MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by somenameforme | 2026-02-06 06:11:33+00:00
The German plan for deportation was never executed. There were programs against the Jews, they were persecuted and encouraged to leave, but the Nazis never formally banned them. They ended up going the other direction as genocide approached and made it impossible for Jews to leave.

But the situations are again nothing alike because in that case you're speaking of Germany trying to dump Germans on other countries. In this case you're speaking of the US returning e.g. Salvadorans to El Salvador, which the latter country generally having obligations under international law to accept their citizens. The handful of exceptions, like with Venezuela, have all generally been resolved.
by Animats | 2026-02-06 06:12:15+00:00
There's a lot of history around what radio was supposed to be for. Little of that history appears in the article. In the US, there was a real question over whether there would be lots of little AM stations or a few huge ones with nationwide coverage. One proposal was to cover the entire continent with three high power AM stations.

But in 1938, Congress decided otherwise.[1]

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate of the United States of America that the operation of radio broadcast stations in the standard broadcast band (550 to 1600 kilocycles) with power in excess of 50 kilowatts is definitely against the public interest, in that such operation would tend to concentrate political, social, and economic power and influence in the hands of a very small group, and is against the public interest for the further reason that the operation of broadcast stations with power in excess of 50 kilowatts has been demonstrated to have adverse and injurious economic effects on other stations operating with less power, in depriving such stations of revenue and in limiting the ability of such stations to adequately or efficiently serve the social, religious, educational, civic, and other like organizations and institutions in the communities in which such stations are located and which must and do depend on such stations for the carrying on of community welfare work generally.

Not something we'd expect from Congress today. That's why, during the era when standard broadcast AM dominated, there were many, many local AM radio stations.

The 50KW AM power limit is still in effect, but has been overridden by stations being under common ownership via buyouts and mergers.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler_resolution
by jonjacky | 2026-02-06 06:12:21+00:00
It is often said that C became popular just because Unix was popular, due to being free -- it just "rode its coattails" as you put it.

As if you could separate Unix from C. Without C there wouldn't have been any Unix to become popular, there wouldn't have been any coattails to ride.

C gave Unix some advantages that other operating systems of the 1970s and 80s didn't have:

Unix was ported to many different computers spanning a large range of cost and size, from microcomputers to mainframes.

In Unix both the operating system and the applications were written in the same language.

The original Unix and C developers wrote persuasive books that taught the C language and demonstrated how to do systems programming and application programming in C on Unix.

Unix wasn't the first operating system to be written in a high-level language. The Burroughs OS was written in Algol, Multics was written in PL/I, and much of VMS was written in BLISS. None of those languages became popular.

IN the 1970s and 80s, Unix wasn't universal in universities. Other operating systems were also widely used: Tenex, TOPS-10, and TOPS-20 on DEC-10s and 20s, VMS on VAXes. But their systems languages and programming cultures did not catch on in the same way as C and Unix.

The original Macintosh OS of the 1980s was no competitor to Unix. It was a single user system without integrated network support. Apple replaced the original Macintosh OS with a system based on a Unix.
by X1NG | 2026-02-06 06:12:29+00:00
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes (US, Canada) (Canadian citizen, eligible for J-1 visa)

Technologies: Python, TypeScript, Go, React, Flask, Node.js, PostgreSQL, Redis, Kafka, Docker, Kubernetes, AWS (Certified), LangGraph, LLMs

Résumé/CV:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TSAIq53gHQvb73pDCTKPjErQ9RB...

Portfolio: https://www.felixng.dev/

Email: FelixNg1022[at]gmail.com

UBC CS+Business student + startup co-founder seeking Summer 2026 SWE internship. Built an AI agent (Python/LangGraph) at my startup—just accepted into a Shanghai incubator. Co-authored CHI 2024 paper on player trust and AI hallucinations. Projects include Schedulii (Go/Kafka/K8s, 10K+ daily requests) and cf_ai_code_review (live on Cloudflare Workers, 39 GitHub stars). AWS Certified. I ship fast and care about craft.
by permo-w | 2026-02-06 06:12:56+00:00
>What would you have rather done if you were the poor mother in middle of nowhere India and you had 6 children with complete lack of material stability. You would have rejected it?

There's a major inconsistency here. You're consistently claiming that other people don't understand poverty, and yet you essentially made the point that you're not poor ("those people have lower IQ"). So either you started off poor and then worked your way up via some route that's obviously not this job, or you haven't experienced it either, or you are actually poor and aren't doing this work. Which is it?

