MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MillionOClock | 2026-02-19 03:22:20+00:00
I really hope someone from any of those companies (if possible all of them) would publish a very clear statement regarding the following question: If I build a commercial app that allows my users to connect using their OAuth token coming from their ChatGPT/Claude etc. account, do they allow me (and their users) to do this or not?

I totally understand that I should not reuse my own account to provide services to others, as direct API usage is the obvious choice here, but this is a different case.

I am currently developing something that would be the perfect fit for this OAuth based flow and I find it quite frustrating that in most cases I cannot find a clear answer to this question. I don't even know who I would be supposed to contact to get an answer or discuss this as an independent dev.
by LeFantome | 2026-02-19 03:22:37+00:00
What projects are trying something similar to Ladybird? Well, mobody really. But Servo is pretty close though they are not writing their own Javascript engine or anything.

But you should perhaps give your attention to Servo. They were founded as a project to write a modern browser in Rust. So, no hand-waving there.

No hand-waving on the Ladybird team either in my opinion. They have very strong technical leadership. The idea that building a massive application designed to process untrusted user input at scale might need a better language than C++ seems like a pretty solid technical suggestion. Making incedible progress month after month using the language you started with seems pretty good too. And deciding, given the progress buidling and the lack of progress exploring the new language, that perhaps it would be best to formally abandon the idea of a language switch...well, that seems like a pretty solid decision as well.

At least, that is my view.

Oh, and I was a massive Servo fan before the Ladybird project even began. But, given how much further Ladybird has gotten than Servo has, despite being at it for less time and taking on a larger scope...well, I am giving my attention to Ladybird these days.

This comment was written in Ladybird.
by Shmungus | 2026-02-19 03:22:52+00:00
Week 1 caught $14.1B in acquisitions, MASI +34%, ZIM +25%, OLB +137%, CMPS +39%, all with UTC timestamps before the moves.

165K lines of Rust, custom NLP engine (no spaCy/NLTK), GradientBoosting over 32 features, IV-aware options strategy selection, and a closed-loop suppression gate that improves win rate between retrains. Also the first financial intelligence MCP server, integrates directly into Claude as a native tool.
Full technical spec in the repo.

https://github.com/Mattbusel/ROT-TECH-PDF
by lurquer | 2026-02-19 03:23:00+00:00
This is what I don't grok...

Your sample sounds exactly like an LLM. (If you wrote it yourself, kudos.)

But, it needn't sound like this. For example, I can have Opus rewrite that block of text into something far more elegant (see below).

It's like everyone has a new electric guitar with the cheapo included pedal, and everyone is complaining that their instruments all sound the same. Well, no shit. Get rid of the freebie cheapo pedal and explore some of the more sophisticated sounds the instrument can make.

----

There is a particular cadence that has become unmistakable: clipped sentences, stacked like bricks without mortar, each one arriving with the false authority of an aphorism while carrying none of the weight. It is not merely tedious or disjointed; it is something closer to uncanny, a fluency that mimics the shape of human thought without ever inhabiting it.

Set this against writing that breathes, prose with genuine rhythm, with the courage to sustain a sentence long enough to discover something unexpected within it, and the difference is not subtle. It is the difference between a voice and an echo, between a face and a mask that almost passes for one.

What masquerades as wisdom here is really only pattern. What presents itself as professionalism is only smoothness. And what feels, for a fleeting moment, like originality is simply the recombination of familiar gestures, performed with enough confidence to delay recognition of their emptiness.

The frustration this provokes is earned. There is something genuinely dispiriting about watching institutions reach for the synthetic when the real thing, imperfect, particular, alive, remains within arm's length. That so many have made this choice is not a reflection on the craft of writing. It is a reflection on the poverty of attention being paid to it.

And if all of this sounds like it arrives at a convenient conclusion, one that merely flatters the reader's existing suspicion, well, perhaps that too is worth sitting with a moment longer than is comfortable.

