MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by almosthere | 2026-02-27 16:37:32+00:00
I have basically no money, doing this paycheck to paycheck and some debt. But this is only possible in a capitalist country with property rights.

> Ah, I see what you're doing: you're "reasoning" by cherry-picking a particular historical example of a larger category (probably the centrally-planned Soviet economy, which is not even a good example of communism), then insisting that category can't be anything but.

The larger and larger a communist society becomes, the more it will devolve into soviet style central planning because of emergencies. The country will get its first food shortage and BAM everyone will be directed to do something different. And the reason food shortages happen is because the price of food and the prices of things end up being centrally controlled because revolt over prices. Because the government is required to stop price hikes, it ends up forcing a company to changes prices, possibly causing it to go out of business. It's a non-stop whack a mole with communism and ALWAYS will end up self sabotaging and turning into soviet style crapville. That's why I mentioned communism can be great with 30 people, but never great when a large 100m+ population is under communism rules. Market pricing works by self governing the prices and also allows for smart entrepreneurs to do something new and innovating.

> > The reality of communistic societies however is that it gets mismanaged by people in power due to fraud, power and control.

> Sounds like capitalism.

That is exactly communism. Pure Capitalism does not have fraud because the checks and balances are competition trying to wipe your company out - everyone has to work hard and fraud doesn't exist because there's no well of free money. I'm not arguing for pure capitalism because I like regulation for clean air and water, but when we go too far in the direction of free money wells, you can get MN Daycares - where there is no checks and balances. The government has little to no reason to check on said fraud because the government itself wants the fraud (for votes to keep itself in power, for example).

Thankfully because we found out about the MN fraud (and CA and WA and other states) the American people will not stand for it and crush these communistic policies - you watch it will happen. If it doesn't happen it's because the people that would have cared enough have fled those states in enough numbers and the rest in a fen slump while the treasury gets raided. This is why better states don't allow such government ruining policies.
by hwillis | 2026-02-27 16:37:42+00:00
> I do feel I actually biased the first doctors opinion with my "research."

It may feel easy to say doctors should just consider all the options. But telling them an option is worse than just biasing their thinking; they are going to interpret that as information about your symptoms.

If you feel pain in your abdomen but are only talking about your appendix, they are rightfully going to think the pain is in the region of your appendix. They are not going to treat you like you have kidney pain. How could they? If they have to treat all of your descriptions as all the things that you could be relating them to, then that information is practically useless.
by somenameforme | 2026-02-27 16:37:45+00:00
There was a huge inflection point in basically everything around 1971. [1] That was US pulled out of Bretton Woods and the USD became completely unbacked by anything, enabling the government to 'print' infinite money. How can market forces be the one deciding anything when literally trillions of imaginary dollars keeps being dumped into it, in a highly prejudiced fashion, by the government and their preferred institutions?

At that point the historical correlations between money and basically everything, which had sustained for centuries - even though the industrial revolution, began completely breaking down, and infinitely began skyrocketing to levels never seen before, in the US at least.

[1] - https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
by dirk94018 | 2026-02-27 16:38:22+00:00
This frames it as Pentagon vs. Anthropic but the actual problem is upstream. If we tell companies they must prevent all possible harm, you're setting them up: nerf the model and silently lose value nobody can quantify, or don't nerf the model and get blamed for every bad outcome. We don't want nerf'd models either. DoW is saying that.
by spankalee | 2026-02-27 16:38:50+00:00
Async iterables aren't necessarily a great solution either because of the exact same promise and stack switching overhead - it can be huge compared to sync iterables.

If you're dealing with small objects at the production side, like individual tag names, attributes, bindings, etc. during SSR., the natural thing to do is to just write() each string. But then you see that performance is terrible compared to sync iterables, and you face a choice:

1. Buffer to produce larger chunks and less stack switching. This is the exact same thing you need to do with Streams. or

2. Use sync iterables and forgo being able to support async components.

The article proposes sync streams to get around this some, but the problem is that in any traversal of data where some of the data might trigger an async operation, you don't necessarily know ahead of time if you need a sync or async stream or not. It's when you hit an async component that you need it. What you really want is a way for only the data that needs it to be async.

We faced this problem in Lit-SSR and our solution was to move to sync iterables that can contain thunks. If the producer needs to do something async it sends a thunk, and if the consumer receives a thunk it must call and await the thunk before getting the next value. If the consumer doesn't even support async values (like in a sync renderToString() context) then it can throw if it receives one.

This produced a 12-18x speedup in SSR benchmarks over components extracted from a real-world website.

I don't think a Streams API could adopt such a fragile contract (ie, you call next() too soon it will break), but having some kind of way where a consumer can pull as many values as possible in one microtask and then await only if an async value is encountered would be really valuable, IMO. Something like `write()` and `writeAsync()`.

