MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by vel0city | 2026-02-22 21:34:11+00:00
> I did not move goal posts at all.

And yet here you are, moving the goal posts again.

> using a Supreme Court decision that is related to domestic matter as evidence of sowing discord and weakening of Europe is ridiculous.

The statement "to promote racist and fringe-right view" is a separate concept you just continue to choose to ignore. Adding it as a requirement when it wasn't is precisely the definition of moving the goalposts. Painting that statement as having a foreign requirement isn't arguing in good faith, especially after this gets pointed out multiple times.

I'm glad I didn't bother wasting my time providing you with more evidence. It wouldn't have made any difference to you. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

> this court decision does not prove it at all

This court decision tells the administration feel free to use race as much as you want to harass people even if there's zero other signals they might not have legal status. Once again, if you can't see the racist enablement of this decision you're choosing to be blind to it.

> But politics today are like this, and you won't find a politician who does not do it.

I can absolutely find politicians that don't call black people monkeys and claiming foreigners are eating your pets. It's really not that hard. It's sad you seem to think that's normal. You might want to re-evaluate who you support if you think they all do this stuff.
by bigyabai | 2026-02-22 21:35:04+00:00
No, I see no reason to give AI-generated articles a second of my time. Wikipedia's best feature is the human-provided citations; you can very easily validate a claim with a hardlink to a book, article or video archive.

AI does not have the skillset or the tools required to match Wikipedia's quality. It can definitely create it's own edit process, but it's a useless one for people like me that don't treat the internet as a ground-truth.
by AnimalMuppet | 2026-02-22 21:35:10+00:00
Well, it certainly allows and enables the spread of misinformation.

That is, what's blocked? Things that people consider misinformation. Some of it really is, and some of it is just stuff that's politically unpopular with the powers that be (which they're also going to label misinformation). And then some of it falls afoul of various copyright laws or other such.

But certainly real misinformation is a significant chunk of that. The proxy enables that misinformation (and disinformation) to bypass the censorship/blocking. So in that sense, yes, it spreads misinformation.
by netsharc | 2026-02-22 21:35:34+00:00
The coding assistant for VSCode is nuts (i.e. gets it wrong a lot, also one time it just got so confused).

I have Gemini Pro for free for a year because I bought a Pixel phone, it answers very fast, so I like it. Let's see how I'll feel about shelling out real money when the subscription ends. But on the phone, I still use Assistant (and just have a shortcut to launch the webpage in my browser), because the phone was forcing Gemini, but after 5 minutes of usage I found it was slower for my usages (usually I just tell it to set an alarm and add a reminder/calendar event), and when I asked about my tasks, Gemini would get the task listing from Google Tasks, and keep it in its history... that'll pollute my chat history!
by logicprog | 2026-02-22 21:35:39+00:00
Re productivity: the METR study is seriously flawed overall, and:

1. if you disaggregate the highly aggregated data, it shows that the slowdown was highly dependent on task type, and tasks that required using documentation or novel tasks were possibly sped up, whereas ones the developers were very experienced with were slowed down, which actually matched the developers' own reports

2. developers were asked to estimate time beforehand per-task, but estimate whether they were sped up or slowed down only once, afterwards, so you're not really measuring the same thing

3. There were no rules about which AI to use, how to use it, or how much to use it, so it's hard to draw a clear conclusion

4. Most participants didn't have much experience with the AI tools they used (just prompting chatbots), and the one that did had a big productivity boost

5. It isn't an RCT.

See [1] for all.

The Anthropic study was using a task far too short to really measure productivity (30 mins), and furthermore the AI users were using chatbots, and spent the vast majority of their time manually retyping AI outputs, and if you ignore that time, AI users were 25% faster[2], so the study was not a good study to judge productivity, and the way people quote it is deeply misleading.

Re learning: the Anthropic study shows that how you use AI massively changes whether you learn and how well you learn; some of the best scoring subjects in that study were ones who had the AI do the work for them, but then explain it afterward[3].

