MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by peteforde | 2026-02-09 00:19:35+00:00
Daily agentic user here, and to me the problem here is the very notion of "vibe coding". If you're even thinking in those terms - this idea that never looking at the code has become a goal unto itself - then IMO you're doing LLM-assisted development wrong.

This is very much a hot take, but I believe that Claude Code and its yolo peers are an expensive party trick that gives people who aren't deep into this stuff an artificially negative impression of tools that can absolutely be used in a responsible, hugely productive way.

Seriously, every time I hear anecdotes about CC doing the sorts of things the author describes, I wonder why the hell anyone is expecting more than quick prototypes from an LLM running in a loop with no intervention from an experienced human developer.

Vibe coding is riding your bike really fast with your hands off the handles. It's sort of fun and feels a bit rebellious. But nobody who is really good at cycling is talking about how they've fully transitioned to riding without touching the handles, because that would be completely stupid.

We should feel the same way about vibe coding.

Meanwhile, if you load up Cursor and break your application development into bite sized chunks, and then work through those chunks in a sane order using as many Plan -> Agent -> Debug conversations with Opus 4.5 (Thinking) as needed, you too will obtain the mythical productivity multipliers you keep accusing us of hallucinating.
by akerl_ | 2026-02-09 00:19:58+00:00
> attacker "proves" themselves trustworthy on any project by behaving in an entirely helpful and innocuous manner, then leverages that to gain trust in target project (possibly through multiple intermediary projects).

Well, yea, I guess? That's pretty much how the whole system already works: if you're an attacker who's willing to spend a long time doing helpful beneficial work for projects, you're building a reputation that you can then abuse later until people notice you've gone bad.

This feels a bit https://xkcd.com/810/
by drgo | 2026-02-09 00:20:03+00:00
We have been here before many times. Nutritional epidemiology studies have a terrible track record of establishing causal relationships (e.g., Beta-carotene and lung cancer, selenium and prostate cancer, etc all were not replicated when the definitive clinical trials were done). The problem is that statistical models with questionable and often untestable assumptions are used, but the results are reported as if these models were fault-less. The result is overly optimistic estimates of statistical significance and inflated confidence in study findings.
by arnonejoe | 2026-02-09 00:20:30+00:00
Totally agree on ai assisted coding resulting in randomly changed code. Sometimes it’s subtle and other times entire methods are removed. I have moved back to just using a JetBrains IDE and coping files in to Gemini so that I can limit context. Then I use the IDE to inspect changes in a git diff, regression test everything, and after all that, commit.
by isodev | 2026-02-09 00:20:57+00:00
What we call AI at the heart of coding agents, is the averaged “echo” of what people have published on the web that has (often illegitimately) ended up in training data. Yes it probably can spit out some trivial snippets but nothing near what’s needed for genuine software engineering.

Also, now that StackOverflow is no longer a thing, good luck meaningfully improving those code agents.
by extra88 | 2026-02-09 00:21:07+00:00
I think proportion is more useful that quantity. 66% of housing units (that's all forms of housing, not just single-family homes) have a garage or carport. Also, given that there are ~145 million housing units, 60 million would be a bad situation.

> most are within 100 miles of a fast DC charger

That's not good enough. No one can spend 3-4 hours to drive 200 miles round trip, or even 100 miles, to charge quickly.

There needs to be a good solution for the 33% of households that don't have access to EV charging as part of their home. Until it becomes really plentiful, part of the solution may involve fast charging that only the 33% can use or that favors the 33%; people who can charge overnight at home should charge overnight at home.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1268-dece...
by II2II | 2026-02-09 00:21:25+00:00
Terminology shifted somewhere along the lines, because the nature of sites like Facebook changed. These sites were called "social networking" in the early days, since they connected people. These sites are called "social media" these days, which I assume is a reflection that the top-down nature of these sites are much more like traditional print/radio/television media.

