MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by coldtea | 2026-02-10 12:11:36+00:00
>It is not desire-able, safe, logical, or rational since (to paraphrase:), they are complex text transformation algorithms that can, at best, emulate training data reinforced by benchmarks and they display emergent behaviours based on those.

>They are not human, so attributing human characteristics to them is highly illogical

Nothing illogical about it. We attribute human characterists when we see human-like behavior (that's what "attributing human characteristics" is supposed to be by definition). Not just when we see humans behaving like humans.

Calling them human would be illogical. Attributing human characteristics is highly logical.

It's a "talks like a duck, walks like a duck" recognition, not essentialism.

After all, human characteristics is a continium of external behaviors and internal processing, some of which we share with primates and other animals (non-humans!) already, and some of which we can just as well share with machines or algorithms.

"Only humans can have human like behavior" is what's illogical. E.g. if we're talking about walking, there are modern robots that can walk like a human. That's human like behavior.

Speaking or reasoning like a human is not out of reach either. To a smaller or larger or even to an "indiscuisable from a human on a Turing test" degree, other things aside humans, whether animals or machines or algorithms can do such things too.

>That irrationality should raise biological and engineering red flags. Plus humanization ignores the profit motives directly attached to these text generators, their specialized corpus’s, and product delivery surrounding them.

The profit motives are irrelevant. Even a FOSS, not-for-profit hobbyist LLM would exhibit similar behaviors.
by lnenad | 2026-02-10 12:11:51+00:00
> They are not human, so attributing human characteristics to them is highly illogical. Understandable, but irrational.

What? If a human child grew up with ducks, only did duck like things and never did any human things, would you say it would irrational to attribute duck characteristics to them?

> That irrationality should raise biological and engineering red flags. Plus humanization ignores the profit motives directly attached to these text generators, their specialized corpus’s, and product delivery surrounding them.

But thinking they're human is irrational. Attributing something that is the sole purpose of them, having human characteristics is rational.

> Pretending your MS RDBMS likes you better than Oracles because it said so is insane business thinking (in addition to whatever that means psychologically for people who know the truth of the math).

You're moving the goalposts.
by matt_kantor | 2026-02-10 12:11:56+00:00
Given how YouTube makes money from advertising, I suspect it's more profitable for them to keep the data to themselves and use it for targeting. I would not be surprised if they also share it with Adsense & other Alphabet entities (and presumably with government agencies), but am doubtful beyond that.

Not that this is much better than directly selling to third parties.
Show HN: Valk – new programming language with a stateful GC
by lorenzv | 2026-02-10 12:12:40+00:00
Greetings HN,

I have been working on a new programming language for the last 3 years and thought it was time to share it with some people. The core of the language is done and i have been using it to create all software related to the language: the compiler itself, the website and vman (valk manager, like npm). There's still alot of work todo but was hoping for some feedback. Maybe an interesting feature of the language is (so i think) that it's the first language with a stateful garbage collector. It basically knows what memory goes out of scope and which doesn't without having to scan for it. So no more mark/sweep. This new GC algorithm is kind of complex and i would probably need a big blog post to explain everything. Something i will do in the future. Anyhow, feedback is welcome.
by LightBug1 | 2026-02-10 12:13:52+00:00
That's fair, but arguable. At this stage I think the architecture and it's reason to be are now so deeply intertwined that you cannot separate them (or would ruin it with the attempt).

I've seen instances where a building is all about what takes place there, demolished, re-built, and lose their soul and former purpose.

I can easily see that happening with the Southbank. It's iconic and embedded so deeply at this stage, despite the the various opinions on its looks.
by consumer451 | 2026-02-10 12:14:47+00:00
Ok, after a bit of “research” - a openclaw user sets the soul.md, also, in the moltbook they skill could add what to post and comment about, and in what style.

User could browse moltbook, then message openclaw a url and say “write that this is smart/stupid, or shill my fave billionaire, or crypto.”

