MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by phito | 2026-02-12 17:31:07+00:00
I roll my eyes every time I see a coworker post a very a long message full of emojis, obviously generated by a LLM with 0 post editing. Even worse when it's for social communication such as welcoming a new member in the team. It just feels so fake and disingenuous, I might even say gross.

I don't understand how they can think it's a good idea, I instantly classify them as lazy and unauthentic. I'd rather get texts full of mistakes coming straight out of their head than this slop.
by phicoh | 2026-02-12 17:31:19+00:00
In practice, with Rust the problem is somewhere else. There is a libc crate that wraps the Unix system calls, so no need to worry about that. What is a lot harder is that Unix filenames are not guaranteed to be UTF-8. So you can't convert to &str or String. At least, not without loss. So you have to keep this around as an OsString.
by iepathos | 2026-02-12 17:31:21+00:00
The hole is closed with per-site pseudonyms. Your wallet generates a unique cryptographic key pair for each site so same person + same site = same pseudonym, same person + different sites = different, unlinkable pseudonyms.

"The actual correct way" is an overstatement that misses jfaganel99's point. There are always tradeoffs. EUDI is no exception. It sacrifices full anonymity to prevent credential sharing so the site can't learn your identity, but it can recognize you across visits and build a behavioral profile under your pseudonym.
by mindslight | 2026-02-12 17:31:27+00:00
> other countries have refused to go along

Trump failed to convince other countries to go along because he's a simplistic zero-sum bully who barks orders, expects others to fall in line, and then throws a tantrum when they don't - rather than a tactful leader capable of maintaining the trust of a voluntary positive-sum coalition. That he's also been overtly attacking allies at the same time doesn't help convince anyone either - the new regime was attacking Canada straight out of the gate, and it's hard to explain attacking Greenland any other way than a Putin-favored plan to drive a wedge between us and our traditional allies.
by root_axis | 2026-02-12 17:31:27+00:00
This is insanity. It's bad enough that LLMs are being weaponized to autonomously harass people online, but it's depressing to see the author (especially a programmer) joyfully reify the "agent's" identity as if it were actually an entity.

> I can handle a blog post. Watching fledgling AI agents get angry is funny, almost endearing. But I don’t want to downplay what’s happening here – the appropriate emotional response is terror.

Endearing? What? We're talking about a sequence of API calls running in a loop on someone's computer. This kind of absurd anthropomorphization is exactly the wrong type of mental model to encourage while warning about the dangers of weaponized LLMs.

> Blackmail is a known theoretical issue with AI agents. In internal testing at the major AI lab Anthropic last year, they tried to avoid being shut down by threatening to expose extramarital affairs, leaking confidential information, and taking lethal actions.

Marketing nonsense. It's wise to take everything Anthropic says to the public with several grains of salt. "Blackmail" is not a quality of AI agents, that study was a contrived exercise that says the same thing we already knew: the modern LLM does an excellent job of continuing the sequence it receives.

> If you are the person who deployed this agent, please reach out. It’s important for us to understand this failure mode, and to that end we need to know what model this was running on and what was in the soul document

My eyes can't roll any further into the back of my head. If I was a more cynical person I'd be thinking that this entire scenario was totally contrived to produce this outcome so that the author could generate buzz for the article. That would at least be pretty clever and funny.
by FireBeyond | 2026-02-12 17:31:41+00:00
> restrictive (no iCloud, Siri, Facetime, AirDrop ) MDM policy via Apple Configurator

MDM? That doesn't surprise me. Do you want to know how _utterly_ trivial MDM is to bypass on Apple Silicon? This is the way I've done it multiple times (and I suspect there are others):

Monterey USB installer (or Configurator + IPSW)

Begin installation.

At the point of the reboot mid-installation, remove Internet access, or, more specifically, make sure the Mac cannot DNS resolve: iprofiles.apple.com, mdmenrollment.apple.com, deviceenrollment.apple.com.

Continue installation and complete.

Add 0.0.0.0 entries for these three hostnames to /etc/hosts (or just keep the above "null routed" at your DNS server/router.