The treatment of chat applications, online forums, etc. as social media has always felt strange to me for that reason. While the companies that offer those services may control the platform, control of interactions is limited to moderation and the content of those interactions is rarely created by a commercial interest.
by nrds | 2026-02-09 00:21:31+00:00
Is it even worth pointing out that the author misunderstands how UB works in Rust, given that at this point such a misunderstanding has to be willful than otherwise? There is _no_ UB in the safe subset of Rust, and in mixed safe-unsafe rust, the UB can only originate in the unsafe blocks.

In modern C++ (i.e. with smart pointers) something similar is true in that the UB can only occur in code dealing with certain types and functions (e.g. raw pointers), and not other types and functions. It's really the same as rust, just without the compiler support and the explicit unsafe blocks.
by tunesmith | 2026-02-09 00:21:34+00:00
https://concludia.org/ - I've mentioned it here before, it's a site to help people reason through and understand arguments together. No real business purpose for it yet, it's more an idea I've had for years and have been wanting to see it through to something actually usable. You can graphically explore arguments, track their logical sufficiency/necessity, and make counterpoints. It's different than other types of argument theory that just have points "in favor" and "against" because of how it tries to propagate logical truth and provability.
by ragall | 2026-02-09 00:22:13+00:00
My take from all this is that OCI, being essentially a .tar.gz, is a bad image format. A smarter solution would either use a seekable archive format like zip, or profile the container startup to make a list of essential files, and put those at the beginning of the image where they would be unconditionally fetched. Also, a fully lazy fetch is bad for reliability: the image should slowly be slowly fetched in its entirety, after which restarts only work with local data.
by rootusrootus | 2026-02-09 00:22:20+00:00
I've had that happen, too, on a [more] regular car. I drove a Mustang 5.0 from Oklahoma to Oregon, and as I went through eastern Colorado the coolant temperature steadily dropped until it was resting at the bottom of the gauge. I don't recall whether the gas mileage suffered noticeably or not during that phase of the drive.
by tzs | 2026-02-09 00:23:08+00:00
I believe that they were responding to this specific part of your comment:

> But the idea that drones must keep track of which individual properties allow flight above and which don't, and try to navigate some around some kind of patchwork accordingly, is simply unpractical and unreasonable

Flying over public roads would be a way to avoid flying over properties that do not allow drones and would not be unpractical.
by rmonvfer | 2026-02-09 00:23:24+00:00
https://agentmode.co

Hosted OpenClaw, one click and you get a full agent with configurable skills, channels and the whole thing, all running in its own sandbox.

I love OpenClaw but setting it up is a pain: VPS, Docker, API keys in plaintext, security patches... So I’ve spent the last couple weeks building a hosted version that handles all of that. Each user gets their own isolated environment on Cloudflare Workers.

Still doing some testing with friends before opening signups but planning to launch properly this week.

Would love feedback on the landing page in the meantime!
by kortilla | 2026-02-09 00:23:39+00:00
The long tail of routers receiving your update doesn’t matter. Once the common transit networks get it, that’s where the rest would dump the traffic to reach you anyway. The only time slow propagation to the edges matters is the first time announcing a prefix after it has been fully withdrawn.

Using the wrong route to get the packet in your general direction still gets you the packet as long as it hits an ISP along the way that got the update.

We could fully drain traffic from a transit provider in <60s with a withdrawal with all of the major providers you get at the internet exchanges. If you weren’t seeing that your upstream ISPs may have penalized you for flapping too much and put in explicit delays.
by claysmithr | 2026-02-09 00:24:24+00:00
I'm running a BETA on Worn, my tape saturation VST. Made in Cmajor with some help of vibe coding.

https://stoneandsignalaudio.com/

Use code 'FREEBETA' to partake, ~25 seats left.

https://claysmithmusic.com/

I'm also making music. I got Suno to do a cover of 2 songs I wrote, although eventually I want to introduce human versions. Also want to make electronic music eventually.
by Heathcorp | 2026-02-09 00:24:32+00:00
Implementing a hobby HDL for designing circuits in Wireworld and other Cellular Automata. The eventual goal is to create a larger Wireworld computer than the original (https://www.quinapalus.com/wi-index.html). If this project actually ends up working, I may attempt to optimise some large Conway's Game of Life designs. Currently I'm at the stage of rewriting the language's solver.