>Can you address the point I made where farmers suicides happen because of material poverty?

You haven't provided any evidence. If you can prove the suicide rate is higher for these farmers, you may have a point, but even then, the suicide rate does not necessarily have any bearing on the overall rate of happiness. It's possible that a bigger majority are happier farming, but a small minority are pushed more inexorably towards suicide. Perhaps that isn't true either. We simply don't know without evidence.

That's my basic point. You're making strong claims, but you quite clearly simply do not know and are deciding based on instinct and perhaps a vague desire to have your favoured political candidates get more votes. You haven't provided any justification whatsoever. "I think it's right", "maybe they commit suicide" and "they don't vote for people I prefer" are not justifications, they're guesses. As much as you may want me to ("Who are you to suggest they are less happy than otherwise?"). I have made no claims whatsoever, simply pointed out the lack of nuance using hypotheticals.

Having more money is very good. Psychological damage is very bad. Your point is that psychological damage doesn't matter and having more food is all that matters. Okay, so should you send your child off to fight for a warlord if it means they have more food? Please try to grasp that's there's nuance.

>If you saw that my main point was that metaphysical concerns of “trauma” and “psychological issues” are a non issue for people who don’t have food on their plate.

I've put this at the end because its beside the main point, but this sentence is just a barrel of conceptual misunderstandings. Trauma is a type of psychological issue, so "trauma and psychological issues" makes no sense without a prepended "other". Neither trauma nor psychological issues are metaphysical concerns. Metaphysical concerns are issues of first principles and deeper understandings of concepts. It's a branch of philosophy. If you don't believe me, Google it, or ask ChatGPT.
by curiosity42 | 2026-02-06 06:13:49+00:00
One thing that has helped me immensely, given that everything that is typed has an agenda (don't worry, I am an anonymous no body, from whom even thinking of having a agenda will be nothing short of fake-puffery), is that:
1. Analyze the written word no it's own merit, regardless of who has written it
2. Look at who has written it and all the agendas that might have been wrapped into it
3. Apply a discount or multiplier, given your own world view.
Else, a lot of good thought gets thrown out (again, at least for me).
by frankc | 2026-02-06 06:14:18+00:00
I recently built something in the same universe - using ffmpeg to receive streams from obs to capture audio and video - don't want to get into details beyond except to say it involved a fairly involved pipeline of ray actors and a significant admin interface with nicegui. I had no problem doing this with claude. You need to give it access to look up how do things, like context7. If you are doing something very specific, you need to have a session that does research to build a skill so it doesn't need to redo that research every time. And yes, you do need to tell it the architecture and be fairly detailed with something like how you want rbac.

Using these tools takes quite a bit of effort but even after doing all those steps to use the tool well, I still got this project done in a few days when it otherwise would have taken me 1-2 months and likely simply would never happened at all.
Show HN: Fine tuning a resume builder for SWE's
by zed_labs_dev | 2026-02-06 06:14:55+00:00
We built SWEResume based on community feedback and insights from FAANG recruiters (some of them even joined us as advisors).

Our selling point is simple: ATS/LLM parsing optimized resumes, with non-generic AI content improvements based on actual successful resumes.

We spent a long time fine-tuning our formatter to be able to generate latex styled PDFs using a simple GUI editor.

The formatting and parsing improvements are free to apply and generate as much as you want.

We only charge for the deep content analysis, which actually costs us.

Initial users have loved it so far, and would love to get some feedback from the HN community!

Use code 'jungle' for a special discount for the content analysis!
by thesz | 2026-02-06 06:15:45+00:00
We are talking about compiler here and "performance" referred above is the performance of generated code.

When you are optimizing a program, you have a specific part of code to improve. The part can be found with profiler.

When you are optimizing a compiler generated code, you have many similar parts of code in many programs and not-so-specific part of compiler that can be improved.
by b1temy | 2026-02-06 06:16:42+00:00
> Because game studios these days are all about global matchmaking

Why not have moderation then? When participating in an online forum, you are essentially "matchmaking" to a topic or corner of the internet with similar interests. Have some moderators (be it members of the community, or staff) ban players on obvious hacking/cheating or rule-breaking behaviour, and allow members to report any instances of this (I believe this is already a thing in modern video games, I have seen videos of "influencers" getting enraged when losing and reporting players for "stream sniping").

Sure, this might cause the usual issues of creating an echo chamber where mods and admins might unfairly ban members of the community. But you could always just join a different server in that case.