----

(prompt used: I want you to revise [pasted in your text], making it elegant and flowing with a mature literary-style. The point of this exercise is to demonstrate how this sample text -- held up as an example of the stilted LLM style -- can easily be made into something more beautiful with a creative prompt. Avoid gramatical constructions that call for m-dashes.)
by alexgarden | 2026-02-19 03:23:10+00:00
Not a dumb question — it's the right one. "Who watches the watchmen" has been on my mind from the start of this.

Today the answer is two layers:

The integrity check isn't an LLM deciding if it "feels" like the agent behaved. An LLM does the analysis, but the verdict comes from checkIntegrity() — deterministic rule evaluation against the Alignment Card. The rules are code, not prompts. Auditable.

Cryptographic attestation. Every integrity check produces a signed certificate: SHA-256 input commitments, Ed25519 signature, tamper-evident hash chain, Merkle inclusion proof. Modify or delete a verdict after the fact, and the math breaks.

Tomorrow I'm shipping interactive visualizations for all of this — certificate explorer, hash chain with tamper simulation, Merkle tree with inclusion proof highlighting, and a live verification demo that runs Ed25519 verification in your browser. You'll be able to see and verify the cryptography yourself at mnemom.ai/showcase.

And I'm close to shipping a third layer that removes the need to trust the verifier entirely. Think: mathematically proving the verdict was honestly derived, not just signed. Stay tuned.
by CqtGLRGcukpy | 2026-02-19 03:23:50+00:00
Radio stations realized they could make more money by having less DJs, or by having one DJ cover a bigger area.

It's not just YouTube Live, DJs moved to Tiktok and other live stream platforms.

I know I listen to less radio because I pay for a music streaming service that allows me to listen to exactly what I want, with no ads, and pays the artist more.
by godelski | 2026-02-19 03:23:55+00:00
I'm an AI researcher, here's my beliefs (it'll be clear in a second why I say belief and not claim objective facts)

1) you can't be sure it's gone. It's even questionable if data can be removed (longer discussion needed). These are compression machines, so the very act of training is compressing that information. The question really becomes how well that information is compressed or embedded into the model. On one hand, the models (typically) aren't invertible so the information is less likely to be compressed lodslessly. On the other hand, the models aren't invertible, so reversing them is probabilistic and they are harder to analyze in this sense.

2) as you may gather from 1) there's almost certainly more issues like this. There are many unknown unknowns waiting to be discovered. Personally this is why I'm very upset the field is so product focused and that a large portion regards theory as pointless. Theory does two things for us because it builds a deeper and more nuanced understanding. Theory advancing allows us to develop faster as we can iterate on paper rather than through experimentation. This allows us to better search the solution space and even understand our understanding. This also leads to better safety of models as it is necessary to understand them to understand where they fail and how to prevent those failures. Experimentation alone is incredibly naïve. It is like proving the correctness of your programs through testing (see the issues with TDD). Tests are great but they are bounds, not proofs. They can suggest safety, give you some level of confidence in safety, but they cannot guarantee it. We all know that the deeper understanding of your code the better tests you can write, and this is the same thing here. That theory is reducing your unknown unknowns and even before strong proofs are made we can get wider coverage in our testing.

I think we're so excited right now we're blinding ourselves. If we're cutting off or reducing fundamental research then we are killing the pipeline of development. Theory is the foundation that engineering sits on top of. But what worries me is that there's so many unknown unknowns and everyone is eagerly saying "we're just need 'good enough'" or "what's the minimum viable product". These are useful tools/questions but they have limits and it gets dangerous when putting out the minimum at scale
by mintflow | 2026-02-19 03:25:20+00:00
As a developer who have been built some tailscale-based clients, I think this maybe acceptable because they running a business with money from the VCs.

And I am also very grateful that tailscale implement some workaround for systems such as apple-based OS with core APIs built into the open source code, thus if you really need you can just look the open source code and doing accordingly, though it really need some research work.

For the long term if they really do not want to open source the core client code (which I do not believe at the moment), I think support a fully open source coordinator and open source client based on the fork will still be doable.
by wackget | 2026-02-19 03:25:34+00:00
Yeah that's great and all but my 2nd gen iPad Air from 2017 doesn't get updates past iPadOS 15 (current version: 26).

