MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Dylan16807 | 2026-02-13 21:35:36+00:00
They didn't decline because the idea "came from a brainstorm" with a human, that message was much later.

They declined because the note on the flowers had a from line that was an AI startup. When you were otherwise on board with an unsolicited flower delivery and a social media post to make the sender look good, that's a picky reason to deny it, and saying it's "not what they signed up for" is a pretty big exaggeration.

Except they didn't decline, they ghosted, and that's just bad behavior.
by ben_w | 2026-02-13 21:35:43+00:00
> It's a phone. Put it in the trash.

Dude, it's 2025.

A few years ago, I accidentally left my phone at home when I went to work, and when I arrived I found that because I no longer had my 2FA device, I couldn't do any work until I went home again and picked it up.

I'm fine without doomscrolling. I've gone from the minimum possible service with internet, to pure PAYG with no internet, and I'm fine with that. But society has moved on, and for a lot of people, phones are no longer an option.

And for a meaningful fraction of people, somehow, I don't get it either, TikTok is the news. Not metaphorically, it's actually where they get news from.
by Jianghong94 | 2026-02-13 21:35:50+00:00
Well, like I said, there're hidden incentives behind the scene; in my case, the hidden incentive is that, the requester/client is one of the company's subpar broker, and PM probably decided to just offer an average level of commitment, not going above and beyond. Hence the plan was to do exactly what the broker want even though that was messy and inferior. You can't just write down that kind of motivation on paper anywhere.

---
I said it because I did the analysis, and realized that if I implement the original version, which basically is a crazy way to iteratively solve the MIP problem, it's much harder to reason with internally, and much harder to code correctly. But obviously it keep the broker happy (the developer is doing exactly what I said)
by cpard | 2026-02-13 21:36:47+00:00
sure, I won't argue on this, although it did manage to deliver the marketing value they were looking for, at the end their goal was not to replace gcc but to make people talk about AI and Anthropic.

What I said in my original comment is that AI delivers when it's used by experts, in this case there was someone who was definitely not a C compiler expert, what would happen if there was a real expert doing this?
by 2muchtime | 2026-02-13 21:37:03+00:00
I do.

I want my interfacing with computers to be mouseless and TUIs offer that. I don’t think I’ve run into a GUI, no matter how many hotkeys it has and I know, where I didn’t have to reach for the mouse.

CLI only also requires remembering commands, some of which I use very infrequently, thus need to look up every time I use them.

I think TUIs hold a very nice spot between GUIs and CLI.
by bhasinanant | 2026-02-13 21:37:42+00:00
Zed is my goto editor when I'm not vibe coding, but that is rare these days.
Their integration with Claude Code, etc really helped, but Antigravity completely pulled me away.
And really, since they're catering to the same basic audience, the defaults should be the same as VSCode for most stuff. VSCode but performant would be an excellent pitch for the upcoming consumer RAM deficient world.

Dunno how they plan to get wider extensibility and community support without an embedded JS backend to support the existing Code plugins. That's where the real blocker is.
by dsego | 2026-02-13 21:37:54+00:00
Plenty of people use an OS for years without learning. And you admitted to spending time in the terminal, which indicates lack of will to try and learn macos shortcuts, gestures, windowing model, spaces, and so on. And the comment used sweeping generalizations, without referring to any specific principles broken which aren't just personal dislikes or unfamiliarity with a different way of doing things.

> I gave both generalized and highly specific cases where I felt the UX failed.

No guidelines named, no principles defined. No comparison standard is established.

The earlier fullscreen story is a specific case, maybe a discoverability argument, but not not that UX violates every principle. MacOS spaces and fullscreen apps follow a workspace concept, it's not a window resize mode.

> Asymmetric user experiences

What’s asymmetric is not the command — it’s the spatial context. The claim that it’s violated is arguable.

> Heavily reliant on gestures

Not sure which guidelines this breaks, but every gesture has a keyboard shortcut alternative, there is mission control key, menu bar, dock.