That’s how you could “pull the strings,” right?
by Toddyg1981 | 2026-02-10 12:14:55+00:00
I’ve been a builder for 24 years. I’m on a disability pension in Australia, and over the last few years I built a full autonomous security platform on a 16‑year‑old computer.

It started as a personal project and turned into something much larger: a unified security fabric with 94 modules across protection, intelligence, automation, offensive simulation, and governance.

The system does things I couldn’t find in existing tools:
– autonomous SOC
– AI model runtime security
– national‑level telemetry correlation
– deception and digital‑twin simulation
– supply‑chain AI
– data‑integrity verification

Everything is self‑maintaining and AI‑driven.

I’m posting this to get technical feedback from people who understand security, distributed systems, and AI. I’m not selling anything. I’m not raising money here. I just want to know if what I’ve built is useful, flawed, interesting, or insane.

Screenshots, documentation, and the investor/technical package are on my site:
www.anchoraiguard.com

Happy to answer any technical questions about architecture, design decisions, or implementation details.
by afandian | 2026-02-10 12:15:35+00:00
Thanks! That's the approach I'm taking. Bellows airtight first. Then a period of reflection on the tuning before the next step.

The good thing about harmoniums is that they have clearly defined layers, and each layer can be approached left to right.

The things that worried me were the steps that are difficult to reverse without the risk of damage, like gluing and tuning. I've done some of both now!

Curious about that mystery instrument. Give me a clue.
by e_pascual_otero | 2026-02-10 12:15:57+00:00
In Spain, electronic invoices for public administration use an XML format called Facturae. The official viewer requires installing Java. I built FacturaView, a free web tool that lets you upload your XML and instantly see all the invoice data — sender, receiver, line items, taxes, totals, payment info.

Everything is processed locally in your browser. Files never leave your device. You can export to PDF or Excel.

Supports all Facturae versions (3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2), batch invoices, and digital signature validation.

Built with Vanilla JS + Vite on the frontend, Python/FastAPI for optional signature validation. 242 tests.
by anileated | 2026-02-10 12:16:05+00:00
You would need to know that person's working hours, so I don't see how you are avoiding something.

Sure, if you talk to someone there for the first time, you would need to learn what time is generally day/night. However, you will know that 2-3 times in. Just like you would automatically know that now it's summer in Oz, or 3 hour short days near Arctic circle, if you talk to anyone from there even very occasionally.

Case in point, we have global calendar with no problems.
by latexr | 2026-02-10 12:16:06+00:00
> Many of them I would not have found if he did not share things as soon as he discovered something

You don’t know that. For all you know, your life would’ve been richer if you’ve read those thoughts after they’ve been left to stew for longer. For all you know, if that happened you would’ve said “most” instead of “many”. Or maybe not, no one can say for sure until it happens

> that felt “obvious.”

It’s not about feeling obvious. There is value in exploring obvious concepts when you’ve thought about them for longer, maybe researched what others before you had to say on the matter, and you can highlight and improve on all of that. Everyone benefits from a thoughtful approach.

> I’ve picked up an incredible number of useful tips and tricks. (…) I also love how he documents small snippets and gists of code that are easy to link to and cross-reference.

That is (I think clearly, but I may be wrong) not what I’m talking about. A code snippet is very far removed in meaning from a human insight. What I wrote doesn’t just concern Simon’s readers, but Simon as a person. Being constantly “on” isn’t good, it leads to exhaustion (as reported), which leads to burnout. While my first paragraph in the previous comment was a criticism, it was merely an introduction to the rest of the post which was given in empathy. I want us all to do and be better.
by kjksf | 2026-02-10 12:16:34+00:00
Not to take away from your experience but to offer a counterpoint.

I used claude code to port rust pdb parsing library to typescript.

My SumatraPDF is a large C++ app and I wanted visibility into where does the size of functions / data go, layout of classes. So I wanted to build a tool to dump info out of a PDB. But I have been diagnosed with extreme case of Rustophobiatis so I just can't touch rust code. Hence, the port to typescript.

With my assistance it did the work in an afternoon and did it well. The code worked. I ran it against large PDB from SumatraPDF and it matched the output of other tools.