I believe Minecraft has a system similar to what I described; you enter the URL of a server to join, each hosted on its own independent instance (not necessarily hosted by Mojang, the studio behind Minecraft) each with their own unique sets of rules and culture, and being banned in one server does not ban you from every other server. Incidentally, Minecraft also does not have kernel level anticheat, and still very successfully manages to be one of the most popular games around (By some accounts, the top-selling game of all time).

> I miss the days of Tribes 2 or CS1.6 when games had server browsers

I do too.
by jamesfinlayson | 2026-02-06 06:17:02+00:00
This so much - I remember migrating from one CI system to another a few years ago - I had built all of our pipelines to pull in some secrets and call a .sh file that did all the heavy lifting. The migration had a few pain points but was fairly easy. Meanwhile, the teams who had created their pipelines with the UI and broken them up in to multiple steps were not happy at all.
by bigstrat2003 | 2026-02-06 06:17:12+00:00
Jenkins, like many complex tools, is as good or bad as you make it. My last two employers had rock solid Jenkins environments because they were set up as close to vanilla as possible.

But yes, Groovy is a much better language for defining pipelines than YAML. Honestly pretty much any programming language at all is better than YAML. YAML is fine for config files, but not for something as complex as defining a CI pipeline.
by indemnity | 2026-02-06 06:17:42+00:00
When really solid programmers who started skeptical (and even have a ban policy if PR submitters don’t disclose they used AI) now show how their workflows have been improved by AI agents, it may be worth trying to understand what they are doing and you are not.

https://mitchellh.com/writing/my-ai-adoption-journey

My experience mirrors that of Mitchell. It absolutely is at the level now where AI can free up time to do the really interesting stuff.
by thayne | 2026-02-06 06:17:49+00:00
> in C it's hard to say reliably define this int is 64-bit wide

That isn't really a problem any more (since c99). You can define it as uint64_t.

But we have a ton of existing APIs that are defined using the wobbly types, so we're kind of stuck with it. And even new APIs use the wobbly types because the author didn't use that for whatever reason.

But that is far from the only issue.

128 bit ints is definitely a problem though, you don't even get agreement between different compilers on the same os on the same hardware.
by Calavar | 2026-02-06 06:18:19+00:00
I think that's overstating it.

JustHTML is a success in large part because it's a problem that can be solved with 4 digit LOC. The whole codebase can sit in an LLM's context at once. We already know LLMs are quite good at that class of problem.

I would classify both this C compiler and FastRender as interesting failures. They are interesting because they got a significant fraction of the way to feature complete. They are failures because there is no clear path to moving the needle to 80% feature complete (or in the cast of FastRender even to 50%).

I've seen this issue play out in pretty much every vibe coded project that crosses a certain size: You see an obvious defect that the agent missed, but you don't have enough knowledge of the codebase to be able to nudge the agent in the right direction.
by andkenneth | 2026-02-06 06:18:27+00:00
Weirdly I feel like partially because of this it feels more "human" and more like a real person I'm talking to. GPT models feel fake and forced, and will yap in a way that is like they're trying to get to be my friend, but offputting in a way that makes it not work. Meanwhile claude has always had better "emotional intelligence".

Claude also seems a lot better at picking up what's going on. If you're focused on tasks, then yeah, it's going to know you want quick answers rather than detailed essays. Could be part of it.
Show HN: A React testing boilerplate for vibe coded apps
by scedast | 2026-02-06 06:18:32+00:00
Hey HN,

Vibe coding with AI I realized it's not great at writing tests by default. I built this React testing boilerplate to fix that. It’s meant to keep your vibe coded apps maintainable post-launch. You can ship features quickly, but with a safety net that prevents regressions from silently breaking things.
by up-n-atom | 2026-02-06 06:18:42+00:00
Why bother? Ask yourself first if you’re doing anything truly meaningful. The answer is likely no; it’s all irrelevant. Time is finite. The thousand ideas you had don’t need to be built. You’re only being productive for show. You’re orchestrating your time for agentic irrelevance. It’s not going to make life any easier long term. What you’re actually doing is crafting an addiction, a reliance on technology, because you aren’t doing what humans must: learn. You’ll spiral out once the systems go down, and they will, because you’ve forgotten to build contingencies. And your knowledge gap will cascade beyond help and time. For you are on the path to becoming the walking dead. Go out and find value in what you’re capable of, not just in productivity gains. Good luck, and remember, the tortoise beat the hare.
by ArchieScrivener | 2026-02-06 06:19:41+00:00
The Evolution method outlined also seems born from the Continuous Delivery paradigm that was required for subscription business models. I would argue Engineering is the superior approach as the Lean/Agile methods of production were born from physical engineering projects whose end result was complete. Evolution seems to be even more chaotic because an improper paradigm of 'dev ops' was used instead of organically emerged as one would expect with an evolving method.