WIP language spec: https://gist.github.com/Heathcorp/13fcd206fdc38ca6ce001f32ef...

Writing the compiler/solver in Rust with no AI assistance because this is a learning project.
by rifty | 2026-02-09 00:25:07+00:00
It feels like the problem here comes from the reluctance to utilize a negative sum outcome for rejection. Instead of introducing accidental perverse incentives, if rejected your stake shouldn't go to the repo, 50% could be returned, and 50% deleted (specific values just for illustration). If it times out or gets approved you get 100% back. If a repo rejects too often or is seen doing so unfairly reputation would balance participation.
by wat10000 | 2026-02-09 00:25:10+00:00
It's a predictor of what you'll click on. This correlates somewhat with what you want to see, but they don't care one whit about what you want, and the two don't always line up well.

In short, the problem is ragebait. I might open up some app because I want to see cat videos, but when I'm presented with "Polly McPoliticianface LIES about FLOWERS" I'm likely to click in anger about Polly's nefarious actions. Do this enough and you end up with something that just tries to make you angry all the time.
by socketcluster | 2026-02-09 00:25:20+00:00
I think AI is just a massive force multiplier. If your codebase has bad foundation and going in the wrong direction with lots of hacks, it will just write code which mirrors the existing style... And you get exactly was OP is suggesting.

If however, your code foundations are good and highly consistent and never allow hacks, then the AI will maintain that clean style and it becomes shockingly good; in this case, the prompting barely even matters. The code foundation is everything.

But I understand why a lot of people are still having a poor experience. Most codebases are bad. They work (within very rigid constraints, in very specific environments) but they're unmaintainable and very difficult to extend; require hacks on top of hacks. Each new feature essentially requires a minor or major refactoring; requiring more and more scattered code changes as everything is interdependent (tight coupling, low cohesion). Productivity just grinds to a slow crawl and you need 100 engineers to do what previously could have been done with just 1. This is not a new effect. It's just much more obvious now with AI.

I've been saying this for years but I think too few engineers had actually built complex projects on their own to understand this effect. There's a parallel with building architecture; you are constrained by the foundation of the building. If you designed the foundation for a regular single storey house, you can't change your mind half-way through the construction process to build a 20-storey skyscraper. That said, if your foundation is good enough to support a 100 storey skyscraper, then you can build almost anything you want on top.

My perspective is if you want to empower people to vibe code, we need to give people really strong foundations to work on top of. There will still be limitations but they'll be able to go much further.

My experience is; the more planning and intelligence goes into the foundation, the less intelligence and planning is required for the actual construction.
by btown | 2026-02-09 00:25:40+00:00
Per the readme:

> Unfortunately, the landscape has changed particularly with the advent of AI tools that allow people to trivially create plausible-looking but extremely low-quality contributions with little to no true understanding. Contributors can no longer be trusted based on the minimal barrier to entry to simply submit a change... So, let's move to an explicit trust model where trusted individuals can vouch for others, and those vouched individuals can then contribute.

And per https://github.com/mitchellh/vouch/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md :

> If you aren't vouched, any pull requests you open will be automatically closed. This system exists because open source works on a system of trust, and AI has unfortunately made it so we can no longer trust-by-default because it makes it too trivial to generate plausible-looking but actually low-quality contributions.

===

Looking at the closed PRs of this very project immediately shows https://github.com/mitchellh/vouch/pull/28 - which, true to form, is an AI generated PR that might have been tested and thought through by the submitter, but might not have been! The type of thing that can frustrate maintainers, for sure.

But how do you bootstrap a vouch-list without becoming hostile to new contributors? This seems like a quick way for a project to become insular/isolationist. The idea that projects could scrape/pull each others' vouch-lists just makes that a larger but equally insular community. I've seen well-intentioned prior art in other communities that's become downright toxic from this dynamic.