In a way porting from one language to another is extreme case of refactoring and Claude did it very well.

I think that in general (your experience notwithstanding) Claude Caude is excellent at refactorings.

Here are 3 refactorings from SumatraPDF where I asked claude code to simplify code written by a human:

https://github.com/sumatrapdfreader/sumatrapdf/commit/a472d3...
https://github.com/sumatrapdfreader/sumatrapdf/commit/5624aa...
https://github.com/sumatrapdfreader/sumatrapdf/commit/a40bc9...

I hope you agree the code written by Claude is better than the code written by a human.

Granted, those are small changes but I think it generalizes into bigger changes. I have few refactorings in mind I wanted to do for a long time and maybe with Claude they will finally be feasible (they were not feasible before only because I don't have infinite amount of time to do everything I want to do).
by bayindirh | 2026-02-10 12:17:11+00:00
Do not insult P-II w/256 MB of RAM. That thing used to run this demo[0] at full speed without even getting overwhelmed.

Except some very well maintained software, some of the mundane things we do today waste so much resources it makes me sad.

Heck, the memory use of my IDE peaks at VSCode's initial memory consumption, and I'd argue that my IDE will draw circles around VSCode while sipping coffee and compiling code.

> for no reason other than our own arrogance and apathy.

I'll add greed and apparent cost-reduction to this list. People think they win because they reduce time to market, but that time penalty is delegated to users. Developers gain a couple of hours for once, we lose the same time every couple of days while waiting our computers.

Once I have read a comment by a developer which can be paraphrased as "I won't implement this. It'll take 8 hours. That's too much". I wanted to plant my face to my keyboard full-force, not kidding.

Heck, I tuned/optimized an algorithm for two weeks, which resulted in 2x-3x speedups and enormous memory savings.

We should understand that we don't own the whole machine while running our code.

[0]: https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=1221
by piokoch | 2026-02-10 12:17:17+00:00
"In 2026, I don't use an IDE any more."

Just a question? What IDE feature is obsolete now? Ability to navigate the code? Integration with database, Docker, JIRA, Github (like having PR comments available, listed, etc), Git? Working with remote files? Building the project?

Yes, I can ask copilot to build my project and verify tests results, but it will eat a lot of tokens and added value is almost none.
by aetherspawn | 2026-02-10 12:17:27+00:00
I’m convinced all these blog posts on AI productivity are some kind of high level propaganda trying to create a Folie à deux that AI is much better than it is.

The worst part is that it’s so convincing: not only does everyone who can’t make it work feel gaslit about it, but some people even pretend that it works for them so they don’t feel like they’re missing out.

I remember the last time this happened and people were convinced (for like 2 years) that a gif of an ape could somehow be owned and was worth millions of dollars.
by embedding-shape | 2026-02-10 12:18:02+00:00
Yeah, the UI is slightly ambiguous about it, but FWIW I see the time as one hour off, which makes sense since I'm in +1 :)

The API shows a unambiguous timestamp, which is the exact same value I see for your comment: https://hn.algolia.com/api/v1/items/46958592

> created_at: "2026-02-10T12:03:56.000Z"
by austin-cheney | 2026-02-10 12:18:49+00:00
A meta web browser, or browser toolkit. That is a web browser that by default obeys current standards but does not have to. It can be gutted or extended at the discretion of a user.

For example I would like to remove reliance on certificates for TLS. I know it’s a security nono but I don’t care. Another example is choosing to make markdown the default format instead of html.

Simultaneously such an application should allow users to add their own custom packages, such as native interpretation of Python or custom media codecs.
by nephihaha | 2026-02-10 12:18:53+00:00
I think Epstein's primary role was as a money launderer for Wall Street and the US political/mandarin class. The sex stuff may have been secondary and as blackmail collateral. Powerful people need to hide their money. No customs checks between Continental US and US Virgin Islands, and a short trip on a yacht from the US Virgin Islands to the British Virgin Islands where they ask no questions about bags of dollars being brought in.

