Even for terrorists in the US they have to go through a FISA court and get warrants.

Consider this, the bill of rights stipulates that a soldier cannot be stationed on your property in times of peace, but in times of war it will be allowed. It makes exceptions for times of war. but even in times of war, 4th amendment's search and seizure protection don't have an exception. Even in times of insurrection and rebellion. To deliberately violate that for personal and political reasons, that in itself is treason. With that intent alone, even without action, it invalidates all legitimacy that government has. If a clause in a contract is broken, the contract is broken. The bill of rights is the contract between the people and their government that gives the government its powers to rule, in exchange for those rights. With the contract explicitly, deliberately and with provable malicious intent broken, the whole agreement is invalidated.

I'll even say this, the US military itself is on the hook if they stand by and let this happen.
by jopsen | 2026-02-28 21:29:40+00:00
> The point is preventing another North Korea style nuclear blackmail state.

You can bomb the leadership all day long.

Without boots on the ground the regime will probably continue.

I don't see how this stops Iran from building nukes. Sure they may have a temporary set back.

But do you think this will change their minds?

Can they even negotiate a resolution with the US. Given that the current administration won't honor its own agreements.

Did Trump issue an ultimatum here? And demand something?
by moogly | 2026-02-28 21:30:29+00:00
[T]he War Department will not be distracted by democracy building interventionism, undefined wars, regime change, climate change, woke moralizing and feckless nation building.

- Pete Hegseth, December 6, 2025[1]

[1]: https://www.war.gov/News/Speeches/Speech/Article/4354431/rem...
by reify | 2026-02-28 21:30:35+00:00
can I get some guidance please?

I've got a new form of ick.

its a terrible disease.

Its called agentick

a sudden feeling that you dislike someone or something or are no longer attracted to someone because of something they do:

"give someone the ick" I used to like Kevin, but when I saw him in that suit it gave me the ick.

Pet rats give me the ick. People talking about chatbots and ai give me the Ick.

"get the ick" If you suddenly get the ick, you don't have to act on it straight away and break up with the person.

If you suddenly feel repulsed by someone you're dating, that's the ick talking.

Icky, sticky vicky
by mpalmer | 2026-02-28 21:30:37+00:00
Looks moderately interesting, but I refuse to upvote vibe-written submissions. Of course documents like this have their uses, but:

- They cannot easily be attributed to a human author, and therefore debates and discussions on the substance of the ideas tend not to get too far

- They (tend to) take well-established concepts, glue them together, and describe the result in reverential tones, regardless of the relative triviality of the solution. Hard to rule that out here tbh.

I am not saying any of that is what's happening here. What I am saying is that I'm not going to waste my time reading something I can't easily vet for quality.

Author (not OP) has written plenty of its* own words on Bluesky over the last few weeks. If it's written anything longhand about this stuff I'd be interested to read it. But for now "anti-slop bias" designed into the system has not reached the prose.

*respecting pronouns
by Gander5739 | 2026-02-28 21:30:41+00:00
I think it's hard to say what sounds natural, and what is a stylistic flaw that is nevertheless natural to say. For instance in your comment you say

> for a long time before LLMs.

The double use of the sound "fore" (in "for" and "before") can sound jarring.

Similarly "This sort of" feels a bit off to me, though I'm not sure a could definitively say why. Maybe it's a bit of a garden-path sentence; it looks like the noun "sort" before becoming the adverb "sort of". Or maybe this is just some kind of peculiarity I've picked up and your writing is perfectly natural.
by spondyl | 2026-02-28 21:30:59+00:00
Oh neat, I had come across the headless client yesterday (and submitted a now-fixed bug report for it after running into some issues).

Before opening HN this morning and seeing this post, I actually wrote a post about how I'm experimentally using headless to publish my blog: https://utf9k.net/blog/obsidian-headless/

Well, that post was my experiment but I'll be looking forward to trying it out going forward.

There are of course many alternatives and I'm sure this workflow may have its pains but for now, it feels like a lot less friction between actually writing and having it published.

I've used plain Git for many years of course but I've also tried other rube goldberg machines such as various Git-inside-Obsidian plugins and so on but there's always just a bunch of "stuff" between writing and putting it online.
by timacles | 2026-02-28 21:32:05+00:00
the US is like a new born deer against battalion of ninjas when it comes to corruption.