The sad thing here is that generators are really the right shape for a lot of these streaming APIs that work over tree-like data, but generators are far too slow.
by fwip | 2026-02-27 16:38:54+00:00
I agree with your post, but in practice, couldn't you get back that efficiency by setting T = UInt8Array? That is, write your stream to send / receive arrays.

My reference point is from a noob experience with Golang - where I was losing a bunch of efficiency to channel overhead from sending millions of small items. Sending batches of ~1000 instead cut that down to a negligible amount. It is a little less ergonomic to work with (adding a nesting level to your loop).
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-02-27 16:39:12+00:00
> Public transit depends on the assumption that some trips are more common than others.

Public transit depends on the assumption that there is enough density along a given route to justify its existence. Take a look at the NYC subway map. In the highest density boroughs (Manhattan and Brooklyn) the routes basically go from everywhere to everywhere. Even more so for the Manhattan bus map. That's what you want in a large dense city.

In smaller cities, the "build a high density core surrounded by lower density areas" model is the thing that causes more congestion, because then the core ends up as a bottleneck but people don't want to take transit to get there because it doesn't have frequent service to the areas outside the core at one of the traveler's endpoints. For those cities it's better to have medium density everywhere than try to make transit work in a city where a large proportion of the population is coming from an area with density too low to make it viable.

And if the whole "city" is low density, i.e. it's a rural small town, then it's not likely you're going to make public transit work there whatsoever. The best option there is to use mixed zoning so people so inclined can live within walking distance of shops.

> It's not a Pareto improvement, as the traffic will become worse for those who drive on that route. But it's not a huge loss for them either.

It is though? The premise to begin with is that road is already too congested and is slowing down the buses. Removing a third to half of its capacity is going to make it dramatically worse. That's what many of the proponents of bus lanes are after -- they want to force people onto the bus by snarling the cars.

They refer to this as "induced demand" by inverting the sign when what they really mean is to suppress demand for driving by making it more miserable, but don't want to call it that because it would be unpopular.
by nradov | 2026-02-27 16:39:13+00:00
In the general case it's usually not possible to accurately review an individual physician's performance. The software developers here on HN like to think in simplistic binary terms but in the real world of clinical care there is usually no reliable source of truth to evaluate against. Occasionally we see egregious cases of malpractice or failure to follow established clinical practice guidelines but below that there's a huge gray area.

If you look at online reviews, doctors are mostly rated based on being "nice" but that has little bearing on patient outcomes.
by renewiltord | 2026-02-27 16:39:20+00:00
Is your opinion that one is more worthwhile than the other. It is my opinion that it is the other way. We have a way to express this: we each make weighted votes with how valuable we think something is and how good we were at making things valuable for others (money). Then people try to do the thing that is voted for.

To be honest, this system seems pretty good.
by cogman10 | 2026-02-27 16:40:06+00:00
> Yet somehow the progressives found him more unpalatable than the MAGAs if you look at people like Brianna Gray and Jill Stein.

Gaza and the border were two big issues where Biden and democrats at large were notably not progressive.

And, as you might imagine, funding a genocide is something that's really hard to stomach no matter how good Lina Khan was.

It also really didn't help that Kamala and her brother, where they did promise changes, it was to eliminate Khan and double down on prosecuting "transnational criminal organizations". They notably made a hard pivot from what was initially a somewhat progressive message to one of Kamala campaigning with Liz Cheney and celebrating the endorsement of a war criminal, Dick Cheney.
by hal9000xbot | 2026-02-27 16:40:06+00:00
MCP architecture presents some interesting challenges for persistent memory implementation. The key technical hurdle is bridging stateless LLM conversations with stateful external systems.

The critical design decisions usually involve:

1. *Serialization strategy* - How do you represent complex conversation state in a way that survives process restarts? JSON works for simple cases but struggles with rich object graphs or circular references.

2. *Memory indexing* - Vector embeddings for semantic search vs traditional indexing for exact matches. Most implementations end up with hybrid approaches.

3. *Memory lifecycle* - When to persist, when to evict, how to handle schema evolution as the system learns new patterns.

4. *Cross-conversation context* - The hardest part is maintaining coherent identity across conversation boundaries without creating privacy leaks.

Curious about the implementation approach here - is this using file-based persistence, a database backend, or something else? The choice significantly impacts both performance characteristics and operational complexity.
by alfredoizjr | 2026-02-27 16:40:08+00:00
Hi HN, I'm a solo dev. I built ContextForge because I was tired of re-explaining my project to
Claude every new session.

It's an MCP server that gives Claude persistent memory — semantic search, GitHub integration, task
tracking, and team collaboration. There's a web dashboard to manage everything.

Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, and any MCP client.