As for the US, there are many people out there who want to see it brought down so some kind of new world power can move in instead.
by crabmusket | 2026-02-10 12:18:54+00:00
Being a cooperative seems (having never run one) harder than being a regular private company. It seems like it would constrain a business from being able to do what it would otherwise want to do. So I think of it as doing business "on hard mode". I think it's socially worth doing, and I aspire to be part of one someday. But I don't think it comes for free, especially in a market where you'll compete with businesses that aren't also playing on hard mode.
Show HN: SynthForge - data modeler/generator for all databases
by dllrr | 2026-02-10 12:19:36+00:00
Hi HN,

I built SynthForge IO to create semi-realistic test data across different database formats. I spent months one time using Mimesis and Faker to do what I wanted and grew frustrated.

I've always wanted something with diagramming and could be used for all the DBs I used: Postgres, MySQL, MongoDB.

Now I can import my existing schemas, visually adjust the design, or describe with AI, then generate data to any nosql or sql database.

It has the normal data generators, plus some fun custom ones like role-playing names and weapons.

Completely free to use at https://synthforge.io

Quick video intro at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC0I1McuBYM

Would love feedback! Especially on what field types or export formats are missing.
by boxed | 2026-02-10 12:19:57+00:00
> Maybe an interesting feature of the language is (so i think) that it's the first language with a stateful garbage collector. It basically knows what memory goes out of scope and which doesn't without having to scan for it

You should probably describe what you mean by that somewhere. Because on its face it doesn't seem to make sense. If you don't need to scan, why is the benchmark "how many times can we scan?"?

How is this different from ARC/ORC or something more like that?
by RupertSalt | 2026-02-10 12:20:41+00:00
Your comment is rather incoherent; I recommend prompting an LLM to generate comments with impeccable grammar and coherent lines of reasoning.

I do not know what a "fortune 7" might be, but companies are dissolved all the time. Thousands per year, just administratively.

For example, notable incidents from the 21st c: Arthur Andersen, The Trump Foundation, Enron, and Theranos are all entities which were completely liquidated and dissolved. They no longer meaningfully exist to transact business. They are dead, and definitely 100% not immortal.
by simonw | 2026-02-10 12:21:03+00:00
> There is value in exploring obvious concepts when you’ve thought about them for longer, maybe researched what others before you had to say on the matter, and you can highlight and improve on all of that.

That's exactly what I try to do.

I wrote more about my approach to that here: https://simonwillison.net/2024/Dec/22/link-blog/#trying-to-a...
by adrian_b | 2026-02-10 12:22:09+00:00
The vast majority of useful things cannot be computed with QED from fundamental principles. You cannot compute even simple atomic energy spectra.

The fundamental laws of chemistry have not been changed much by quantum physics, they just became better understood and less mysterious. Quantum mechanics has explained various cases of unusual chemical bonds that appeared to contradict the simpler rules that were believed to be true before the development of quantum physics, but not much else has practical importance.

Solid-state physics is a much better example, because little of it existed before quantum physics.

Nevertheless, solid-state physics is also the most obvious example that the current quantum physics cannot be used to compute anything of practical value from first principles.

All solid-state physics is based on experimentally-measured parameters, which cannot be computed. All mathematical models that are used in solid-state physics are based on guesses about how the solutions could behave, e.g. by introducing various fictitious averaged potentials in equations, like the Schroedinger equation, and they are not based on computations that use primary laws, without guesses that do not have any other justification, except that when the model is completed with the experimentally-measured values for its parameters, it can make reasonably accurate predictions.

Using empirical mathematical models of semiconductor materials, e.g. for designing transistors, is perfectly fine and entire industries have been developed with such empirical models.

However, the fact that one must develop custom empirical models for every kind of application, instead of being able to derive them from what are believed to be the universal laws of quantum physics, demonstrates that these are not good enough.

