MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hs86 | 2026-02-13 13:55:02+00:00
In the past few years, I’ve started to develop a form of “upgrade dread” when it comes to OS upgrades. What are they going to enshittify now? What are they going to drop support for now?

This somehow excluded Linux and its DEs, and I eagerly read any news, changelogs, and announcements in this space. They’re still not perfect in every aspect, but at least I see things improving instead of public turf wars between departments trying to improve their KPIs.

Why is there an extra URL handler for MS Edge that bypasses the default browser config? Why is the search bar this wide in the default taskbar config instead of showing a simple button? Why are local searches always sent to Bing with no easy way to switch it off or change the search provider?
by XCSme | 2026-02-13 13:55:15+00:00
Interesting angle. I’ve found those human vs bot scores are useful as a first pass, but sometimes they misclassify power users or weird edge cases.

When I built UXWizz[0], session recordings ended up being the clearest signal of real intent. Watching someone actually struggle through a form tells you way more than a score alone.

Have you thought about feeding behavior patterns back into the quality score? Feels like there’s a nice combo there.

PS: The linked page is quite cool, reminds me of 2005 internet and Piczo websites, lol

[0] https://www.uxwizz.com
by ufocia | 2026-02-13 13:56:19+00:00
> what do you prefer, the developers abandoning the project, or at least having the option of a paid-for version?

It's not a binary choice. I prefer the developers releasing the software under a permissive license. I agree that relying on freemium maintenance is naive. The community source lives on, perhaps the community should fork and run with it for the common good absorbing the real costs of maintenance.
by brazzy | 2026-02-13 13:56:59+00:00
"Extended ASCII" is just a sloppy term for a bunch of other encodings that are not, in fact, ASCII.

If your BASIC class used (or emulated) a C64 or compatible, you were using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETSCII and if it used MS-DOC you were using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codepage_437
Ask HN: How do you shut down misbehaving AI in production?
by nordic_lion | 2026-02-13 13:57:04+00:00
If you are running AI workloads/agents or LLM-backed systems in production, how do you actually shut one down when it starts behaving badly?

By “misbehaving” I mean things like:
-runaway spend
-latency issues
-prompt loops
-tool abuse or unexpected external calls
-data leakage risks
-cascading failures across downstream services

In most systems I’ve seen, there is good observability. You can see logs, traces, cost dashboards. But the actual shutdown mechanism often ends up being manual: disable a feature flag, revoke an API key, roll back a deployment, rate limit something upstream.

I am trying to understand what people are doing in practice.

-What is your actual kill mechanism?
-Is it bound to a model endpoint, an agent instance, a workflow, a Kubernetes workload, something else?
-Is shutdown automated under certain conditions, or always human-approved?
-What did you discover only after your first real incident?

Concrete examples would be extremely helpful.
by metalman | 2026-02-13 13:57:27+00:00
Whenever I am in NYC, I play a game called find the bullet hole , which is startlingly easy to do.
Taking the stairs in my uncles building it was clear that there had been a (or several) running gun battles up and down the stair well, and the spalling from small calliber rounds is just ignored and left, even in plate glass or store fronts.
Show HN: A zero-setup sandbox for testing Bitcoin Lightning payments
by getAlby | 2026-02-13 13:58:23+00:00
We built an open-source developer sandbox for experimenting with Bitcoin Lightning payments.

It gives you an instant preloaded test wallet and lets you try different payment scenarios right away — no signup, no configuration.

You can:
- trigger common payment flows
- copy/paste example prompts for coding agents
- drop ready-to-use code snippets into your own app

Once you’re ready to go live, you can switch to a real wallet without changing any code.

I’m around and would love feedback on what’s useful, confusing, or missing.
by aurareturn | 2026-02-13 13:58:32+00:00
The moment you point it at a real, existing codebase - even a small one - everything falls apart.

Not my experience. It excels in existing codebases too.

I often ask it "I have this bug. Why?" And it almost always figures it out and fixes it. Huge code base.