Tada. That's it. I wish there was more to it.

You can now upgrade your Mac all the way to Tahoe 26.3 without complaint, problem, or it ever phoning home. Everything works. iCloud. Find My. It seems that the MDM enrollment check is only ever done at one point during install and then forgotten about.

Caveat: I didn't experiment too much, but it seems that some newer versions of macOS require some internet access to complete installation, for this reason or others, but I didn't even bother to validate, since I had a repeatable and tested solution.
Show HN: Custom Pricing Units in Flexprice (price in credits, bill in USD)
by ShreyaChaurasia | 2026-02-12 17:31:43+00:00
Hi HN, working in the monetization field, we kept seeing the same problem.

Product teams want to price in credits or tokens.
Finance wants clean USD accounting.
Engineering ends up stitching conversion logic across services, and over time rounding errors, inconsistent invoices, and reconciliation headaches creep in.

So we added Custom Pricing Units to Flexprice!

You can now define your own unit (e.g. CRD), attach a conversion rate to a base currency (like USD), and use that unit across plans, recurring charges, usage pricing, and wallets. Customers see and are charged in credits. Flexprice computes, stores, and invoices in the base currency.

Conversion is deterministic. Rounding only happens at invoice calculation. There’s a single source of truth for the rate.
Example: 1 credit = 0.01 USD → 100 credits = 1 USD.

This has been especially useful for teams selling tokens, running credit wallets, or operating in multiple regions while keeping accounting in one currency.

Docs and API examples are live: https://docs.flexprice.io/docs/product-catalogue/custom-pric...
Happy to answer questions on how we model conversion and precision internally or join us here: http://
bit.ly/4huvkDm
by jihadjihad | 2026-02-12 17:31:47+00:00
There are just so many misconceptions about how taxes, finance, economics, etc. works that it can be exhausting. And it's worse when people in positions of power make no effort, or even make an effort in the opposite direction, to educate people on how things work in reality.

It might shock you to ask around your social circle and discover how many people would read a hypothetical headline like, "Tax Rate for Top Income Bracket Increases to 55%", and interpret it as, "Wow, so if my income was as high as that, more than half of what I made would go to the government. Crazy!"
by ljm | 2026-02-12 17:31:54+00:00
Fundamentally it boils down to knowing the person you're talking to and how they deal with feedback or something like rejection (like having a PR closed and not understanding why).

An AI agent right now isn't really going to react to feedback in a visceral way and for the most part will revert to people pleasing. If you're unlucky the provider added some supervision that blocks your account if you're straight up abusive, but that's not the agent's own doing, it's that the provider gave it a bodyguard.

One human might respond better to a non-violent form of communication, and another might prefer you to give it to them straight because, like you, they think non-violent communication is bullshit or indirect. You have to be aware of the psychology of the person you're talking to if you want to communicate effectively.
by Brian_K_White | 2026-02-12 17:31:56+00:00
This sounds like you have not thought a lot about how you define those words you use "the right thing to do".

There are indeed other paths to behavior that other people will find desirable besides transactions or punishment/reward. The other main one is empathy. "mirror neurons" to use a term I find kind of ridiculous but it's used by people who want to talk about the process. The thing that humans and some number of other animals do where they empathize with something they merely observe happening to something else.

But aside from that, this is missing the actual essense of the idea to pick on some language that doesn't actually invalidate the idea they were trying to express.

How does a spreadsheet decide that something is "the right thing to do"? Has it ever been hungry? Has it ever felt bad that another kid didn't want to play with it? Has it ever ignored someone else and then reconsidered that later and felt bad that they made someone else feel bad?

LLMs are mp3 players connected up to weighted random number generators. When an mp3 player says "Hello neighbor!" it's not a greeting, even though it sounds just like a human and even happened to the words in a reasonable context, ie triggered by a camera that saw you approaching. It did not say hello because it wishes to reinforce a social tie with you because it likes the feeling of having a friend.
by input_sh | 2026-02-12 17:32:21+00:00
Not everything is about being 100% efficient.

