MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ndsipa_pomu | 2026-02-15 10:26:48+00:00
For some reason, I didn't watch DS9 at the time, though I've watched all the other Treks and am a big fan - must have been shown at the wrong time for me or something. However, DS9 only had the dominion arc in the last three seasons, so I'm definitely in the B5 was first camp.

What I find fascinating is that JMS wrote in all kinds of escape hatches for if major characters left and of course, there's the time travelling shenanigans that are shown in season 1, but not resolved to much later which show just how planned out it was. Of course his 5 season arc was tied up in 4 seasons when the studios threatened to cancel the 5th season, and then when they changed their mind, it led to a somewhat tacked on season 5 as the main story had been resolved.

It seems like a common factor of having a static space stations that lends itself well to story arcs. The other Treks were based on exploration, so they make sense to reset each episode as they travel to a new region.
by thinkingemote | 2026-02-15 10:26:50+00:00
"yes I'm right. Not sure why you are being downvoted. Do your own research"

Does research and now admits that he wasn't right, and understands why he and others were being down voted and hopefully learns from this and moves on.

Kudos for the edit and honesty: it's rare to see learning actually happen in fiery threads! I've been in your shoes and learning and change is possible.
by PunchyHamster | 2026-02-15 10:29:38+00:00
I know. We run it for near a decade now. I mentioned it because a lot of uses for minio are pretty small.

I had 2 servers at home running their builtin site replication and it was super easy setup that would take far more of both hardware and work to replicate to ceph so while ceph might be theoretically fitting feature list, realisticially it isn't an option.
by indubioprorubik | 2026-02-15 10:30:19+00:00
Well, she openly supports islamo-supremacists and facists as long as they have the right skin color.

If you know the middle east, just a little bit and are not just busy hating jews, you can look up the minority statistics in the whole surrounding areas- and man did these guys murder and send fleeing basically everyone not excactly them. Alawites, Copts, Jews, Druse, Yesidi- currently the curds. The middle east has the longest ongoing genocide and its invisible, cause the guys doing it have a suntan- and spoilers- it aint the jews.
by tomwojcik | 2026-02-15 10:30:42+00:00
Everyone here (including me) agrees on how dumb this idea is, yet I know C level people who would love it.

I wonder how our comments will age in a few years.

Edit: to add

> Review the output, not the code. Don't read every line an agent writes

This can't be a serious project. It must be a greenfield startup that's just starting.
by JanneVee | 2026-02-15 10:30:48+00:00
My little anecdote of breaking the spell. Really I might not been truly under the spell, but I had to go far in to my project to loose the "magic" of the code. The trick was simply going back to a slower way of using it with a regular chat window. Then really reading the code and interrogation everything that looks odd. In my case I saw a .partial_cmp(a).unwrap() in my rust code and went ahead an asked is there an alternative. The LLM returned .total_cmp(a) as an alternative. I continued on asking why it generated the "ugly" unwrap, LLM returned that it didn't become available later version of rust with only a tiny hint of that it .partial_cmp is more common in the original trainingsets. The final shattering was simply asking it why it used .partial_cmp and got back "A developer like me... ". No it is an LLM, there is somewhere in the system prompt to anthropomorphize the responses and that is the subtle trick beyond "skinner box" of pulling the lever hoping to get useful output. There are a bunch of subtle cues that hijacks the brain of treating the LLM like a human developer. So when going back to the agentic flow in my other projects I try to disabling these tricks in my prompts and the AGENTS file and the results are more useful and I'm more prone to realizing when the output has sometimes has outdated constructs and be more specific on what version of tooling I'm using. Occasionally scraping whole branches when I realize that it is just outdated practices or simply a bad way of doing things that are simply more common in the original training data, restarting with the more correct approaches. Is it a game changer... no but it makes it more like a tool that I use instead of a developer of shifting experience level.
by scaleinitiative | 2026-02-15 10:30:54+00:00
I’m a tool builder, and I made Storepage after getting tired of how fragmented app launch setup is.

Before you can even market your app, you usually need a decent homepage, a privacy policy, terms, store links, and hosting/DNS sorted. It’s a lot of overhead for something that should be straightforward.

Storepage is my attempt to simplify that. It gives mobile app developers one place to create and publish:

- Landing page
- Privacy policy
- Terms of service
- app-ads.txt
- App Store / Google Play links
- Easy but powerful site editor

You can publish on a *.storepage.app subdomain or connect your own domain when you’re ready.