Codex user, not Claude Code.
by YeGoblynQueenne | 2026-02-13 13:59:07+00:00
Pay close attention to the wording: "The Waymo Driver ... remains in control of driving". That means it applies the controls needed to go from point A to point B on its own. However, it does not choose point A and point B on its own: a human chooses them. That's autonomous path planning, but not autonomous navigation, and certainly not "fully autonomous" anything.

Waymo prevaricates about the "influence" the human operator has on the path taken by the Waymo Driver [1] but it is clear there are situations that the Waymo Driver cannot choose point A and point B on its own, at least safely, otherwise Waymo would not be paying for humans to do it. They'd let the system do it on its own. It can't. It's not "fully autonomous".

We can play with words and accept whatever terminological obfuscation Waymo wants to impose in order to pimp its wares, or we can accept that current systems have limitations, and choose to understand the real SOTA over marketing.

_____________

[1] Fleet response can influence the Waymo Driver's path, whether indirectly through indicating lane closures, explicitly requesting the AV use a particular lane, or, in the most complex scenarios, explicitly proposing a path for the vehicle to consider idib.
by xtiansimon | 2026-02-13 14:00:47+00:00
> "An AI agent ... published a personalized hit piece about me ...raises serious concerns about..."

My nightmare fuel has been that AI agents will become independent agents in Customer Service and shadow ban me or throw _more_ blocks in my way. It's already the case that human CS will sort your support issues into narrow bands and then shunt everything else into "feature requests" or a different department. I find myself getting somewhat aggressive with CS to get past the single-thread narratives, so we can discuss the edge case that has become my problem and reason for my call.

But AI agents attacking me. That's a new fear unlocked.
by amelius | 2026-02-13 14:01:18+00:00
The main problem is that Apple wants to be opinionated. Linux is the polar opposite of that. People used to say the latter is bad, but it turns out the former is way worse (many hackers of course already knew this).

> Not quite at the point I'd recommend them for grandma and grandpa, but not that far off, either.

But at this point grandma and grandpa are the only ones I'd recommend to use Apple devices.
by 5o1ecist | 2026-02-13 14:01:24+00:00
That's not what the word "should" means, though.

"Should" is a lot closer to "better do it this way" than "you must do it this way". While "must" implies a mandatory-ness, "should" does not.

Or take it from perplexity:

"Must" normally expresses strong obligation/necessity: something is required, with little or no choice.

"Should" is softer and usually expresses recommendation, expectation, or what is right/appropriate, not a strict requirement.
by sheikhnbake | 2026-02-13 14:01:51+00:00
There's nothing to manipulate. The majority of the US electorate is politically and literally illiterate. That's why their voting patterns are based almost entirely on the current economic sentiment, not the media.

Biden denied a worsening economic situation for the average American, and the response was Trump winning the election.

Trump has made the economic situation even worse, and his support is tanking. Which is why republican candidates are currently losing in landslides and we're breaking protest records.
by trueismywork | 2026-02-13 14:02:24+00:00
China was an offender at the time yes. But even so, since 1980, when effects of climate change were first known, US has emitted 250Gt and China only 263 Gt, which in per capita terms places US at 690t/p and China at 185 t/p. This is despite China having one child policy since 1979 (which by the way has been heavily criticized by the US).

In all, the case for US being the real villain here keeps getting stronger and stronger.
by mrexcess | 2026-02-13 14:02:36+00:00
>The internet has and will always be about increasibg the signal te noise ratio for the user.

And my point is that the signal used to primarily originate from peer interactions, not broadcasting. Look at Usenet, AOL's structure, or Web 1.0. There's an inversion in the modern era, where broadcast messaging is perceived as the signal, and peer interactions the noise.
by tokai | 2026-02-13 14:02:52+00:00
I assume that you haven't read up because the modern concept of universal basic income was made by Friedman. You are so far off the mark laying it at the feet of marxism that I was actually holding back and treating you with more respect than you deserve when showing such an extreme lack of awareness of the concepts you are discussing.

I get you don't like marxism. But you come off like a parody when you have such shallow grasp on what it is. Most real life communist countries, it is a crime to be without work. As far as you can come from a basic income.
Show HN: I built a macOS app that toggles between extended/mirrord monitor setup
by vrn21 | 2026-02-13 14:03:12+00:00
When my external power connection to Monitor stops (due to some outage) Mac still extends it display. So I'd either need to unplug my hdmi or go change it to mirror from settings (which takes too much time tbh) to resume my work.