[1]: https://www.fightforthehuman.com/are-developers-slowed-down-...
[2]: https://www.seangoedecke.com/how-does-ai-impact-skill-format...
[3]: https://www.anthropic.com/research/AI-assistance-coding-skil...
by grishka | 2026-02-22 21:35:42+00:00
I want my posts universally-readable and universally-interactable (that's why I don't like the idea of locking my accounts). I also want to be able to explore the social graph — looking at who follows who, what that friend of a friend posts, etc. It all forms an integral part of what social networks are.

What I absolutely do not want is the platform having any of its own agency. I want a social network that ideally works as a dumb pipe. I especially don't want my content surfaced in front of the kinds of people who would've never found it through their own exploration.

It should come as no surprise, then, that I have a lot of faith in the fediverse.
by throawayonthe | 2026-02-22 21:36:48+00:00
Definitely true that the battery life is not at all inherent to arm, but "Once you're compiling a bunch of stuff the battery performance tanks and seems just like any other notebook computer" is not that true i think, apple silicon is still fairly power efficient even at full throttle compared to most x86 chips (though again yes the latest mobile amd chips are catching up)
by sowbug | 2026-02-22 21:37:19+00:00
Yes and no. It was approved under the California state rules fast-tracking ADUs, but the thing I bought didn't have plumbing or sewer. Had I known I would be in for that much time and money, I'd have chosen something with a bathroom, so that it could have someday been an in-law unit. This is just an office or studio.
by Niko901ch | 2026-02-22 21:37:45+00:00
This is a great practical application of pgvector! The HN corpus is perfect for semantic search because the discussions tend to be technical and well-structured.

I'm curious about the embedding model you chose - did you compare different options (OpenAI ada-002, Cohere, open-source models like all-MiniLM)? And how's the query performance with pgvector at scale?

One feature that would be valuable: filtering by time range or karma score. Sometimes you want recent discussions vs. classic threads with high engagement.
by Steinmark | 2026-02-22 21:37:48+00:00
If $x_{T+1}=$|mathbb(E){stitch^\top
gauge^(-1)stitch]$.
Lemma - The system still runs,because $pattern$ is stable ($||pattern<1$) the system remains bounded (The app doesn't crash yet) Multi-modal $NEWT decouple real time rendering (60 fps) from AI computation(<100ms) and network calls (Async latency to 5ms stitch count makes sense). The dominant eigenvector in the latent coupling.
by cmrdporcupine | 2026-02-22 21:38:16+00:00
The Anglo-Saxons were not Germans, and their language was not a "German" language.

It was Germanic, derived from a common ancestor with German but absolutely distinct separate lineage and your weird ethonationalist quasi-fascist soup of of thoughts here and below is both factually incorrect and incoherent.

Actual scholars of Germanic languages don't share your bizarre biases.
by rvnx | 2026-02-22 21:39:04+00:00
I'm totally on your side that ASML, Airbus and a couple of pharmaceutical companies are great innovators and very special (in a positive way) companies in this world.

But still, this is where I slightly disagree, because I feel the more regulation, the less innovation is possible.

Here just feeling frustrated when I see that freedom.gov getting censorship of that overall tendency to regulate, rather than to actively promote freedom of entrepreneurship, of expression, of thinking out-of-the-box etc, and this freedom.gov thing is just a symptom of that whole system.
by stewartjarod | 2026-02-22 21:39:13+00:00
ESLint is pass/fail. Every pattern is either an error everywhere or ignored entirely. This makes it useless for the most common real-world scenario: you have hundreds of occurrences of something you want to get rid of, but you can't fix them all at once.

Baseline introduces ratcheting. You set a ceiling on how many times a pattern can appear across your codebase. You migrate some, lower the ceiling. CI blocks any PR that increases the count. The number only goes down.

```toml
[[rule]]
type = "ratchet"
pattern = "legacyFetch("
max_count = 200
```

Next sprint: 180. Then 150. Eventually 0. This one concept has been the most useful thing in the tool for me -- I've used it to drive migrations on large codebases where the alternative was "ignore the lint rule on 200 files and hope for the best."

Other things it does that ESLint can't:
- Path-scoped pattern bans. "no db. in app/*/page.tsx" is one line of TOML.
- Dependency bans on package.json, not just source imports.
- Proximity rules. "every DELETE needs an orgId within 80 lines."
- File presence. Require LICENSE, forbid .env.
- Tailwind dark mode + semantic token enforcement.