I’m actively looking for honest feedback from builders:

- Is the flow clear enough from signup to publish?
- Does pricing feel fair for indie devs?
- What would make this genuinely useful for your launch stack?

If you want to try it, email me and I’ll send a launch discount code: hello@storepage.app

Link: https://storepage.app
by panstromek | 2026-02-15 10:31:57+00:00
I think agree (but I think I think about this maybe a one level higher). I wrote about this a while ago in https://yoyo-code.com/programming-breakthroughs-we-need/#edi... .

One interesting thing I got in replies is Unison language (content adressed functions, function is defined by AST). Also, I recommend checking Dion language demo (experimental project which stores program as AST).

In general I think there's a missing piece between text and storage. Structural editing is likely a dead end, writing text seems superior, but storage format as text is just fundamentally problematic.

I think we need a good bridge that allows editing via text, but storage like structured database (I'd go as far as say relational database, maybe). This would unlock a lot of IDE-like features for simple programmatic usage, or manipulating langauge semantics in some interesting ways, but challenge is of course how to keep the mapping between textual input in shape.
by gostsamo | 2026-02-15 10:32:33+00:00
If the author is right, OpenAI have room for improvement where they can further improve the fast models for correctness for certain tasks while Anthropic are left with scaling vertically. OFC, it is likely that over time both approaches will converge when the companies understand the problem space better and what tradeoofs are worth making.

My personal take is that they will need a big model to plan and break down tasks and schedule them to specialized smaller models while there is a good enough model for real time interactions with the user, but it is the naive take and many other things might be shaping the decisions.
by anonymous908213 | 2026-02-15 10:34:11+00:00
> especially if quality degrades at all

It is worth noting that consumers are completely and totally incapable of detecting quality degradation with any accuracy. Which is a given since the models are already effectively random, but there is a strong bent to hallucinate degradations. Having done frontend work for an AI startup, complaints of degrading the model were by far the most common, despite the fact that not only did our model not change, users could easily verify that it didn't change because we expose seeds. A significant portion of complainers continue to complain about model degradation even when shown they could regenerate from the same seed+input and get the exact same output. Humans, at scale, are essentially incapable of comprehending the concept of randomness.
by gritzko | 2026-02-15 10:34:39+00:00
Based on my personal experience, big-corp monorepos have all features of a black hole: they try to suck in all the existing code (vendor it) and once some code starts living in a monorepo, there is no way to separate it as it becomes entangled with the entire thing. There is no way to "blend it in", so to say.

This subject deserves a study of its own, but big-big-tech tends to use other things than git.
by gchadwick | 2026-02-15 10:35:23+00:00
Anyone else find reading things like this slightly exhausting?

I'm very much pro AI for coding there are clearly significant capabilities there but I'm still getting my head around how to best utilise it.

Posts like these make it sound like ruthlessly optimizing your workflow letting no possible efficiency go every single day is the only way to work now. This has always been possible and generally not a good idea to focus on exclusively. There's always been processes to optimise and automate and always a balance as to which to pursue.

Personally I am incorporating AI into my daily work but not getting too bogged down by it. I read about some of the latest ideas and techniques and choose carefully which I employ. Sometimes I'll try and AI workflow and then abandon it. I recently connected Claude up to draw.io with an MCP, it had some good capabilities but for the specific task I wanted it wasn't really getting it so doing it manually was the better choice to achieve what I wanted in good time.

The models themselves and coding harnesses are also evolving quickly complex workflows people may put together can quickly become pointless.

More haste, less speed as they say!
by qeternity | 2026-02-15 10:35:24+00:00
Yes this article is full of misunderstanding. The main explanation of bottleneck is wrong: it’s the model weights which dominate memory bandwidth (and hence why batching multiple requests in a single pass increases total throughput). If copying user tokens was the bottle neck, batching would not achieve any speed up.

When an author is confused about something so elementary, I can’t trust anything else they write.
by PunchyHamster | 2026-02-15 10:35:26+00:00
The author doesn't know how to use git or how git works.

If he knew how to use it, he'd be annoyed at some edge cases.

If he knew how it works, he'd know the storage subsystem is flexible enough to implement any kind of new VCS on top of it. The storage format doesn't need to change to improve/replace the user facing part
by phicoh | 2026-02-15 10:36:41+00:00
Selling ACK meant money for research into distributed systems (Amoeba) and parallel programming languages. I can see that money for research is more attractive than open source.

For MINIX the situation was different and I think more unfortunate. AST wanted to make sure that everybody could obtain MINIX and made his publisher agree to distributing the MINIX sources and binaries on floppies. Not something the publisher really wanted, they want to sell AST's book. In return the publisher got (as is usual for books) the exclusive right to distribute MINIX.