With this app I just hit Switch to Internal Only, keep working on my MacBook screen, and later click Restore Extended when everything is working again.
by dns_snek | 2026-02-13 14:03:26+00:00
It won't matter because they don't care. The masses don't concern themselves with theoretical threats even when they understand them on an intellectual level, they buy the emotional argument no matter how weak it is on technical merit.

To convince them otherwise, you need to offer a more compelling emotional argument, but politicians and lobbyist already tell them that they're going to get raped and killed in the street unless they support their agenda.

So what do you do? How do you come up with an emotional argument that's more compelling than that?
by ben_w | 2026-02-13 14:03:41+00:00
I think the cloning example is a good reference point here.

IIRC, human cloning started to get banned in response to the announcement of Dolly the sheep. To quote the wikipedia article:

Dolly was the only lamb that survived to adulthood from 277 attempts. Wilmut, who led the team that created Dolly, announced in 2007 that the nuclear transfer technique may never be sufficiently efficient for use in humans.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)

Yes, things got better eventually, but it took ages to not suck.

I absolutely expect all the first attempts at brain uploading to involve simulations whose simplifying approximations are equivalent to being high as a kite on almost all categories of mind altering substances at the same time, to a degree that wouldn't be compatible with life if it happened to your living brain.

The first efforts will likely be animal brains (perhaps that fruit fly which has already been scanned?), but given humans aren't yet all on board with questions like "do monkeys have a rich inner world?" and even with each other we get surprised and confused by each other's modes of thought, even when we scale up to monkeys, we won't actually be confident that the technique would really work on human minds.
by Arnt | 2026-02-13 14:03:55+00:00
If you read RFC 2119, you'll see that the definition of SHOULD includes the word must. Perhaps it's easier to understand if I rephrase it as: "If you understand the issue and its consequences, SHOULD means optional. If you don't, SHOULD is equivalent to MUST."

Message-ID has maybe half a dozen types of problem. If you know all of them, leaving it out is up to you.
by adrian_b | 2026-02-13 14:04:19+00:00
I do not think that it is correct to call that as "the most successful", when the only people in the entire world who have benefited from the attack have been Bush Junior and all his political or businessmen friends, and they have benefited tremendously, by gaining huge amounts of money from the wars and from internal US "security" activities and by ensuring the reelection.

If we assume that the purpose of the terror attack was the official one, it has not been successful for its initiators, but for those controlling USA.

If "successful" is intended to refer to the fact that 3 out of 4 airplanes have reached their target, I remember how I watched live the events and I was stupefied that the 2nd and the 3rd airplanes have hit their targets. For the 1st airplane, it was normal to be successful, as nobody expected that action. But for the following 2, I was familiar with air defenses from places that are supposed to be much less advanced than USA and there was plenty of time to find the airplanes and shoot them down. I could never understand why this did not happen and even more I could never understand why there has never been any credible US official explanation for why it did not happen (I mean the explanation that they could not find the airplanes because
they have turned off their transponders is not credible).
Show HN: Mac apps are signed in. Why make an AI authenticate too?
by spamsch | 2026-02-13 14:04:45+00:00
Hi HN, I built an open-source (MIT) AI agent for macOS that talks directly to Mail, Calendar, Reminders, Notes, and Safari through AppleScript — no OAuth flows, no API gateways, no passwords to store.

The premise is simple: your Mac apps are already signed in. Why should an AI assistant make you re-authenticate everything through a separate integration layer? Why do I need to create an Azure app to get an OAuth token for my Office 365 emails? Why do I need a Google PubSub setup?

I needed something that is very simple to setup for my family and friends and can do almost the same things they do daily on my Mac. And they do not need to enter passwords or other authentication. In the end it is another harness but one that we love to use.

On Telegram you can dictate things like "My mom sent me her vacation dates by email — add them to my calendar" and it chains the right tools: searches Mail, extracts the dates, creates the Calendar event.