Decades of believing we are blessed with some sort of perpetual exceptionalism has made the American people not only susceptible to corruption but actively unknowingly promote it. Propaganda has convinced them to invite it into their house and let it know where all your money is and your bank account information.
by gpt5 | 2026-02-28 21:32:07+00:00
You are relying on unreliable news sources, the strikes are incredibly precise. See the aerial photo of Khamenei's residence that was bombed [1]. You can see how the surrounding area remains surprisingly clean in face of the utter destruction in the middle.

https://www.reddit.com/r/war/comments/1rh2f41/the_residence_...
by Supernaut | 2026-02-28 21:32:42+00:00
Sure, I get that. I was just aiming for comic effect in pointing out that the player's initial reward for having made it through all the levels of a very difficult game is "lol, do it again".

I did work my way through it a second time to see the "proper ending", and what's interesting is that I remember nothing about it. There's a moral in there, somewhere.
by coeneedell | 2026-02-28 21:33:21+00:00
I have the right not to sell poison to someone who I have reason to believe will use it to kill a third party. The idea of simply trusting the patron to be responsible makes sense when the patron is anonymous or a new contact. It’s generally good to assume good intentions in the absence of evidence, I think. If the government is not anonymous enough to get this treatment.
by cheema33 | 2026-02-28 21:33:48+00:00
> Everything about having a child seems burdensome and hard. Turns out it's doesn't feel anything like that and I can't think of anything I'd rather be doing.

You got lucky and had kid(s) that were not extremely difficult to raise. Not everybody gets that. Not all kids are alike. Some will make your life a living hell. It is a total crapshoot.

Also, not everybody enjoys parenting, even if they have easy kids. We are not all built the same.

I did get lucky and had relatively easy kids. I love them. But, I do not enjoy parenting.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-02-28 21:34:52+00:00
That's the devil in the details. Sam altman's insult upon injury, treating the public as idiots on top of being a collaborator. The answer to your question is the government decides what is legal, as in the executive branch, in the pentagon the commander in chief decides. So essentially, they can do whatever they want so long as they call it legal.

As I said in a sibling comment, mass surveillance cannot be considered legal in the US under any context. not even war, emergency, terrorism, nuclear strike, national security reasons, imminent danger to the public,etc.. targeted surveillance can, scoped surveillance of a group of people can, but not mass surveillance. In other words Sam Altman is saying "This thing can never be legal short of a constitutional amendment, but so long as trump says it is, we'll look the other way".

What a two-faced <things i can't say on HN> this guy is!

I really hope Google poaches all his top engineers. If any of you are reading this, I ask you this, I get working for money, but will Google or Anthropic offer you all that much less? Consider the difference in pay when you put a price on your conscious.
by jstummbillig | 2026-02-28 21:34:56+00:00
> Trump can tell the pentagon "everyone in minnesota is a potential insurrectionist, do mass surveillance on them under the patriot act and the insurrection act".

This is just incoherent. You can't have US companies fix an unhinged US government.

If the government runs wild, there are some serious questions to be asked at a state level, about how that could happen, how to fix it quickly and how to prevent it in the future – but I should hope none of them concern themselves with the ideas of individual company owners, because if the government can de fact do what it wants regardless of legality the next thing that this government does could simply be pointing increasingly non-metaphorical guns at individual AI company functionaries.
by reichenstein | 2026-02-28 21:35:03+00:00
What slop engine integration? There is no slop engine integration. We do the very opposite. We separate between human and machine generated text, we are so careful about making sure that people know what they wrote and what they didn't that even make sure that you see when you spellchecked something with the help of Apple Intelligence. There's nothing to fuck or get angry about AFAIK, and I'm responsible for it.
by twobitshifter | 2026-02-28 21:35:32+00:00
Even if the autonomous weapon systems ‘perform as intended’, this does not in any way mean that they are not an enormous danger.

Secondly, as that is department policy and not a law or regulation, they appear to be saying that the cited directive is presently the only thing standing between the DOD and the use of autonomous weapons.