Right at the start that was fine, but when Usenet and the Internet took off, that became quite painful. People trying to maintain and distribute patch sets.
by fodkodrasz | 2026-02-15 10:37:30+00:00
I just hope they have robust backups and disaster-recovery plans, as Gentoo Wiki once had a terrible data loss, and it was like the burning of the Alexandria Library, I feel that put the distro to a decline. I don't use Arch (I used Gentoo in those times), but these collaborative knowledge bases are too precious to be lost.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44900319
by EliRivers | 2026-02-15 10:37:37+00:00
Continuing the theme, a new starter at my place (with about a decade of various experience, including an international financial services information player whose name is well known) had never used git or indeed any distributed, modern source control system.

HN is a tiny bubble. The majority of the world's software engineers are barely using source control, don't do code reviews, don't have continuous build systems, don't have configuration controlled release versions, don't do almost anything that most of HN's visitors think are the basic table stakes just to conduct software engineering.
by aeneas_ory | 2026-02-15 10:38:19+00:00
Sounds like GPT wrote this piece based on some tech exec‘s „we must use AI or lose“ „strategy“. Just let engineers use the tools they want instead of force feeding them yet another ridiculous process. For me, if I have to do meetings in the morning (or „write promps“ lmao) instead of clearing out the ridiculous AI slop debt of code agents my product would never ship.
by johnisgood | 2026-02-15 10:38:41+00:00
According to my experience, yes, it is. I have used Gentoo (using its wiki to install and configure), then after a few distro hops I was at Arch Linux and the wiki was a blessing and ever since I have found it (>10 years), I never needed anything else. Stuff they have on there applies specifically AND generally. Whereas Gentoo's wiki is usually specific IIRC.
by goku12 | 2026-02-15 10:39:01+00:00
Honestly, has any of these AI companies ever offered a compensation for the data they pillage, except in case of large walled up information silos like reddit? This is like asking why the occasional burglars are not singled out for direct access into your house, compared to the stripmining marauders out there.

Why does any of them deserve any special treatment? Please don't try to normalize this reprehensible behavior. It's a greedy, exploitative and lawless behavior, no matter how much they downplay it or how long they've been doing it.
by kouteiheika | 2026-02-15 10:39:21+00:00
> The main explanation of bottleneck is wrong: it’s the model weights which dominate memory bandwidth (and hence why batching multiple requests in a single pass increases total throughput). If copy user tokens was the bottle neck, batching would not achieve any speed up.

Inference is memory-bound only at low batch sizes. At high batch sizes it becomes compute-bound. There's a certain threshold where stuffing more requests in a batch will slow down every request in isolation even though it may still increase the number of tokens/second across the whole batch for all request in aggregate.
by gritzko | 2026-02-15 10:40:26+00:00
In my current codebase, I preserve the whitespace nodes. Whitespace changes would not affect the other nodes though. My first attempt to recover whitespace algorithmically not exactly failed, but more like I was unable to verify it is OK enough. We clang-format or go fmt the entire thing anyway, and whitespace changes are mostly noise, but I did not find 100% sure approach yet.
by munksbeer | 2026-02-15 10:40:55+00:00
So if this is true, it seems that we must accept that many people will die of cancer we could have detected and cured with frequent scans, because doing frequent scans will overall cause more harm to people who didn't need treatment. So the overall death/harm rate would be worst with more frequent scans?

Isn't that then just a problem with the scan and diagnosis? With more frequent scans it seems highly unlikely that we wouldn't improve this process and end up in a better place.
by sfa_aok | 2026-02-15 10:40:57+00:00
So if you specify work the right way, you can move at incredible velocity. If you have the confidence in your setup and ways of working, you don’t need to look at the code being put out.

Genuinely seeking answers on the following - if you’re working that way, what are you “understanding” about what’s being produced? Are you monitoring for signal that points out gaps in your spec which you update; code base is updated, bugs are fixed and the show goes on? What insights can you bring to how the code base works in reality?

Not a sceptic, but thinking this stuff through ain’t easy!
by xg15 | 2026-02-15 10:41:23+00:00
The "problem" (for corporations) is that the process of signing up for a subscription is itself a major obstacle in user flow and can serve as a point where users "wake up" and realize what they are doing.