What makes it different:

- *No credentials needed for Apple apps* — AppleScript talks to them directly, macOS Keychain handles auth
- *Runs fully offline* — use local models via Pico AI Server, or cloud providers (Anthropic, OpenAI, OpenRouter)
- *Desktop app with setup wizard* — not a CLI-only project; download a .dmg, follow the steps, done
- *Telegram as remote control* — text or voice-message the agent from your phone
- *Skills ecosystem* — extensible via drop-in SKILL.md files (compatible with AgentSkills/ClawHub)
- *Memory between sessions* — remembers your preferences and patterns in a local YAML file you can read/edit/delete

The agent is a ReAct loop in Python. Tools are auto-discovered from type hints. The desktop shell is Tauri (Svelte + Rust) with the Python agent bundled as a sidecar binary via PyInstaller.

I spent a lot of time on AppleScript performance — bulk-fetching with `whose` clauses instead of iterating messages one by one (each Apple Event has ~0.1-0.5s overhead, so naively reading a mailbox would take minutes).

All data stays on your Mac under `~/.macbot/`. Your prompts go to your chosen LLM provider; nothing else leaves the machine.

GitHub: https://github.com/spamsch/son-of-simon
Show HN: SatGate – Budget enforcement proxy for MCP tool calls (L402/macaroons)
by satgate | 2026-02-13 14:05:26+00:00
I built an open-source MCP proxy that enforces per-tool budgets on AI agent tool calls.

The problem: MCP gives agents tool access with no economic controls. An agent stuck in a retry loop against a $0.10/call API burns real money until someone kills it. Auth says "who" and "what" — nothing says "how much."

How it works: SatGate MCP Proxy sits between your agent and upstream MCP servers. Transparent relay — agents don't know it's there until they hit their budget.

Agent → SatGate MCP Proxy → Upstream MCP Server
tools/call intercepted → cost: 50 credits (dalle_generate) → budget: 35 remaining → JSON-RPC error: budget_exhausted

Per-tool costs with wildcard matching (web_search: 5, gpt4_*: 25, dalle_generate: 50).

Delegation: Parent agents can mint sub-agent tokens with carved budgets. Enforced cryptographically via macaroon HMAC chains — no DB lookup, microsecond verification.

Orchestrator (1000 credits)
├── research-agent (300) → 60 calls → 402 EXHAUSTED
├── content-agent (200) → still operational
└── analytics-agent (150) → still operational

Budget isolation is real — when research-agent hits 0, siblings and parent are unaffected.

Two payment modes:
- Fiat402: Credit-based budgets with delegation trees (enterprise)
- L402: Lightning micropayments per tool call. Agent pays invoice, gets preimage, retries.

Transport: stdio (local sidecar) or SSE/HTTP (remote, multi-agent). Written in Go. 28 tests. ~2,200 lines.

GitHub: https://github.com/SatGate-io/satgate
Blog: https://satgate.io/blog/beyond-connection-economic-governanc...
by aurareturn | 2026-02-13 14:06:25+00:00
No, OP said he used the Max Opus 4.6.

Anyways, I think one area where Codex and Claude Code falls short is that they do not test the changes they made by using the app.

In this case, the LLM should ideally render the page in a real browser, and actually click on the buttons to verify. Best if the LLM test it before the changes, and then after so that it is the same. Maybe it should take a screenshot of before the change, then take a screenshot after. And match.

I asked why Codex and Claude don't do this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46792066
by netdevphoenix | 2026-02-13 14:06:54+00:00
> Not my experience. It excels in existing codebases too.

Why don't you prove it?

1. Find an old large codebase in codeberg (avoiding the octopus for obvious reasons)

2. Video stream the session and make the LLM convo public

3. Ask your LLM to remove jQuery from the db and submit regular commits to a public remote branch

Then we will be able to judge if the evidence stands
by lxgr | 2026-02-13 14:07:09+00:00
> Copying a consciousness is about the most extreme violation of bodily autonomy possible.

Who's autonomy is violated? Even if it were theoretically possible, don't most problems stem from how the clone is treated, not just from the mere fact that they exist?

> It's worse than e.g. building nuclear weapons, because there's no possible non-evil use for it.