If that’s the case how hard is it to change or alter a directive?
Ask HN: Article to share with a technical manager about modern AI coding tools?
by killmill | 2026-02-28 21:35:38+00:00
I’m on an IT team, and my manager uses ChatGPT’s chat interface for some tasks, (IAC) so he’s generally aware of AI.

However, he’s not familiar with more advanced tools like Claude Code, Codex, or other development tools.

I’m looking for a, balanced article that explains:

What these tools can realistically do today

Where they still struggle or fall short

Any recommendations?
by kelseyfrog | 2026-02-28 21:36:34+00:00
On the hook for what?

The current US government has a fundamentally different ontology for the derivation of human rights.

Wheras you and I likely agree that human rights are inalienable due to them being derived from the universe nature of human experience, the administration believes that human rights begin and end with them, the state. When they're the one able to affect the world with violence, it doesn't matter who's on the hook. The US electorate thought they could heal a status wound by authoritarianism instead of therapy and everyone else is paying the price.
by metaPushkin | 2026-02-28 21:37:03+00:00
I am fully in favor of common sense, meritocracy, and do not associate myself with any parties. But this article is pure propaganda and brainwashing. And to be fair, an article like this, if it were of a right-wing nature, would have long been banned. Which once again shows us the truth that everyone's minds are actively being washed with a certain ideology.
by Waterluvian | 2026-02-28 21:37:10+00:00
These communications offend me because they treat the audience like they’re stupid, stupid, stupid.

But I imagine that being honest about your corporate identity is suboptimal. It’s probably an important cognitive dissonance tool for the employees? It’s like when autocracies repeat big obvious lies endlessly. Gives those who want to opt out of reality an option.
by einpoklum | 2026-02-28 21:37:20+00:00
Do we really need to read the text of a statement entitled "Our agreement with the department of war"? If it weren't the US, it would still be something that any person of moral character would never get in the position to write.

And it _is_ the US department of war - just now entered into yet another war of aggression against Iran, with no cause nor legal basis (not even domestic IIANM), in and endless list of wars, direct and indirect. With another crown jewel being the support, funding and arming for the still-unhalted genocide in Gaza.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-02-28 21:37:39+00:00
Maybe I'm misunderstanding but are you taking the gov's side? Anthropic's standard was the constitutions. The executive branch has no authorization under US law to perform surveillance of any kind on its own. OpenAI will now be breaking US law, Anthropic simply decided to obey US law.

The US government can update its laws and come back to Anthropic, or do what they just did
by lkey | 2026-02-28 21:37:43+00:00
The United States Military, in its official capacity, has been performing illegal, extrajudicial assassinations of civilians in international waters for months now.

We have been sharing technology and weapons with Israel while it prosecutes a genocide in contravention of both US and International law.

We are currently prosecuting a war on Iran that is illegal under both US and International law.

Any aid given to such a force is to underwrite that lawlessness and it shows a reckless disregard for the very notion of a 'nation of laws'.

When OpenAI says, 'The Military can do what is legal', full in the knowledge that this military has no interest in even pretextual legality, one has to wonder why you hold that you 'agree with' both of these decisions.

Do you believe the flimsiest of lies in other aspects of your life?
by testdelacc1 | 2026-02-28 21:37:52+00:00
Here’s hoping they feel the war in Moscow and St Petersburg this year. A bit of rationing wouldn’t hurt them.

More than the war, they’ll feel the peace. More than 100% of the economic growth of the last few years has gone into war production, meaning the civilian economy has shrunk. When the weapons factories are scaled back the economy is going to hurt something fierce. Even Muscovites will notice.

This is why Putin can’t stop fighting. When the fighting stops Russia will face a reckoning. Better to postpone that day hoping that Europe runs out of steam.
by kumardeepanshu | 2026-02-28 21:38:13+00:00
happy to answer any questions here.

a few things people usually ask:

- yes it handles plain text, HTML, and subject line extraction. the parser picks the most likely OTP code across all three so you're not locked to a specific email format

- you can pass a `from` filter to only match emails from a specific sender domain, which helps avoid picking up the wrong code if your agent has multiple services sending to the same inbox

- the long-polling approach means your agent just blocks on one call instead of polling. no webhook server to maintain, no correlation logic to wire up

also wanted to mention - OTP/2FA is just the first thing we're solving. we're building out bulk email sending and marketing email support as well, so agents can do the full email loop: receive OTPs, send outreach at scale, run campaigns. the goal is to be the complete email layer for AI agents.

if you're running agents at scale and hitting edge cases, would love to hear what you're running into.
by Nevermark | 2026-02-28 21:38:30+00:00
> I'll even say this, the US military itself is on the hook if they stand by and let this happen.