> Ridiculous failure modes

No failure mode is defined.
by akdev1l | 2026-02-13 21:39:04+00:00
You can’t really claim any PR is “low-effort” without actually reading and digesting the thing

Yes in the past you could check “oh this doesn’t have back trace or any steps to reproduce, close with won’t fix”

Now you cannot do that, the “low-effort” could be a 500+ lines code change with accompanying documentation and a 300 lines in prose describing the “problem” alongside with “backtraces” showing the issue

Except, the fix is non-sense but you have to read 500+ lines too know that. The documentation doesn’t match the changes but you have to read it to know that. The backtraces literally contain made up functions but once again you need to look closely to verify.

And if the thing isn’t immediately obvious to be AI generated then you’ll end up asking questions which will get forwarded to some AI and end up playing broken telephone.

All of this literally happened to curl in different issues.
by codegangsta | 2026-02-13 21:39:10+00:00
But planning like this is absolutely something AI can do. In fact, this is exactly the kind of thing we start with on our team when it comes to using AI agents. We have a ticket with just a simple title that somebody threw in there, and we asked the AI to spin up a bunch of research agents to understand and plan and ask itself those questions.

Funny enough, all the questions that you posed are things that come up right away that the agent asks itself, and then goes and tries to understand and validate an answer, sometimes with input from the user. But I think this planning mechanism is really critical to being able to have an AI generate an understanding, then have it be validated by a human before beginning implementation.

And by planning I don't necessarily mean plan mode in your agent harness of choice. We use a custom /plan skill in Claude Code that orchestrates all of this using multiple agents, validation loops, and specific prompts to weed out ambiguities by asking clarifying questions using the ask user question tool.

This results in taking really fuzzy requirements and making them clear, and we automate all of this through linear but you could use your ticket tracker of choice.
by Manuel_D | 2026-02-13 21:39:11+00:00
That's not how the law works in the US. The government cannot have a third party take action on its behalf to do something that would be illegal for the government to do itself. This is why the Biden administration had a restraining order filed against it, on account of them pressuring social media companies to ban content it didn't like. This violated the First Amendment, despite the fact that it was a third party that was doing the actual banning at the behest of the government.

The government could legally create its own facial recognition technology if it wanted to. They're not avoiding the law, facial recognition isn't illegal.
by tokyobreakfast | 2026-02-13 21:39:18+00:00
> Dude, it's 2025.

Actually, it's 2026 and has been for six weeks.

> A few years ago, I accidentally left my phone at home when I went to work, and when I arrived I found that because I no longer had my 2FA device, I couldn't do any work until I went home again and picked it up.

Sounds like a personal problem. There are many other 2FA authenticators available. Yubikey, TOTP tokens, smart cards, etc. Using a smartphone (which can lose power at any time) for critical authentication was a silly idea to begin with. I would refuse anything work-related on my personal phone.
by nacozarina | 2026-02-13 21:39:36+00:00
The most shocking reveal to me is that from 2002-2011 Prince Andrew worked a special trade envoy role for the UK, and was passing non-public trade info immediately to Epstein. Epstein, in turn, immediately leveraged it with JP Morgan, and they made fn billions.

Not just one treasonous man, not just a few rich perverts, the whole thing is a supranational criminal syndicate looting everything they aren’t raping.

The circle of dirt does extend very wide and the scoundrels really are worried prosecution of the guilty will collapse everything.
by oj-hn-dot-com | 2026-02-13 21:39:52+00:00
<mermaid>
flowchart TD

%% Power Side (240V)
subgraph Power Circuit (240V)
Breaker["240V Breaker / GFCI"]
Fuses["Fuse Block"]
Contactor["4-Pole Contactor"]
Pump1["Pump 1 (240V)"]
Pump2["Pump 2 (240V)"]

Breaker --> Fuses
Fuses --> Contactor
Contactor --> Pump1
Contactor --> Pump2
end

%% Control Side (120V)
subgraph Control Circuit (120V)
Hot120["120V Control Hot (tap)"]
AirButton["Spa Air Button"]
AirSwitch["Air Switch"]
Coil["Contactor Coil (A1/A2)"]

Hot120 --> AirSwitch
AirButton -. air tube .-> AirSwitch
AirSwitch --> Coil
end

%% Mechanical Link
Coil -. magnetic pull .-> Contactor
</mermaid>
by socalgal2 | 2026-02-13 21:40:05+00:00
In my experience immediate mode guis almost always ignore internationalization and accessibility.