This position seems effectively indistinguishable from antinatalism.
by ToucanLoucan | 2026-02-13 14:07:10+00:00
> Re: your edit... Who are you responding to??

Preemptively, the exact sort of "BUT BIDEN BAD" horseshit occurring elsewhere in the thread. And again, yes, Biden bad. Biden is an inept old man who was far out of his depth, who failed, completely, to hold anyone accountable for the atrocity against the Republic that was January 6th. But again, he, and to be sure, the Democrats as a whole, failed that, and whilst that is true, the other side is currently ushering in the end of American global influence and they're going to make it so no American citizen will EVER be able to own ANYTHING EVER AGAIN. So I am simply not entertaining this "both sides" horseshit anymore.

Both sides DO have problems. One has distinctly WAY more fucking problems, and also, WAY more fucking power. If pointing out this obvious fucking reality makes me partisan, or biased, whatever. Partisan I am.

If I'm to be marched into a meat grinder I at least reserve the right to tell the people doing it to me they fucking suck.
by codyb | 2026-02-13 14:07:38+00:00
But if everyone acted like Stallman then solutions that have gone away such as public payphones would come back due to their requirement.

He doesn't give a crap if a random phone record of his appears in a random haystack, and that's kind of the point isn't it? It's the aggregated, crawlable stores that are the threat

There may be other issues with Stallman, but that behavior doesn't strike me as particularly inconsistent
by pfdietz | 2026-02-13 14:08:03+00:00
Sure, but one still has a savings if one goes to heavier noble gas elements over the lighter ones. The noble gases are used because they don't contaminate spacecraft surfaces.

About the only place I can think of in a plasma engine where you'd want to use light elements is if the engine is thermal: making a confined plasma, heating it to very high temperature, then expanding it through a magnetic nozzle. There, you'd want to use hydrogen to minimize radiative losses from the hot plasma, especially vs. using a plasma containing partially ionized atoms of higher atomic number elements; these can radiate fiercely.
by manuelmoreale | 2026-02-13 14:08:10+00:00
> I often zone out as soon as I expect I'm reading slop and that's the reason try to ensure my own writing isn't slop adjacent.

And how is this a problem someone else has to address? Some people zone out when they see a text is too long: are we supposed to only publish short form then? I have 10 years of writing on my site, if someone in 2026 sees my use of em dashes and suddenly starts thinking that my content is AI generated that's their problem, not mine.

Too many people are willingly bending to adapt to what AI companies are doing. I'm personally not gonna do it. Because again, now it's em dashes, tomorrow it could be a set of words, or a way to structure text. I say fuck that.
by coldcode | 2026-02-13 14:08:57+00:00
For any AI post, there seems like that one person for whom it worked great, and a whole lot where it didn't. Your mileage may vary...

Some things AI does well, many things it may be not worth the effort entailed, and some where it downright sucks and may even be harmful. The question is will it ever change the curve to where it is useful most of the time?
by Ray20 | 2026-02-13 14:09:04+00:00
> wealth gap disparity has only gotten worse for Gen X, Millenials, and Gen Z

And how much do they make? $35 an hour? Okay, let's even go very safe and go with a large margin, say they make $30 an hour. And compare that to LESS THAN $2 an hour, which is what 90% of the rest of the world makes. That's still a difference of MORE THAN 15 times. You can't argue with math.

> The primary beneficiaries are the rich.

No, that's bs. The main beneficiaries are the American working class. They YEARLY have more income than American billionaires accumulated over generations. They elected Trump. Twice.

Meanwhile, 90% of workers worldwide earn less than $2 an hour.

And how many Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z have given up most of their tens of dollars hourly salaries for the benefit of the world's workers, earning less than two dollars an hour? Zero!
by imtringued | 2026-02-13 14:09:13+00:00
This is definitely the case because the accusations and supposed social contract seem extremely one-sided towards free riding.

Nobody here is saying they should donate the last version of MinIO to the Apache software foundation under the Apache license. Nobody is arguing for a formalized "end of life" exit strategy for company oriented open source software or implying that such a strategy was promised and then betrayed.

The demand is always "keep doing work for me for free".