Rust, single binary, tree-sitter for AST rules, rayon for parallel scanning. TOML config, 8 presets, also runs as an MCP server so AI tools can query the rules.

On crates.io and npm (`npx code-baseline scan`). MIT.

Inspired by Matt Holden's guardrail coding concept [1].

[1]: https://www.fuzzycomputer.com/posts/guardrail-coding
by Jenk | 2026-02-22 21:39:31+00:00
Since using jj I'm on the lookout for some kind of setting that will exclude the .jj folder from the repo _and_ any operation including git clean, without having to add it to the repo. I.e., make it completely invisible to git including `git clean -xdf`!

At the moment I'm making do with aliasing `git clean -e .jj`
by mpweiher | 2026-02-22 21:40:47+00:00
Dunno, my calendar reminds me "out of the blue", without me having to initiate a conversation, that it's time to leave for the gym, no "claw" or "ai" involved.

I always have my backpack with me, so if I need milk I can pick it up on the way back. And I am pretty sure that I have to notice if I need milk myself.

The tech sounds cool, but whenever I hear about actual applications, I don't see the point.
by jasonhansel | 2026-02-22 21:41:01+00:00
More importantly, it avoids the issue where every new editor requires an addition to every repository's gitignore file (.idea, .vscode, etc).

IMO, it's best to keep things that are "your fault" (e.g. produced by your editor or OS) in your global gitignore, and only put things that are "the repository's fault" (e.g. build artifacts, test coverage reports) in the repository's gitignore file.
by crote | 2026-02-22 21:41:04+00:00
> A quick Google suggests that a regular 120v US outlet might charge EVs at a rate somewhere in the range of 3 to 5 miles per hour. So a dozen or so hours sitting, plugged in at home every day, is enough to cover most folks' every-day driving.

And this gets significantly better once you start using 240v sockets - like the US is already using for dryers. Got a dryer in your garage? Guess what, you are only a weekend project away from having an overnight EV charger in your garage!
by gwbas1c | 2026-02-22 21:41:14+00:00
I'd like to point out that these systems had modems answering the phone and allowing access without any authentication. The sanitized story of the airport was used as a warning to why computers on the open internet need passwords at the Boston Microsoft Security Summit in 2004.

They didn't tell me about the pharmacy! Remember, these were teenagers who were curious (and naive to the implications of their actions.)

In the case of the airport, they didn't know it was an airport or even what kind of system they were in. What happened was that one of them found a reboot command, and ran it, not knowing the consequences. (Remember, when a computer controls a "thing," there is often a complicated startup procedure when it reboots.)

So don't just blame foolish kids; whoever thought it was a good idea to allow modem access to an air traffic control program without a password was the bigger fool. I had stronger security on my dial-up BBS than an airport.
by dangus | 2026-02-22 21:41:19+00:00
To use the analogy of other vice industries like gambling or alcohol, would you rather buy those products from shady unregulated vendors or more transparent regulated entities?

That’s the type of analogy we might make in this case.

Obviously many people (literally billions) like this format and use it in relative moderation to unwind and kill time. Hell, I’ve even gotten productive helpful information out of the format on occasion.

It’s also taken a critical role in journalism and current events.

Unless you’re advocating prohibition, the cat is out of the bag.

Being able to find a short form video alternative that isn’t owned by commercial/government interests is a positive thing.
by umairnadeem123 | 2026-02-22 21:41:41+00:00
the real issue isn't whether AI writes the code -- it's whether you treat the output as a first draft or a final product.

i run multi-pass generation for everything now. first pass gets the structure, second pass refines, third pass i actually read and edit. it's basically a diffusion process for code. one-shotting complex logic with an LLM almost always produces something subtly wrong.

also learned the hard way that using the best frontier model matters way more than clever prompting. paying 10x more for opus over a cheaper model saves me hours of debugging garbage output. the "write-only" framing misses this -- it's not that you never read the code, it's that the reading/editing ratio has flipped.
by spijdar | 2026-02-22 21:41:55+00:00
"Nonsense" is a strong word ;-)

Here's a contrarian-squared take: in reality, the question "Is macOS a BSD" is malformed. It makes some sens, but is more confusing than it's worth.