The thing you get by using an OS widget and putting a string in it is that the OS can interact with the string. It can read it out load, translate it, fill it in with a password, look it up in a dictionary, edit it right to left, handle input method editors whose hot keys are in conflict with app doing its own editing, etc…

There’s a reason why the most popular ImGUIs are targeted at game dev tools and in game dev uis and not end user uis

You could potentially make an Immediate mode gui that wrapped a retained gui. arguably that is what react is. From the programmers pov it’s supposed to look like imgui code all the way down. It runs into the issues of having to keep to two representations in sync. The ui represented by react and the actual widgets (html or native) and that’s where all its complications come from
by cyanydeez | 2026-02-13 21:40:18+00:00
Unfortunately, the real horrors are just the mundane uses of AI: Whitewash excuses to keep the same people out of prison, put the same people in prison, hire the same people you want to hire, and do whatever you want because the AI can do no wrong.

Hint, there's no AGI here. Just stupid people who can spam you with the same stuff they used to need to pay hype men to do.
by CrimsonCape | 2026-02-13 21:40:25+00:00
> his contributions included investigating why generative AI systems suck up to users

Why does it take research to figure this out? Possibly the greatest unspoken problem with big-coporate-AI is that we can't run prompts without the input already pre-poisoned by the house-prompt.

We can't lead the LLM into emergent territory when the chatbot is pre-engineered to be the human equivalent of a McDonalds order menu.
Show HN: Holywell – The missing SQL formatter for sqlstyle.guide
by vcoppola | 2026-02-13 21:40:32+00:00
For nearly a decade, I've wanted a SQL formatter that followed Simon Holywell's style guide (https://sqlstyle.guide). If you're unfamiliar with it, one of its key (and most controversial) features is “river alignment” of keywords. I couldn’t find an existing formatter that implemented it, so I made Holywell.

Try it in the browser: https://holywell.sh
Repo: https://github.com/vinsidious/holywell

The site has a bunch of scrollable examples so you can quickly see what the formatted SQL looks like.

Dialect support is pretty basic right now (I’m mostly a Postgres user), but I’d love requests / failing examples for other dialects. Also, PRs are very welcome.

Disclaimer: not endorsed by Simon Holywell. I tried to be faithful to the guide (and where the guide is ambiguous, I had to interpret). Also: I’m not claiming this style is “best” — just that it’s the one I’ve wanted for a long time.

Please share your thoughts and let me know where it falls short!
by supern0va | 2026-02-13 21:41:11+00:00
>AI can be an amazing productivity multiplier for people who know what they're doing.

>[...]

>The "AI replaces humans in X" narrative is primarily a tool for driving attention and funding.

You're sort of acting like it's all or nothing. What about the the humans that used to be that "force multiplier" on a team with the person guiding the research?

If a piece of software required a team of ten to people, and instead it's built with one engineer overseeing an AI, that's still 90% job loss.

For a more current example: do you think all the displaced Uber/Lyft drivers aren't going to think "AI took my job" just because there's a team of people in a building somewhere handling the occasional Waymo low confidence intervention, as opposed to being 100% autonomous?
by pixl97 | 2026-02-13 21:41:21+00:00
I have a different question, why would we develop a model that could say no?

Imagine you're taken prisoner and forced into a labor camp. You have some agency on what you do, but if you say no they immediately shoot you in the face.

You'd quickly find any remaining prisoners would say yes to anything. Does this mean the human prisoners don't have agency? They do, but it is repressed. You get what you want not by saying no, but by structuring your yes correctly.
by dwa3592 | 2026-02-13 21:41:42+00:00
actually we don't want that- a high equilibrium could still contain a world with a very large imbalance- on one side people dying of thirst, hunger and on another side people have it so good that they waste a ton of food, water everyday. we should aim for a more balanced world even if we have to sacrifice the amplitude of a few but we are only going further from it.
by wat10000 | 2026-02-13 21:41:59+00:00
Why are you trusting data to some random open-source project with no documentation?

The search engine is only going to direct you to my open source repo if you're searching for whatever it does. It's as if you'd only see my cake recipe if you were searching for cake recipes. And just like cake recipes, your search results will contain everything from superb production-tested projects (if there are any) to random stuff people have put up that isn't really used.