Free tier available, install with: npm install -g contextforge-mcp

Happy to answer any questions!
by 0xdeadbeefbabe | 2026-02-27 16:40:10+00:00
> Isaac Newton: “But if I have done the public any service this way it is due to nothing but industry & a patient thought.”

> who wants to hear supermodels lecturing us on the importance of inner beauty?

Also, Newton's statement can be taken as passing the test for social acceptability. It could also be that Newton, Feynman, etc took their hardware for granted.
by DeepSeaTortoise | 2026-02-27 16:41:45+00:00
Not really, because that's the core issue had hand, but I might not have made my intention with the argument sufficiently clear.

The question the court looked at: Did Congress intend "receiving gifts as a bribe" and "receiving gifts as gratitude" to be two separate crimes for non-federal employees as it is the case for federal ones (In which case handling the issue would have been left up to the states)?

The majority opinion refused to consider the moral argument (although they snuck it in in their argument on a lack of fair notice), but IMO that's by far the most intuitive one, when you allow yourself to look at the problem from the legislative perspective. By looking at the extremes it becomes very clear that there are two very different problems:

Imagine a group of students doing much better than their peers on their final exam thanks to the efforts of their teacher and they gift him a "Best teacher ever" mug.

But now reverse the causality:

Imagine a teacher demanding to be gifted a "Best teacher ever" mug before putting extra effort into preparing his students for their final exam. The group that gifted him the mug does much better than their peers as a result.

IMO these should be two very different crimes, but there is also a valid argument that they are about equivalent, as pursued by the dissenting opinion.

But that's not something a court should legislate.
by mamonster | 2026-02-27 16:41:52+00:00
>Much like Stalin's purges of the Red Army before WWII, there's a massive trade-off between political loyalty and operational competence.

Completely different.

Stalin purged people with war experience to replace them with people with less war experience. Xi is purging pencil pushers and is going to replace them with other pencil pushers.

Let's not act like Xi is purging Bradley or MacArthur
by energy123 | 2026-02-27 16:41:59+00:00
It was kind of buried in my second post:

> They have internal scale and scope economies as the breadth of synthetic data expands.

These frontier labs will have a hundred or a thousand teams of people+AI working in parallel generating synthetic data to solve different niches. A few teams solve computer use. A few teams solve math. A few teams solve various games. So the org is basically a big machine that mints data, and model research is only a small part of it. Scale then is the moat.

The second leg of the moat thesis is that open weights competition will die off soon because the cost to keep up with the scale will be too excessive.

The third leg of the moat thesis is that customers are happy to pay big margins for differences that appear small if the benchmark is the measuring stick.

If the paradigm was still scrape internet -> train model, I'd agree that there is no moat.
by EvanAnderson | 2026-02-27 16:42:28+00:00
I think animation was the less common use case. Sprites were a nice way to get multiple images in a single HTTP request. Latency on dialup was murder and getting more in a single round trip was better. If you have a bunch of similarly-sized elements stick them all in a single file and use CSS to make multiple references to the same file display different images.
by conartist6 | 2026-02-27 16:42:33+00:00
It's not blazingly fast, no, but it's not as much overhead as people think either when they're imagining what it would cost to do the same thing with malloc. TC39 knew all this when they picked { step, done } as the API for iteration and they still picked it, so I'm not really introducing new risk but rather trusting that they knew what they were doing when they designed string iterators.

At the moment the consensus seems to be that these language features haven't been worth investing much in optimizing because they aren't widely used in perf-critical pathways. So there's a chicken and egg problem, but one that gives me some hope that these APIs will actually get faster as their usage becomes more common and important, which it should if we adopt one of these proposed solutions to the current DevX problems
by LogicFailsMe | 2026-02-27 16:42:36+00:00
I don't have a lot of hope here. When most of the creme de la creme of the billionaire class capitulated to Trump at the beginning of his term, that set the tone for everything that followed IMO. It's astounding to me that so many are willing to see him trample on the Constitution and separation of powers when they'd scream like stuck pigs if any other party attempted it. And that's the way a lot of influential Americans like it I guess. Like I said, not a lot of hope. YMMV.
by manmal | 2026-02-27 16:43:18+00:00
Is your argument I should use a shitty model while my coworkers feed the US-based models with the same data? Where would be the sense in that?

> Isn't it standard practice for allies to spy on each other?

Allies? The US is on the brink of breaking up with the EU.

> EU foreign policy already sealed the deal

Not sure what you mean.
by softfalcon | 2026-02-27 16:43:36+00:00
What happens when I send an extremely high throughput of data and the scheduler decides to pause garbage collection due to there being too many interrupts to my process sending network events? (a common way network data is handed off to an application in many linux distros)

Are there any concerns that the extra array overhead will make the application even more vulnerable to out of memory errors while it holds off on GC to process the big stream (or multiple streams)?