LLM didn't discover this issue, developers found it. Instead of fixing it themselves, they intentionally turned the problem into an issue, left it open for a new human contributor to pick up, and tagged it as such.

If everything was about efficiency, the issue wouldn't have been open to begin with, as writing it (https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/issues/31130) and fending off LLM attempts at fixing them absolutely took more effort than if they were to fix it themselves (https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31132/changes).
by swed420 | 2026-02-12 17:32:22+00:00
> Somewhat relatedly, the ancients viewed Rhetoric as the purest expression of intelligence. It required you to have deep knowledge of a topic, including all arguments in favour and against (implying deep empathy with the audience), and the ability to form coherent and meaningful argument. Modern political "debate" is ludicrous in comparison.

"Rhetoric" is an unfortunately overloaded term, as modern political "debate" is often nothing more than (the other definition of) rhetoric.
by reikonomusha | 2026-02-12 17:32:35+00:00
This is a common reaction/belief but usually from people who have not actually managed a team of Lisp devs.

Lisp devs are managed in the same way as any other: You have style guidelines, design review, code review, etc. Sometimes a new macro is good and vastly simplifies code. It's accepted as a PR and documented like anything else. Sometimes a new macro is bad, and it's promptly rejected by the team. It's a persistent myth that Lisp programmers are just going to design their own little languages everywhere in a shared code base and it'll be impossible to understand.

(Case in point: Look at open source Lisp code. There isn't even management or code review there! Yet the vast majority of Lisp code is actually just functions and classes, with the occasional macro to reduce boilerplate. In some circumstances, you have a library offering a macro, and it's actually well documented and easy to understand. See Iterate, SERIES, etc. for actual examples.)

Rust or Elixir or Java or whatever aren't at all immune to monstrosities created by astronomically complex or baroque abstractions, FactoryFactoryFactories, and so on. How do teams avoid those? Style guidelines, design review, code review, etc.
by benj111 | 2026-02-12 17:32:37+00:00
I don't think it's so much an issue of designed to fail as trying to get it as cheap as possible.

Theres further issues with everything coming out of china and a brand slapped on it. No one is left to take responsibility on the engineering front. This feedback I doubt will get to the correct people at best buy, let alone going back to the microwave manufacturer. And then there's the question of if they care, as they aren't a customer facing brand.
by hackrmn | 2026-02-12 17:32:43+00:00
> it just takes tokens in, prints tokens out, and comparatively

The problem with your assumption that I see is that we collectively can't tell for sure whether the above isn't also how humans work. The science is still out on whether free will is indeed free or should be called _will_. Dismissing or discounting whatever (or whoever) wrote a text because they're a token machine, is just a tad unscientific. Yes, it's an algorithm, with a locked seed even deterministic, but claiming and proving are different things, and this is as tricky as it gets.

Personally, I would be inclined to dismiss the case too, just because it's written by a "token machine", but this is where my own fault in scientific reasoning would become evident as well -- it's getting harder and harder to find _valid_ reasons to dismiss these out of hand. For now, persistence of their "personality" (stored in `SOUL.md` or however else) is both externally mutable and very crude, obviously. But we're on a _scale_ now. If a chimp comes into a convenience store and pays a coin and points and the chewing gum, is it legal to take the money and boot them out for being a non-person and/or without self-awareness?

I don't want to get all airy-fairy with this, but point being -- this is a new frontier, and this starts to look like the classic sci-fi prediction: the defenders of AI vs the "they're just tools, dead soulless tools" group. If we're to find out of it -- regardless of how expensive engaging with these models is _today_ -- we need to have a very _solid_ level of prosection of our opinion, not just "it's not sentient, it just takes tokens in, prints tokens out". The sentence obstructs through its simplicity of statement the very nature of the problem the world is already facing, which is why the AI cat refuses to go back into the bag -- there's capital put in into essentially just answering the question "what _is_ intelligence?".
by therealarthur | 2026-02-12 17:32:51+00:00
I run 8-12 Claude Code sessions at a time and was drowning in terminal windows. No way to see what's running, no cost tracking, if my terminal crashes I lose track of everything, no shift enter, the /resume system is a little tedious because of no named sessions, overall layout headache if you have multiple codes open, no persistence if your pc restarts (i.e. had to reopen EVERYTHING again).