That would most definitely not be the Constitutional recourse. Or a sensible approach. If that happens, the Constitution is past tense.

Congress and the Supreme Court are the recourse. If they don't hold up the Constitution then violence or even a non-violent military coup, however well intended, are not going to put the splattered egg back together again.

The last two and a half decades have seen all four presidents, congress, the Supreme Court and both parties allow blatantly unconstitutional surveillance become the norm (evolving an adaptive fig leaf of intermediaries), and presidential military actions entirely blur out the required Congressional oversight. That the weakening of loyalty to the Constitution has been pervasive on those serious counts, is one of the reasons it has been so easy to undermine further.

When governing bodies become familiar with the convenient practice of "deciding" what the constitution means, without repercussions, that lost respect becomes very hard to reinstate.
by einpoklum | 2026-02-28 21:39:05+00:00
> The only power you have is to quit.

Employees often have the power to oust the owner and take over the company; and more often than that have the power to have business grind to a halt. It does take a strong union and a culture of solidarity and sticking together of course, which I doubt we would find in a place like OpenAI.
by BobBagwill | 2026-02-28 21:39:38+00:00
The idea that hardware costs matter most is idiotic^H^H^H^H^H^H^H silly. If you are buying a car, it matters, somewhat. If you are riding in a taxi or leasing a car, you are paying for a service. When you go to a restaurant, is their profitability predicated on how much they payed for their ovens?

LIDAR costs $1000, whoops $100, whoops $10, whoops it's on a chip module that costs a tenth of a cent. Building your business model on hardware NOT getting cheaper seems silly. Sure, software is cheap and getting cheaper, but

Sorry, I have to say it: "It's a service, stupid!"
by laughing_man | 2026-02-28 21:40:29+00:00
>You can do the core functionality of your product as cross platform, to some extend, but once you hit the interaction with the OS and especially the UI libraries of the OS, I think you'd get better software if you just accept that you'll need to write multiple application.

Or you can use a VM, which is essentially what a modern browser is anyway. I wrote and maintained a Java app for many years with seamless cross platform development. The browser is the right architecture. It's the implementation that's painful, mostly for historical reasons.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-02-28 21:40:59+00:00
It's a bit worse, because in the case of mass surveillance, they can't just make their own law, they need to make that law and have 2/3rds of US states sign off on a constitutional amendment.

Aiding someone while you know they're trying to break the law is conspiracy to break the law. OpenAI is culpable. You can't sue the government in many cases, but you can with OpenAI.
by NewsaHackO | 2026-02-28 21:41:01+00:00
>And your assumption is wrong on another level. The Agent SDK specifically exists so that you can write your own harness and give it custom tools - that's its entire purpose. It's even documented in their custom tools guide [1].

Yea, you don't seem to even understand what you are writing. This in no way contradicts any statement I or Anthopic has said.

>Neither tab says anything remotely like "if a third-party app prompts the Agent SDK and uses the output for tool calls, that's not allowed." You entirely fabricated this from the comparisons.

From: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agent-sdk/overview#agent...

>The Anthropic Client SDK gives you direct API access: you send prompts and implement tool execution yourself. The Agent SDK gives you Claude with built-in tool execution.

>With the Client SDK, you implement a tool loop. With the Agent SDK, Claude handles it:

Python

# Client SDK: You implement the tool loop
response = client.messages.create(...)
while response.stop_reason == "tool_use":
result = your_tool_executor(response.tool_use)
response = client.messages.create(tool_result=result, \*params)

# Agent SDK: Claude handles tools autonomously
async for message in query(prompt="Fix the bug in auth.py"):
print(message)

At this point, it's clear that you either have questionable reading comprehension skills, are being willfully ignorant, or are arguing in bad faith because it even says that tool calls outside of the Agent SDK harness has to use the Client SDK as the comments to the code used in the examples.