I am mostly curious, maybe this is not a problem for JS engines, but I have sometimes seen GC get paused on high throughput systems in GoLang, C#, and Java, which causes a lot of headaches.
by shad42 | 2026-02-27 16:43:41+00:00
What we learned while building this is every token matters in the context, we spend lot of time watching logs of agent sessions, changing the tool params, errors returned by tools, agent prompts, etc...

We noticed for example the importance of letting the model pull from the context, instead of pushing lots of data in the prompt. We have a "complex" error reporting because we have to differentiate between real non-retryable errors and errors that teach the model to retry differently. It changes the model behavior completely.

Also I agree with "significant weight of human input and judgement", we spent lots of time optimizing the index and thinking about how to organize data so queries perform at scale. Claude wasn't very helpful there.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-27 16:44:22+00:00
My read of this interaction is Dario is calling out Hegseths' bluff. A bluff the latter didn't even know he was blundering into because Hegseth is an idiot.

SecDef invoking the DPA against Anthropic likely trashes the AI fundraising market, at least for a spell. That's why OpenAI is wading into the fight [1]. Given the Dow is sitting on a rising souffle of AI expectations, that knocks it out as well. And if there is one red line Trump has consistently hewed to and messaged on, it's in not pissing off the Dow.

[1] https://www.axios.com/2026/02/27/altman-openai-anthropic-pen...
by bdangubic | 2026-02-27 16:44:37+00:00
I apologize if my comment was not clear - I am not saying that both political parties are not same shit when it comes to surveillance and shit like that. but here on HN in particular, this "both sides" argument is being applied loosely to justify every imaginable thing that is making America into a country our parents have been scaring us off - every day we are becoming more like the countries and systems we have been fighting hard against. the "Obama was deporting..." absolutely cannot compare to "Trump sending military to always Democratic-led cities and in the process murdering in cold blood Americans on the streets of American cities" and yet you'll read over and over comments like OP that go "oh well, it is both sides" - which is why I gave example of Kamala sending US military to Texas (this would be fun, I am guessing some Hollywood liberal writer/director will eventually make (what could be an amazing) movie about this scenario
by bikenaga | 2026-02-27 16:45:14+00:00
Cited article: "Nonlinear increase of Greenland Ice Sheet runoff into Disko Bay" - https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-20...

"Abstract. The Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) has experienced accelerated mass loss with record peaks in 2012 and 2019. Despite its role as an important tipping element in the climate system, the GrIS's response to recent warming is poorly understood. Here we use Ba/Ca ratios in coralline algae as a proxy for runoff into Disko Bay which is strongly influenced by the input of meltwater from glaciers connected to the GrIS, particularly from Jakobshavn Glacier – the fastest flowing marine-terminating glacier of the GrIS. The 115-year multispecimen master chronology confirms an unprecedented trend change in runoff beginning in the early 2000s. Statistical trend- and time of emergence analysis of the algal proxy record suggests that in 2007 western GrIS runoff has permanently emerged above the 20th century reference period, while temperature observations have not yet exceeded this threshold. This provides independent evidence for a non-linear accelerated response of the largest GrIS glacier, underscoring modelling results that a tipping point in glacial mass balance might soon be reached. Massive GrIS meltwater influx could intensify upper ocean stratification and contribute to global sea level rise."
by gosub100 | 2026-02-27 16:45:38+00:00
People have been trying to use AI in radiology for decades. They still can't get it to do simple tasks like detect pneumonia from an X-ray. I think you are over-estimating how potent this "intelligence" really is.

We were blown away when LLMs came on the scene, because 'whoa, man! Machine can talk like a human', but really, stupid people have been posting online for decades. They talk like humans too! Yet they don't add any value (viz shit posters and trolls).
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2026-02-27 16:46:09+00:00
> So totally cool if an atheist government came to power and

From public libraries? Not many christians are borrowing the bible from the public library, I don't think they'd care. It's also telling that you assume I'm christian myself. This is why the Democrats lose elections, you know. You think that the only ones voting against you are biblethumpers. You count those up, and there's no way team red can win.

>Why do I feel like the people doing this for gay and trans materials would

You mean the people who don't want pornography being distributed to their children in the public schools that they are forced to fund? Those people?

>And here’s something uncomfortable. Unlike religious texts, which are forced onto children, no one was forcing kids to read this book.

The drug dealer defense? "I didn't put a gun to his head and force him to inject fentanyl-laced street heroin!"

>I feel like among the books gender queer is an exception in terms of explicitness

But I didn't complain about those other books, did I? When you look up the lists of "top banned books", do those other books show up at the top of the list? Are they on the list at all? You failed to police your own, and now the rest of us are being forced to police them. That book wasn't banned though never being purchased by school libraries. It had to first show up on the shelf. And you didn't do anything to stop it. Now responsible people have to step in and do it for you.