So, if the goal of this project is to find creative solutions to that problem, shouldn't it avoid dogfooding its own most extreme policy of rejecting PRs out of hand, lest it miss a contribution that suggests a real innovation?
by franciscop | 2026-02-09 00:25:47+00:00
I've seen some discussions and I'd say there's lots of people who are really against the hyped expectations from the AI marketing materials, not necessarily against the AI itself. Things that people are against that would seem to be against AI, but are not directly against AI itself:

- Being forced to use AI at work

- Being told you need to be 2x, 5x or 10x more efficient now

- Seeing your coworkers fired

- Seeing hiring freeze because business think no more devs are needed

- Seeing business people make a mock UI with AI and boasting how programming is easy

- Seeing those people ask you to deliver in impossible timelines

- Frontend people hearing from backend how their job is useless now

- Backend people hearing from ML Engineers how their job is useless now

- etc

When I dig a bit about this "anti-AI" trend I find it's one of those and not actually against the AI itself.
by rootusrootus | 2026-02-09 00:26:42+00:00
Yep, Ford had to put really big tanks on even the F150 to make up for the horrid mileage. Even with a 36 gallon tank, when towing with an F150 you might only get 300 miles. It's one reason the Lightning had problems selling as many as they wanted (aside from the ridiculous pricing the first year or so). Most people who are serious about towing don't use an F150 anyway, but that doesn't mean that F150 buyers don't fantasize about their potential towing needs in the future.
by kelseyfrog | 2026-02-09 00:27:46+00:00
A GBNF to json schema translator in such a way that structured responses from LLMs can be serialized back into string confirming to the original grammar.

Initial results have been surprising in that even when using structured output, some of the generated json schema breaks the generation process in a way that syntactically invalid json is returned.

I'm working through major providers to determine which are stable enough to rely on.

The end goal is to generate strings confirming to non-json grammars for common formats like CSV, SQL, Python, sed, regex, etc.
by anoncow | 2026-02-09 00:27:52+00:00
I tried to vibe code a technical not so popular niche and failed. Then I broke down the problem as much as I could and presented the problem in clearer terms and Gemini provided working code in just a few attempts. I know this is an anecdote, but try to break down the problem you have in simpler terms and it may work. Niche industry specific frameworks are a little difficult to work with in vibe code mode. But if you put in a little effort, AI seems to be faster than writing code all on your own.
by existencebox | 2026-02-09 00:28:34+00:00
I'm similarly bemused by those who don't understand where the anti-AI sentiment could come from, and "they must be doing it wrong" should usually be a bit of a "code smell". (Not to mention that I don't believe this post addresses any of the concrete concerns the article calls out, and makes it sound like much more of a strawman than it was to my reading.)

To preempt that on my end, and emphasize I'm not saying "it's useless" so much as "I think there's some truth to what the OP says", as I'm typing this I'm finishing up a 90% LLM coded tool to automate a regular process I have to do for work, and it's been a very successful experience.

From my perspective, a tool (LLMs) has more impact than how you yourself directly use it. We talk a lot about pits of success and pits of failure from a code and product architecture standpoint, and right now, as you acknowledge yourself in the last sentence, there's a big footgun waiting for any dev who turns their head off too hard. In my mind, _this is the hard part_ of engineering; keeping a codebase structured, guardrailed, well constrained, even with many contributors over a long period of time. I do think LLMs make this harder, since they make writing code "cheaper" but not necessarily "safer", which flies in the face of mantras such as "the best line of code is the one you don't need to write." (I do feel the article brushes against this where it nods to trust, growth, and ownership) This is not a hypothetical as well, but something I've already seen in practice in a professional context, and I don't think we've figured out silver bullets for yet.