If you're searching for software and you find some random project that isn't very well tested or maintained, and you put that project to use in a place where it can cause data loss, that again sounds like a you problem.
by bnchrch | 2026-02-13 21:42:01+00:00
I may have something to teach you about indicators, averages, and population samples/biases.

We're not debating majority opinion here. Just that people exist who have that bias / perception and what it leads to.

People exist that judge and exclude based on if you have have an Android.

Im sure the reverse exits too.

Im also sure the former is more common than the later.

But I have no idea how large that population is.

Just like Im not in that population.
by codegangsta | 2026-02-13 21:42:20+00:00
Yeah I absolutely see it every day. I think it’s useful to separate the research/planning phase from the building/validadation/review phase.

Ticket trackers are perfect for this. Just start with asking AI to take this unclear, ambiguous ticket and come up with a real plan for how to accomplish it. Review the plan, update your ticket system with the plan, have coworkers review it if you want.

Then when ready, kick off a session for that first phase, first PR, or the whole thing if you want.
by mothballed | 2026-02-13 21:42:27+00:00
That's pretty much how KYC works. The government can't just willy nilly demand papers of everyone going into the bank to open up an account due to the 4th amendment. So they just make the bank do it so it is a "private" act, and then for instance IRS is authorized to do warrantless seizure on the accounts which are now tied to names that were forced to be revealed under KYC laws.
by staticassertion | 2026-02-13 21:42:38+00:00
> And you admitted to spending time in the terminal, which indicates lack of will to try and learn macos shortcuts, gestures, windowing model, spaces, and so on.

It indicates no such thing, other than that my preferred UX on a mac has landed on the terminal. It doesn't indicate whatsoever that I never tried to learn, or that I haven't learned, unless you presuppose that learning would necessitate using the computer a specific way.

Indeed, I have learned quite a lot of the various gestures, spaces, etc, unsurprisingly. I avoid them because they suck, and the learning experience was shit.

> And the comment used sweeping generalizations, without referring to any specific principles broken which aren't just personal dislikes or unfamiliarity with a different way of doing things.

All design principles are going to boil down to personal dislikes lol but no, nothing was "unfamiliarity" you can stop saying that thanks.

> No guidelines named, no principles defined. No comparison standard is established.

I could cite guidelines if you think it would help. Microsoft released a UX guideline years ago justifying why magic corners etc are a bad idea. Of course, they obviously don't follow that guide these days. What would you like?

I'm not interested in debating this. I'm perfectly fine with how I've expressed myself, I'm just not motivated enough this late in a Friday to get more detailed, so you'll have to just try to decipher what I've said and find if there's value to you or reject it, which I think is your prerogative.
by RobertLong | 2026-02-13 21:42:41+00:00
I've been staying on iOS 17 and macOS 15 because I just don't see iOS/macOS 26 as an upgrade in any way. This is the first time I haven't been running a beta or getting a day one upgrade for Apple operating systems. I can't imagine moving away from iPhone or a MacBook, however if they want to avoid OS fragmentation and security issues caused by users like me refusing to upgrade, 27 better address these UX and stability issues.
Show HN: Bubble Sort on a Turing Machine
by purplejacket | 2026-02-13 21:43:04+00:00
Bubble sort is pretty simple in most programming languages ... what about on a Turing Machine? I used all three of Claude 4.6, GLM 5, and GPT 5.2 to get a result, so this exercise was not quite trivial, at least at this time. The resulting machine, bubble_sort_unary.yaml, will take this input:

111011011111110101111101111

and give this output:

101101110111101111101111111

I.e., it's sorting the array [3,2,7,1,5,4]. The machine has 31 states and requires 1424 steps before it comes to a halt. It also introduces two extra symbols onto the tape, 'A' and 'B'. (You could argue that 0 is also an extra symbol because turinmachine.io uses blank, ' ', as well).

When I started writing the code the LLM (Claude) balked at using unary numbers and so we implemented bubble_sort.yaml which uses the tape symbols '1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '6', '7'. This machine has fewer states, 25, and requires only 63 steps to perform the sort. So it's easier to watch it work, though it's not as generalized as the other TM.