Yes, NeXT was built on Mach, which was itself basically an evolution of the Accent microkernel married with BSD, when BSD was a proper noun.

In fact, NextStep 0.8, the first public "pre-release", has left support in for A.OUT executables. The included ex and vi binaries are indeed A.OUT executables taken straight from BSD! In the very next release, support for A.OUT was removed, leaving only the Mach-O loader.

XNU is not derived from the Mach that NeXT was, though, but from the OSF Mach kernel, which was continued at the University of Utah. The BSD "bits" were selectively copied from the extent continuations of BSD, or rewritten from scratch. The XNU kernel doesn't strongly resemble any particular *BSD tree, to my knowledge.

Darwin's origins are messier, since it looks like it was a direct continuation of the existing NeXT packaging (but only Apple would know for sure). NeXT, very much unlike BSD, split its userland into distinct packages, which were versioned independently. This practice has carried on to this day, where e.g. Darwin's libc is packaged and versioned separately from the kernel and other utilities.

For that matter, for a very brief period of history, Darwin used Debian's dpkg for building and installing packages. Evidence of this stayed until OS X 10.4-ish, in the Darwin releases, but they returned to NeXT style BOM files for package management.

All that to say, does NeXT/macOS have a BSD-like userland? Yes, but so does Chimera Linux. Does the kernel resemble BSD? In some ways yes, but in many ways no, it's very semantically different.

And is it descendant from BSD? Again, "yes", but it also doesn't really "come" directly from BSD anymore than, say, OSF/1 did. There's no specific BSD it forked from, and no specific point at which it ever really looked like BSD, in terms of userland, packaging, or kernel semantics.

So I think the question just doesn't make much sense to ask.
by martin-t | 2026-02-22 21:42:13+00:00
On the contrary, target is a neutral word, justifying the violence against a target is exactly as difficult as it should be - based on the circumstances instead of emotions.

Victim already implies wrongdoing so it makes justifying just violence harder than it should be.

For the record, i often use target instead of victim when talking about harassment, bullying, rape, etc. because it also doesn't imply surrender to the aggressor or lack of agency.
by umairnadeem123 | 2026-02-22 21:42:37+00:00
biggest lesson i learned here: all-in-one tools that promise to handle your whole workflow are almost always worse than stitching purpose-built ones together.

i tried every no-code automation platform (make, airtable, n8n) for a content pipeline i was building. they all break the moment you need to run it more than twice a day at any real scale. weird rate limits, silent failures, state management nightmares.

ended up just writing python scripts that call APIs directly. less "elegant" but infinitely more debuggable. the fix-your-tools moment for me was realizing the tool itself was the problem -- sometimes fixing means replacing with something simpler and more transparent.
by omoikane | 2026-02-22 21:42:42+00:00
I remember when everything was "machine learning" as opposed to the current LLM stuff. Some of the machine learning techniques involve training and using models that are more or less opaque, and nobody looked at what was inside those models because you can't understand them anyway.

Once LLM generated code becomes large enough that it's infeasible to review, it will feel just like those machine learning models. But this time around, instead of trying to convince other people who were downstream of the machine learning output, we are trying to convince ourselves that "yes we don't fully understand it, but don't worry it's statistically correct most of the time".
by umairnadeem123 | 2026-02-22 21:43:19+00:00
the opus 4.6 "found it and talked itself out of it" pattern is something i see constantly in my own work with these models. the best ones are smart enough to identify the signal but also smart enough to rationalize it away.

this is why human oversight in the loop matters so much even when using frontier models. the model is a hypothesis generator, not the decision maker. i've found the same thing building content pipelines -- the expensive models (opus 4.6 etc) genuinely produce better first-pass output, but you still can't trust them end to end. the moment you remove human review the quality craters in subtle ways you only notice later.

the multi-agent approach someone mentioned above (one model flags, another validates) is interesting but adds complexity. simpler to just have the human be the validation layer.
by dang | 2026-02-22 21:43:22+00:00
> I think it's critically important people figure out what they want to learn from what's being shared.