Sure, you can design your pages after the sign up to be addictive, but that wouldn't actually help you to get more subscribers - so there is not a lot of economic rationale to do so (unless you have other mechanisms to "monetize" already signed up users, such as lootboxes or in-app purchases)

In contrast, if you can use advertising to monetize non-subscribed users, you can sidestep that entire obstacle altogether. That's why there is a lot of economic incentive to design the free part of services to be addictive, as long as there is advertising.
by conartist6 | 2026-02-15 10:41:23+00:00
Let's say I want to fork one of your monorepo modules and maintain a version for myself. It's hard. I might have to fork 20 modules and 19 will be unwanted. They'll be deleted, go stale, or I'll have to do pointless work to keep them up to date. Either way the fork and merge model that drives OSS value creation is damaged when what should be small, lightweight focused repos are permanently chained to the weight of arbitrary other code, which from the perspective of the one thing I want to work on is dead weight.

You can also just tell that monorepos don't scale because eventually if you keep consolidating over many generations, all the code in the world would be in just one or two repos. Then these repos would be so massive that just breaking off a little independent piece to be able to work on would be quite crucial to being able to make progress.

That's why the alternative to monorepos are multirepos. Git handles multirepos with it's submodules feature. Submodules are a great idea in theory, offering git repos the same level of composability in your deps that a modern package manager offers. But unfortunately submodules are so awful in practice so that people cram all their code into one repo just to avoid having to use the submodule feature for the exact thing it was meant to be used for...
by anal_reactor | 2026-02-15 10:43:04+00:00
> narcism ick

I think that's the whole shtick because most tech workers are so far removed from homelessness they don't even consider the possibility. It's not about the author being a narcist, it's about most people from higher social classes having some flavor of narcism.

> The fact that despite privileged upbringing and working in tech in the valley he has no one willing to offer him a couch.

Totally believable. There are very few people I'd offer a couch for more than two nights, and I imagine that in highly competitive environments, like the US tech sector, the typical situation is more grim. Look around and ask yourself - how many true friends does a typical corporate employee have? Someone they could realistically call "ay I'm going homeless can I get a bed for free for like, a few months". Most "friendships" turn out to be very superficial when tried.

> The most striking for me is the framing of his own grandmothers death as exceptional, proving his lineage is special.

This makes a lot of sense. From his point of view, his grandma was special. From your point of view, your grandma is special. The whole point of this post is the contrast between "I am special" and the world disagreeing.

Imagine a situation: someone steals all your money and frames you for pedophilia. Instantly you lose your job, all your friends distance themselves from you, you get evicted from your house. Suddenly, through sheer unbelievably bad luck, you have $5, an old jacket, and serious charges. You show up at soup kitchen in order not to starve and you see all these meth addicts, mentally ill, mentally ill meth addicts, and other types of folks from the lowest class of the society. Would you stand there thinking "ah yes, I'm equal to them, these are my homies, wassap nigga" or would your brain scream "no, this isn't happening, I'm only passing by, I'm different, why is this woman with rotting face staring at me, I need to get out of here ASAP".
by generallyjosh | 2026-02-15 10:44:05+00:00
I do think there's value in trying out fully vibe coding some toy projects today (probably nothing real or security sensitive haha).

The AI will get better at compensating, but I think some of it's weaknesses are fundamental, and are going to be showing up in some form or another for a while yet

Ex, the AI doesn't know about what you don't tell it. There's a LOT of context we take for granted while programming (especially in a corporate environment). Recognizing what sort of context is useful to give the AI without distracting it (and under what conditions it should load/forget context), I think is going to be a very valuable skill over the next few years. That's a skill you can start building now
by miduil | 2026-02-15 10:44:24+00:00
> Arguments against proactive MRI scanning always seem to have a whiff of status quo bias to them

More and more European countries are currently adopting Lung Cancer screening programs. It's usually limited to people with a certain amount of cigarette-pack-years, but still gives the opportunity for driving more of the innovation you're talking about. I think the main challenge at the moment is that nothing in healthcare is prepared of looking at those scans effectively, a radiologist has full medical education + additional specialization - without effective procedures you'll never be able to provide full-body scans with any meaningful impact.
by Hawxy | 2026-02-15 10:44:27+00:00
> "By immediately I mean we send it to k-ID who said that's what they do."

People have already validated this fyi. When k-ID was first added you could send a bogus age result to discord from your local device, which probably still works. There's no evidence your facial scans leave the device.

> "By that I mean they partnered with Persona to do the actual verification."

Which isn't true, it was a UK-only experiment being run for a small subset of users, which has now been discontinued.

I get people are outraged, but this is sensationalism at best.