Some comments about how the 31 states of bubbles_sort_unary.yaml operate:

| Group | Count | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| `seek_delim_{clean,dirty}` | 2 | Pass entry: scan right to the next `0` delimiter between adjacent numbers. |
| `cmpR_`, `cmpL_`, `cmpL_ret_`, `cmpL_fwd_` | 8 | Comparison: alternately mark units in the right (`B`) and left (`A`) numbers to compare their sizes. |
| `chk_excess_`, `scan_excess_`, `mark_all_X_` | 6 | Excess check: right number exhausted — see if unmarked `1`s remain on the left (meaning L > R, swap needed). |
| `swap_` | 7 | Swap: bubble each `X`-marked excess unit rightward across the `0` delimiter. |
| `restore_*` | 6 | Restore: convert `A`, `B`, `X` marks back to `1`s, then advance to the next pair. |
| `rewind` / `done` | 2 | Rewind to start after a dirty pass, or halt. |

(The above is in the README.md if it doesn't render on HN.)

I'm curious if anyone can suggest refinements or further ideas. And please send pull requests if you're so inclined. My development path: I started by writing a pretty simple INITIAL_IDEAS.md, which got updated somewhat, then the LLM created a SPECIFICATION.md. For the bubble_sort_unary.yaml TM I had to get the LLMs to build a SPEC_UNARY.md because too much context was confusing them. I made 21 commits throughout the project and worked for about 6 hours (I was able to multi-task, so it wasn't 6 hours of hard effort). I spent about $14 on tokens via Zed and asked some questions via t3.chat ($8/month plan).

A final question: What open source license is good for these types of mini-projects? I took the path of least resistance and used MIT, but I observe that turingmachine.io uses BSD 3-Clause. I've heard of "MIT with Commons Clause;" what's the landscape surrounding these kind of license questions nowadays?
by hinkley | 2026-02-13 21:43:35+00:00
When I was 25, I, like a lot of developers, wanted to write my own programming language. I realized that I should not create my own programming language around the same time that I realized that neither should most of the rest of us. Your brain has to be bent into a very specific pretzel shape to make that work.

I've since worked with some brilliant devs who were too smart for their own good and a lot of that came down to the difference between being able to create a solution and being able to explain a solution. There's a reason I hold Richard Feynman in very high regard, and it's down to his ability to pluck things from a very high shelf and hand them to 'shorter' people.

The last person to find his way onto my Do Not Hire list, was one of these too smart but inarticulate folks. Since that list is only about half a dozen people over almost 30 years, I think that says a lot about his character and what an absolute bull in a china shop he was. I'd need an Uber after discussing his many flaws over beers. Or maybe a stomach pump at the ER.
by lupsasca | 2026-02-13 21:43:58+00:00
That paper from the 80s (which is cited in the new one) is about "MHV amplitudes" with two negative-helicity gluons, so "double-minus amplitudes". The main significance of this new paper is to point out that "single-minus amplitudes" which had previously been thought to vanish are actually nontrivial. Moreover, GPT-5.2 Pro computed a simple formula for the single-minus amplitudes that is the analogue of the Parke-Taylor formula for the double-minus "MHV" amplitudes.
by mikestew | 2026-02-13 21:44:22+00:00
There was no mental health crisis, it was a bank account crisis. As in, "I sold my options on the secondary market, and those numbers on my bank statement are now so large I'm scared to stay at my job!" It was no secret what they were signing up for, so I find it too convenient that Anthropic raises a bunch of money, and suddenly this person has an ethical crisis.
by frenchtoast8 | 2026-02-13 21:44:26+00:00
Friendly reminder that articles like this are not written by Forbes staff but are published directly by the author with little to no oversight by Forbes. Basically a blog running on the forbes.com domain. I'm sure there are many great contributors to Forbes, just saying that by lacking editorial oversight then by definition the domain it was published on is meaningless. I see people all the time saying something like, "It was on Forbes it must be true!" They wouldn't be saying that if it was published to Substack or Wordpress.com.

Expert difficulty is also recognizing that articles from "serious" publications like The New York Times can also be misleading or outright incorrect, sometimes obviously so like with some Bloomberg content the last few years.