As a result most useful apps flatly refuse to run on it, and my iPad is now a paperweight which yearns for the landfill.

Meanwhile the laptop I bought in 2011 is still going strong, now on Windows 10 (or whatever Linux distro I'd care to throw on it).
by rustyhancock | 2026-02-19 03:25:36+00:00
They were also bailed out by Sega.

When they couldn't deliver the console GPU they promised for the Dreamcast (the NV2), Shoichiro Irimajiri, the Sega CEO at the time let them keep the cash in exchange for stock [0].

Without it Nvidia would have gone bankrupt months before Riva 128 changed things.

Sega console arm went bust not that it mattered. But they sold the stock for about $15mn (3x).

Had they held it, Jensen Huang ,estimated itd be worth a trillion[1]. Obviously Sega and especially it's console arm wasn't really into VC but...

My wet dream has always been what if Sega and Nvidia stuck together and we had a Sega tegra shield instead of a Nintendo switch? Or even what if Sega licensed itself to the Steam Deck? You can tell I'm a sega fan boy but I can't help that the Mega Drive was the first console I owned and loved!

[0] https://www.gamespot.com/articles/a-5-million-gift-from-sega...

[1] https://youtu.be/3hptKYix4X8?t=5483&si=h0sBmIiaduuJiem_
by JB_Dev | 2026-02-19 03:25:44+00:00
“Fair use” allows for educational usage of copyrighted material. Technically it probably is not fair use as Microsoft isn’t an educational institution or a nonprofit.

But come on … these guides really are for learning purposes. Doesn’t seem like a big deal to me at all. They aren’t even hosting it, just pointing to kaggle who is hosting it.

On principle copyright law should allow this kind of learning use case anyway.
by piinbinary | 2026-02-19 03:26:14+00:00
> friends don’t just bring up type inference in casual conversation

I wonder if this is a reference to "I need you to understand that people don't have conversations where they randomly recommend operating systems to one another"

But to the actual point of the article: my understanding is that there are areas where you can use bidirectional typing (e.g. languages that have subclasses) where HM style type inference might become undecidable.
by eleventyseven | 2026-02-19 03:27:22+00:00
It is pretty obviously no. API keys billed by the token, yes, Oauth to the flat rate plans no.

> OAuth authentication (used with Free, Pro, and Max plans) is intended exclusively for Claude Code and Claude.ai. Using OAuth tokens obtained through Claude Free, Pro, or Max accounts in any other product, tool, or service — including the Agent SDK — is not permitted and constitutes a violation of the Consumer Terms of Service.
by artdigital | 2026-02-19 03:27:30+00:00
That’s very clearly a no, I don’t understand why so many people think this is unclear.

You can’t use Claude OAuth tokens for anything. Any solution that exists worked because it pretended/spoofed to be Claude Code. Same for Gemini (Gemini CLI, Antigravity)

Codex is the only one that got official blessing to be used in OpenClaw and OpenCode, and even that was against the ToS before they changed their stance on it.
by slopinthebag | 2026-02-19 03:27:37+00:00
how can they even enforce this? can't you just spoof all your network requests to appear like it's coming from claude code?

in any case Codex is a better SOTA anyways and they let you do this. and if you aren't interested in the best models, Mistral lets you use both Vibe and their API through your vibe subscription api key which is incredible.
by qurio_dev | 2026-02-19 03:28:02+00:00
I wanted actual end user feedback. I’ve done very thorough testing on my part. Honestly got very few responses but each and every response was way too helpful specially capturing mobile numbers. I also noted that almost 60% users signed up but did not completed my profile setup. That’s kind of brutal feedback I was looking for to improve the system. I’m sure I’ll get some feedback on algorithm as well since I’ve removed the sign up friction now.
by segmondy | 2026-02-19 03:30:17+00:00
Thanks, any one with kids experiences this. It's so frustrating. For the same kid you could literally have 5 different sizes that are the same. So you have to keep track of sizes by brand. Trying a new brand is often an adventure. Worse of all, if you come across a sale and rush to take advantage of it. You could end up having lots of items shipped only to have to return every single one of them. It's a mess.
by bmitc | 2026-02-19 03:31:07+00:00
> I also remember taking a class on vector calculus from the same author... which detoured through rudimentary manifold theory and differential forms, and ended with a final week on de Rham cohomology and the Mayer-Vietoris theorem (on vector spaces, to be fair, and not modules in general.)