While I could also gesture at some patterns I've seen where there's a level of semantic complexity these models simply can't handle at the moment, and no matter how well architected you make a codebase after N million lines you WILL be above that threshold, even that is less of a concern in my mind than the former pattern. (And again the article touches on this re: vibe coding having a ceiling, but I think if anything they weaken their argument by limiting it to vibe coding.)

To take a bit of a tangent with this comment though: I have come to agree with a post I saw a few months back, that at this point LLMs have become this cycle's tech-religious-war, and it's very hard to have evenhanded debate in that context, and as a sister post calls out, I also suspect this is where some of the distaste comes from as well.
by f_k | 2026-02-09 00:31:19+00:00
https://citellm.com

Building CiteLLM, an API that extracts structured data from PDFs and returns exact source locations for every field.

It comes with an embeddable widget so you can add click-to-verify to your own app in a few lines of code.

Click any value, jump straight to the highlighted source in the PDF.

Demo: https://citellm.com/demo
by zozbot234 | 2026-02-09 00:31:34+00:00
The most credible argument against AI is really the expense involved in querying frontier models. If you want to strengthen the case for AI-assisted coding, try to come up with ways of doing that effectively with a cheap "mini"-class model, or even something that runs locally. "You can spend $20k in tokens and have AI write a full C compiler in a week!" is not a very sensible argument for anything.
by 0000000000100 | 2026-02-09 00:32:00+00:00
This is what I’ve discovered as well. I’ve been working on refactoring a massive hunk of really poor quality contractor code, and Codex originally made poor and very local fixes/changes.

After rearchitecting the foundations (dumping bootstrap, building easy-to-use form fields, fixing hardcoded role references 1,2,3…, consolidating typescript types, etc.) it makes much better choices without needing specific guidance.

Codex/Claude Code won’t solve all your problems though. You really need to take some time to understand the codebase and fixing the core abstractions before you set it loose. Otherwise, it just stacks garbage on garbage and gets stuck patching and won’t actually fix the core issues unless instructed.
by jbonatakis | 2026-02-09 00:32:12+00:00
The past few weeks I've been building Blackbird

https://github.com/jbonatakis/blackbird

At a high level it's my take on how the execution aspect of spec-driven development should be handled. Where as most tools that are popular right now break a spec down into a task list and instruct your agent to work through it in a single session, I am treating agents as stateless. By this I mean a separate (headless) session is started with selected context for each task. This avoids context exhaustion, compaction (and the resulting confusion that can occur), and means that Blackbird can work through effectively an arbitrarily large task list.

Right now it's BYO-spec, but then it:

* breaks the spec down into a dependent-aware plan (DAG) composed of parent and child tasks

* executes tasks one at a time based on their status (ready to execute if all dependencies are marked as completed)

* allows you to (optionally) pause execution after each task to review, approve and continue, approve and quit, or reject the changes altogether

* (soon) treats parent tasks as an automated reviewer for all child tasks and optionally auto-resume those sessions to address the feedback

* and more

It's entirely bootstrapped, and so far I'm quite pleased with it. I also wrote a post[1] today about some of the concepts I had in mind as I was defining the architecture.

[1] https://jack.bonatak.is/blah/killer-context/
by tptacek | 2026-02-09 00:32:26+00:00
It's Children of Men crossed with The Big Lebowski, with Pynchon instead of noir characters. When you get what it's trying to do, it gets better.

I bounced off of it at first, but I bounced (hard) off of Lebowksi as well.

I don't think it's PTA's best film (or that I will come around to that opinion eventually), but it's pretty good.
by FiniteField | 2026-02-09 00:32:39+00:00
There isn't exactly a "curve" to be behind, just as there isn't one single "history" that you can end up "on the wrong side of". Politics is just the constantly shifting borders in a formalised war for power between different groups, long term there is no single direction of "progress".

>You may avoid politics, but politics may not avoid you.

This is the correct view, in the sense that if you don't belong to some kind of tribe, you'll get ripped off by someone who does. The inert group are not wrong, but by participating less than the others in the battle for their collective self interest, they will end up being the ones taken advantage of.