> What do you need from submitters here? Even setting aside the burden of supplying it, what do you hope to learn?

I appreciate your comments on this - they are the most interesting responses I've seen so far about this question (so I hope the meta stuff doesn't get too much in the way).

The hope is to make the submissions of AI-generated Show HNs more interesting than they are when someone submits just a repo with generated code and a generated README.

The question is what could, at least in principle, be supplied that could have this desired effect.
by lysace | 2026-02-22 21:43:30+00:00
It's really convenient when you have a TV in front of your bed. :)

I use https://apps.apple.com/us/app/readder-for-reddit/id104357580... surprisingly often. It's got this simplistic web browser (uses something like Readability and allows for following links inside and outside of reddit). It can also play youtube links via the Youtube app and direct video links inline. Last updated five years ago and still mostly works.
by thisislife2 | 2026-02-22 21:43:38+00:00
Bangladesh hasn't become a "democracy" in any manner. Remember that a whole host of leaders were arrested, and the most popular political party banned from participating in the recent elections! You can claim that if they were popular there wouldn't have been any "revolutions" when they were ruling. But note that this is a country that has struggled with violence throughout its history, has seen many military coups, and struggled to be a democracy. If they weren't popular, why were these so-called revolutionaries so hell-bent in not allowing them to participate in the "first free and fair" elections organised by them? You don't become a democracy by deliberately excluding a political party that was instrumental in the founding of Bangladesh, and is supported by half the country - that's how you weaken your country's unity and lay the grounds for a civil war.
by smartmic | 2026-02-22 21:44:05+00:00
> The role of the human engineer […] has been to reduce risk in the face of ambiguity, constraints, and change. That responsibility not only endures in a world of Write-Only Code, if anything it expands.

> The next generation of software engineering excellence will be defined not by how well we review the code we ship, but by how well we design systems that remain correct, resilient, and accountable even when no human ever reads the code that runs in production.

As a mechanical engineer, I have learned how to design systems that meet your needs. Many tools are used in this process that you cannot audit by yourself. The industry has evolved to the point that there are many checks at every level, backed by standards, governing bodies, third parties, and so on. Trust is a major ingredient, but it is institutionalized. Our entire profession relies on the laws of physics and mathematics. In other words, we have a deterministic system where every step is understood and cast into trust in one way or another. The journey began with the Industrial Revolution and is never-ending; we are always learning and improving.

Given what I have learned and read about LLM-based technology, I don't think it's fit for the purpose you describe as a future goal. Technology breakthroughs will be evaluated retrospectively, and we are in the very early stages right now. Let's evaluate again in 20 years, but I doubt that "write-only code" without human understanding is the way forward for our civilization.
by simianwords | 2026-02-22 21:44:38+00:00
AI can help you in this case as evidenced by the chat I shared. I do suggest you use it and not keep trying to save face by dodging the question.

I ask you again, what edge case does there exist for an LLM that an LLM can't perform but a human can?

Without dodging the question or asking me sheepishly to ask an LLM, can you unambiguously answer the question with a single edge case?

If you still can't answer me with a single edge case that a human can do but an LLM can't (in text and limited context) then it is clear you are trying to save face.
by CharlesW | 2026-02-22 21:44:48+00:00
The problem with TikTok isn't the form, which is effectively StumbleUpon for short-form video (or Dave Winer's "river of news" in video form, if you prefer).

There's brainrot content on all platforms, but there's also ArtTok, BookTok, CraftTok, EduTok, FoodTok, GardenTok, HistoryTok, MathTok, MusicTok, PoliTok, ScienceTok, TechTok, and lots more.
by mrtksn | 2026-02-22 21:44:50+00:00
Videos from platforms like YouTube are taken down for copyright reasons all the time without any due process, often wrongfully.

The same thing happened but instead of some copyrights organization taking down YouTube/Twitter etc content, Italian copyrights organization blocked some Cloudflare IP addresses without due process for copyright reasons.

The implementations differ slightly but it is exactly the same thing.