Any available references for that that you know of?
by k310 | 2026-02-19 03:31:59+00:00
Nice pick.

https://www.archivebuttons.com/articles?article=https://www....

https://americanbuddhist.net/2024/09/27/your-consciousness-c...

https://www.earth.com/news/study-consciousness-is-a-quantum-...

https://www.wellesley.edu/news/wellesley-teams-new-research-...

https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.110.0...

https://www.eneuro.org/content/11/8/ENEURO.0291-24.2024
by laksjhdlka | 2026-02-19 03:33:11+00:00
I once studied proof theory for a summer at a school in Paris and we talked about type inference and theorem proving all the time in casual conversation, over beers, in the park. It was glorious.

Being a student is so much fun, and we often waste it, or at least don't value it as much as we ought. 20 years later I'd love to go back.
by alexandersucala | 2026-02-19 03:34:10+00:00
CodeReview AI is a GitHub App that ingests your repo's documentation (security policies, style guides, architecture standards, contributing guidelines) and reviews every pull request against them.

Built to solve the context and onboarding gap of specific coding configurations dynamically in real time

Install it on a repo, it scans the file tree, finds and classifies your docs into sub docs of review gates (Security, Architecture, Style, Legal, Onboarding), and starts posting review comments on PRs as per those gates. Every finding cites the exact source document and line range. Findings are tagged DOCUMENT_BACKED or AI_SUGGESTION so you can tell what came from your rules vs. the model.

A hallucination verification pass re-reads every finding internally against the source before posting — if it can't prove it, the finding is dropped.

This is a novel and non-trivial architectural approach that is uncommon in standard AI apps, CodeReview AI utilizes over 10+ patented architectural AI frameworks in it's operations.

Install link (GitHub App, takes ~2 min): https://github.com/apps/codereview-ai-dev

Landing page with more detail: https://alexandersucala.com/tools/codereview-ai.html

It's in beta and free. I'm looking for repos with rich documentation to test against, the more docs you have, the more helpful the output. Happy to answer questions about the architecture.
by LeFantome | 2026-02-19 03:34:44+00:00
> Rust designed specifically for being a language for developing a rendering engine

Rust was born at Mozilla, sort of. It was created by a Mozilla employee. The first "real" project to put it into action was Servo of which parts were adopted into Firefox. While Rust may not have been developed "specifically" to create a browser, it is a fair comment.

That said, Ladybird was started as part of the SerenityOS project. That entire project was built using C++. If the original goal of Serenity was to build an opeerating system, C++ would have felt like a reasonable choice at the time.

By the time Ladybird was looking for "better" languages than C++, Ladybird was already a large project and was making very heavy use of traditional OOP. Rust was evaluated but rejected because it did not support OOP well. Or, at least, it did not support integration into a large, C++ based, OOP project.

Perhaps, if Ladybird had first selected a languge to write a browser from scratch, they would have gone with Rust. We will never know,

We do know that Mozilla, despite being the de facto stewards of Rust at the time, and having a prototype web browser written in Rust (Servo), decided to drop both Rust and Servo. So, perhaps using Rust for browsers is not as open and shut as you imply.
by serf | 2026-02-19 03:35:57+00:00
its not that innocent.

a 200 dollar a month customer isn't trying to get around paying for tokens, theyre trying to use the tooling they prefer. opencode is better in a lot of ways.

tokens get counted and put against usage limits anyway, unless theyre trying to eat analytics that are CC exclusive they should allow paying customers to consume to the usage limits in however way they want to use the models.
by lak-102 | 2026-02-19 03:36:00+00:00
How Microsoft protects its own IP:

https://news.microsoft.com/source/2004/02/12/statement-from-...