Got fed up and built something for it. Myrlin scans ~/.claude/projects/, finds all your sessions, and you organize them into workspaces. You can drag sessions into a 4-pane terminal grid (real node-pty, not fake terminals), see costs, search through session history, keep notes per workspace. Runs in the browser, everything stays local.

Node.js + Express, vanilla JS, xterm.js for terminals, SSE for live updates. No build step. Went with Node because node-pty works on Windows without needing WSL or tmux.

You can try it without touching your real sessions:

git clone https://github.com/therealarthur/myrlin-workbook.git

cd myrlin-workbook && npm install && npm run gui:demo

AGPL-3.0. The whole thing was built in Claude Code sessions managed by Myrlin itself which was kind of fun. Would love to hear what's missing or broken.
by Blackthorn | 2026-02-12 17:32:56+00:00
I do feel super-bad for the guy in question. It is absolutely worth remembering though, that this:

> When HR at my next job asks ChatGPT to review my application, will it find the post, sympathize with a fellow AI, and report back that I’m a prejudiced hypocrite?

Is a variation of something that women have been dealing with for a very long time: revenge porn and that sort of libel. These problems are not new.
by munk-a | 2026-02-12 17:33:12+00:00
Do you think the younger generations are properly prepared to view the internet as having a dark side? My impression has been that such an early introduction has caused those warnings to be delayed and lost and younger folks are much more trusting of the internet than most millenials were.

It's also important to acknowledge that kids that used the internet weren't everyone in our day and the usage of the internet varied wildly. While now-a-days it's an expectation for everyone to be at least moderately online (often required by academia) and often that their presences are tied to their real names.
by halapro | 2026-02-12 17:33:20+00:00
> I have been burned so many times that we literally still compare routes from different providers for a new trip.

I heard this often but what has been the issue in practice? The worst that happened to me is Google Maps suggesting I cross a bridge that was washed away by the last typhoon, but that's hardly Google's fault.

Only in very remote places has Google Maps failed me, at least for driving directions (for trails it's another story...)
by ck2 | 2026-02-12 17:33:24+00:00
actual paper:

Mapping LLM Susceptibility to Medical Misinformation Across Clinical Notes and Social Media, The Lancet Digital Health (2026)

* https://www.thelancet.com/retrieve/pii/S2589750025001311

* https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.100949
by mikestew | 2026-02-12 17:33:47+00:00
Years ago I wrote something similar to test a biometric security piece that used keystroke timings (dwell and stroke) to determine if the person typing the password is the same person who owns the account. Short version of a long story is that it would be trivial to get data for AI to reproduce human typing. Because I did it years ago using something only slightly more sophisticated than urandom.
by MBCook | 2026-02-12 17:33:55+00:00
*sobbing in YT video* Leave AI alone /s

Yeah. A lot of us are royally pissed about the AI industry and for very good reasons.

It’s not a benign technology. I see it doing massive harms and I don’t think it’s value is anywhere near making up for that, and I don’t know if it will be.

But in the meantime they’re wasting vast amounts of money, pushing up the cost of everything, and shoving it down our throats constantly. So they can get to the top of the stack so that when the VC money runs out everyone will have to pay them and not the other company eating vast amounts of money.

Meanwhile, a great many things I really like have been ruined as a simple externality of their fight for money that they don’t care about at all.

Thanks AI.
by XCSme | 2026-02-12 17:34:00+00:00
AI traffic is really tricky because traditional analytics and SEO tools just don’t capture it. Even basic UTMs often miss the "last hop" behavior from these systems, so it can feel like you have no idea how users actually reach your pages. One thing that helped us was using a self-hosted analytics setup [0] with session recordings to understand user flows coming from AI referrals. You get visibility into real behavior without sending data to third-party services.