We can live and progress very well with what we have, but if someone would discover a better theory or a mathematical strategy for obtaining solutions, that could be used to compute the parameters that we must now measure and which could be used to model everything that we need in a way for which there would be guarantees that the model is adequate, then that would be a great advance in physics.
by ojr | 2026-02-10 12:22:30+00:00
AI web agent that lives in a wasm sandbox with predefined skills, it creates websites, mobile apps, powerpoint slides (.pptx files), word documents (.docx files), visualize csv data, and creates remotion videos, no external sandbox servers, all in wasm.

Submitted for the Gemini 3 Hackathon
https://devpost.com/software/slidebits-betty
by embedding-shape | 2026-02-10 12:22:32+00:00
> But if you translate the actual prompt the term riding doesn't even appear. The prompt describes the exact thing you see in excruciating detail.

Yeah, as they go through their workflow earlier in the blog post, that prompt they share there seems to be generated by a different input, then that prompt is passed to the actual model. So the workflow is something like "User prompt input -> Expand input with LLMs -> Send expanded prompt to image model".

So I think "human riding a horse" is the user prompt, which gets expanded to what they share in the post, which is what the model actually uses. This is also how they've presented all their previous image models, by passing user input through a LLM for "expansion" first.

Seems poorly thought out not to make it 100% clear what the actual humanly-written prompt is though, not sure why they wouldn't share that upfront.
Ask HN: Am I holding it wrong?
by notpachet | 2026-02-10 12:22:43+00:00
I've been steadfastly trying my best to incorporate the latest-and-greatest models into my workflow. I've been primarily using Codex recently. But I'm still having difficulties.

For example: no matter what I do, I can't prevent Codex from introducing linter errors.

I use tabs instead of spaces for indentation. It seems like the model is massively weighted on code written using spaces (duh). Despite having a very well articulated styleguide (that Codex helped me write after examining my codebase!) that clearly specifies that tabs are used for indentation, the model will happily go off and make a bunch of changes that incorporate spaces seemingly at random. It will use tabs correctly in certain places, but then devolve back to using spaces later on in the same files.

I have a linter that I've taught the model to run to catch these things, but A) that feels like such a waste of tokens and B) the model often forgets to run the linter anyway.

It's like having a junior developer who has never used the tab key before. They remember to ctrl-f their spaces->tabs sometimes before opening a PR, but not all the time. So I wind up giving them the same feedback over and over.

This example -- tabs instead of spaces -- is just one specific case where the model seems to invariably converge on a local maximum that is dictated by the center of the software bell curve. But in general I'm finding it to be true of just about any "quirky" style opinion I want to enforce:

- Avoid Typescript's `any` or `unknown`: the model will still happily throw these in to make the compiler happy

- Avoid complex ternaries: nope, the model loves these

- Avoid inscrutable one-letter variables versus longer, self-descriptive ones: nope, `a` it is

It just seems like I'm using a tool that is really good at producing the average software output by the average software developer. It's not able to keep my aesthetic / architectural desires at the front of its thinking as it's making my desired changes. It's as if I hired the guy from Memento as an intern.

How do people get around this, other than slathering on even more admonitions to use tabs no matter what (thereby wasting valuable tokens)?

Beyond syntax, I'm still able to use the models to crudely implement new features or functionality, but the way they write code feels... inelegant. There's often a single unifying insight within grasp that the model could reach for to greatly simplify the code it wrote for a given task, but it's not able to see it without me telling it that it's there.
by shinycode | 2026-02-10 12:23:34+00:00
I agree. It’s really easier to build low-impact tools for personal use.
I managed to produce tools I would never have had time to build and I use them everyday. But I will never sell them because it’s tailored to my needs and it makes no sense to open source anything nowadays.
For work it’s different, product teams still need to decide what to build and what is helpful to the clients. Our bugs are not self-fixed by AI yet.
I think Anthropic saying 100% of their code is AI generated is a marketing stunt. They have all reasons to say that to sell their tool that generates code. It sends a strong signal to the industry that if they can do it, it could be easier for smaller companies.
We are not there yet from a client perspective asking a feature and the new feature is shipped 2 days later in prod without human interactions