In case the new anti-copyright Microslop memory-holes that link:

https://web.archive.org/web/20260215220230/https://news.micr...

The tutorial could have used that leaked source code for "educational purposes", as many here claim.
by linuxhansl | 2026-02-19 03:36:19+00:00
Heh. I once had to make an argument that 256 bit randomly assigned identifiers are good enough without explicit collision checking. People wanted me to add complex and expensive collision checks.

My argument was the 2^256 actually approaches the number of atom in the observable universe (within 1 to 3 orders of magnitude), and that collisions are so unlikely that we'll have millions of datacenter meltdowns first (all assuming we have a good source of random numbers, of course). In the end I convinced everybody that even 128 bits are good enough, without any collision checking required.

I thought my arguments was clever, but this is so much better. :)
by JB_Dev | 2026-02-19 03:36:54+00:00
Intent (should) be what matters. If you want to learn how to train AI and use copyrighted material in your learning - I don’t care in the slightest at all.

In fact if you do this as a nonprofit or at an educational institution in a teaching context it’s explicitly allowed by fair use already.

If you do it individually, idk I’m not a lawyer. But it should be allowed on principle.

But if you then go take your trained AI and deploy it for commercial purposes that’s a different story and should have protections for the original rights holders.
Stoat: A Good Alternative to Discord?
by peq42 | 2026-02-19 03:37:21+00:00
I've been looking for alternatives to discord recently, but its been kinda hard. Most of them are either too corporate, unsafe(looking at you Matrix) or just outright bad

But then I found Stoat, and it seems almost like a 1:1 to discord, with a few differences:

1) it's hosted in europe, so has better privacy and follows good laws(looking at you, american cloud act)
2) Open source
3) May become federated, if the massive user demand is heard.

Is it worth it?
by eks391 | 2026-02-19 03:37:38+00:00
I think you are confusing bug bounty programs with espionage and cyber warfare. The USA definitely accepts vulnerabilities for any system (or at least target systems), paying good money for them if it is an attack chain, giving them that competitive edge you mention. They have at least one military organization over this exact thing (USCYBERCOM) and realistically other orgs to include the intelligence community.
There are no bug bounties on "any" system because bug bounties are part of programs to fix bugs, not exploit them. They therefore have bug bounties for their own systems, as those are the ones they would be interested in improving. What you described, which they definitely do, is cyber espionage, and those bugs are submitted through different channels than a bug bounty.
by gizmo686 | 2026-02-19 03:37:44+00:00
All models are wrong, some are useful.

Yes, there are theoretical issues with assuming PRNGs are truly random. However, there are also theoretical issues with assuming that Newton's law of universal gravitation is true.

I am confident is saying that more experiments have gone wrong due to not considering relativity, than have gone wrong due to the proper usage of a statistically sound (even if not cryptographically so) PRNG.

I also suspect that both classes of errors are dwarfed by improper usage or non sound PRNGs.
by andes314 | 2026-02-19 03:38:36+00:00
I’m building ClawJetty: a small, always-on mini PC that runs a personal OpenClaw instance with minimal setup (pair from an app, connect your chat channel, done). The point is to make “self-host your agent” feel like setting up a router, not a weekend project.

Pricing is two tiers and two purchase options:

Plus: $149/mo with a 12-month commitment (box included) or $449 upfront + $119/mo

Pro: $269/mo with a 12-month commitment (box included) or $449 upfront + $219/mo

Plans include managed updates + rollback, safe defaults (no exposed inbound ports), and address collection at checkout for fulfillment. AI usage is bundled with included allowance; overages/top-ups will come later.

Looking for feedback from people who’ve self-hosted agents (or tried): what parts of setup/ops were the biggest pain, and what would you demand from an “agent appliance” to trust it?
by m463 | 2026-02-19 03:38:42+00:00
I wonder if web searches used to be pretty productive, then declined as sponsored results and SEO degraded things.

Nowadays an ai assist with a web search usually eliminates the search altogether and gives you a clear answer right away.

for example, "how much does a ford f-150 cost" will give you something ballpark in a second, compared to annoying "research" to find the answer shrouded in corporate obfuscation.