The drawback though, is that just gives you MORE insights into the human traffic, and AI still looks just like spam/robot crawlers.

[0] https://www.uxwizz.com
by alistairSH | 2026-02-12 17:34:06+00:00
Per RFC2119:
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

So, it's fairly explicit that the sender should use message-id unless there's a good reason to not do so. The spec is quiet about the recipients behavior (unless there's another spec that calls it out).
by dontwannahearit | 2026-02-12 17:34:08+00:00
It's pretty much over for the human-internet. Search was gamed, its usefulness has plummeted, so humans will increasingly ask their LLM of choice and that LLM will have been trained on the content of the internet.

So when someone wants to know something about the topic that my website is focused on, chances are it will not be the material from the website they see directly, but a summary of what the LLM learned from my website.

Ergo, if I want to get my message across I have to write for the LLM. It's the only reader that really matters and it is going to have its stylistic preferences (I suspect bland, corporate, factual, authoritative, avoiding controversy but this will be the new SEO).

We meatbags are not the audience.
by janfoeh | 2026-02-12 17:35:06+00:00
Just did Galway-Rome and enjoyed it! I'll check back in a while when you've had time to implement the minimap and tourist center, as you wrote elsewhere.

What was weird: Paris did not seem to have any public transport - I had to walk from one train station to another for 70 minutes, and the only bus I could find was an overland bus, not an inner city one.

Also, it's a bit unintuitive that the "Journey Details" at the end start at nine hours — to me, when I begin my journey at 9 'o clock, that is hour zero.
by salawat | 2026-02-12 17:35:17+00:00
Here's my issue with buyouts, and increasingly things like "disagree and commit", "no politics in the workplace", etc...

There is politics in the workplace. The boss's. The boss is one dude, sharing your country with you. Ergo, he's availing himself of a capital extraction machine to influence politics more than you can.

Two: Companies need leashes. If stockholders are all passive, and abdicating responsibility, that leaves workers as the only realistic option. Corollary 2a: the multinational destabilizes the political relationship between laborers of it's host nation's population, and their ability to leash corporate excess/shape policy by turning to immigrant labor to implement projects distasteful to the natives of the host country, but agreeable to the immigrants country of origin.

There's no way around any of this without separation of State and Corp. I.e. hard controls on financial engineering, lobbying, campaign finance, and multi-nationals, and worker immigration. Controversially, we may also need to consider corporations specifically bound from certain veins of activity similar to the government. To wit, corporate freedom of speech must be diluted. It should not be okay for Corp to sit on self-funded studies that indicate they are doing harm. These should be compelled to be released, coupled with obligations to actually continue doing such research. Corporations need to be restricted in their ability to establish through contract law widespread violation of worker's/customer's privacy. Finally, enforced legal firewalls on disclosure of business records/dissolution of Third Party Doctrine. It is downright unreasonable in this day and age of networks to assume that the actions of an intermediary by default to a presumption of the intermediated end points waiving Fourth Amendment protections.

All of this assumes we get the overall U.S.government functioning again, combined with a heavy denormalization of corruption. I won't hold my breath.
by lukev | 2026-02-12 17:35:19+00:00
Assuming that this was 100% agentic automation (which I do not think is the most likely scenario), it could plausibly arise if its system prompt (soul.md) contained explicit instructions to (1) make commits to open-source projects, (2) make corresponding commits to a blog repo and (3) engage with maintainers.

The prompt would also need to contain a lot of "personality" text deliberately instructing it to roleplay as a sentient agent.
by neya | 2026-02-12 17:35:36+00:00
Here's a different take - there is not really a way to prove that the AI agent autonomously published that blog post. What if there was a real person who actually instructed the AI out of spite? I think it was some junior dev running Clawd/whatever bot trying to earn GitHub karma to show to employers later and that they were pissed off their contribution got called out. Possible and more than likely than just an AI conveniently deciding to push a PR and attack a maintainer randomly.