Ai assistance would seem to favor the engineering approach as the friction of teams and personalities is reduced in favor of quick feasibility testing and complete planning.
by cowl | 2026-02-06 06:19:48+00:00
Agree but you are talking about a POC, and he is talking about reliable, working software.
this phase of LLM are perfect for POCs and there you can have 10x speedup, no question.
But going from a POC to a working reliable software is where most of our time is spent anyway even without LLMS.

With LLMs this phase becomes worse.
we speedup 10x the poc time, we slow down almost as much in the next phases, because now you have a poc of 10k lines that you are not familiar with at all, that have to pay way more attention at code review,
that have to bolt on security as an afterthought (a major slowdown now, so much so that there are dedicated companies whose business model has become fixing Security problems caused by LLM POCs).
Next phase, POCs are almost always 99% happy path. Bolt on edge case as another after thought and because you did not write any of those 10k lines how do you even know what edge cases might be neccesary to cover? maybe you guessed it rigth, spend even more time studing the unfamiliar code.

We use LLM extensivly now in our day to day, development has become somewhat more enjoyable but there is, at least as of now, no real increase in final delivry times, we have just redestributed where effort and time goes.
by vanc_cefepime | 2026-02-06 06:20:10+00:00
Just the people’s choice, right? They voted for this government policy, right???!?
https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2025/10/22/denver-mayor-ext...

>> “I was stunned to learn late yesterday that after convening a task force of local and national experts, Mayor Johnston has been negotiating secretly with the discredited CEO of Flock Safety and signing another unilateral extension of this mass surveillance contract with no public process and no vote from the City Council or input from his own task force,” Councilmember Sarah Parady told The Denver Gazette.
by alephnerd | 2026-02-06 06:20:39+00:00
> But with the collapse of US/EU relations and the subsequent cozying up to China, it's not impossible that the Chinese demand access to the EU markets in exchange for assistance

The EU doesn't need to bend to China's will.

That's why the EU signed an FTA with India last week. During the Diwali sales season (9 days long) Mercedes was selling a car every 6 minutes [0] with an average sales price of $111k before the FTA was signed as well as rolling out 12 new models of which 2 are luxury EVs. It's also why BMW is rolling out 10 new cars in India - 3 of which are luxury EVs [1].

Most other large markets are either closed to European exports or face downward Chinese pricing pressure. By giving European luxury exporters the ability to sell 250K European manufactured cars tariff free a year it helps reduce pressure by giving European exporters a China-free market, with MG Motors India being Indianized [11].

China has also insisted that it will continue to back Russia in Ukraine no matter what [2][3] and Russia has returned the favor [4][5] to China. As such, China-EU relations are essentially irreparable and MoFA aligned think tanks have pointed this out as well [6]. And this is also why the EU is only further expanding trade barriers for Chinese exports [7][8][9][10].

[0] - https://www.reuters.com/world/india/mercedes-indias-revenue-...

[1] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-08/bmw-to-ro...

[2] - https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/ch...

[3] - https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-russia-discuss-ukr...

[4] - https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russian-b...

[5] - https://www.reuters.com/world/china/russias-shoigu-chinas-wa...

[6] - https://fddi.fudan.edu.cn/_t2515/57/f8/c21257a743416/page.ht...

[7] - https://www.ft.com/content/5d9f1a02-a60b-418f-8c9b-b711624cd...

[8] - https://www.ft.com/content/eb677cb3-f86c-42de-b819-277bcb042...

[9] - https://www.ft.com/content/101ced1f-e03b-4353-8b1a-401d4feca...

[10] - https://www.ft.com/content/a7190e3e-8656-401e-8645-f342d1a63...

[11] - https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-saic-cut-stake-in...
by hexaga | 2026-02-06 06:21:02+00:00
Again, vacuous. You deride as 'metaphysical' what is psychological. But the health and well-being of
children too is a 'metaphysical' concern to the worker by this metric, and yet you call it up to
support yourself? Your argument is empty, hypocritical: there can be no substance to calling the one
metaphysical and the other physical, thereby dismissing all suffering.

If you're going to play the game you're playing, play it everywhere: their children don't matter, their
suffering doesn't matter, they don't matter.

The core of your argument is merely that if it is possible to force someone to do something, it is right
and proper. What a vile philosophy, to make what is detestable into that which is desirable.

At least have the grace to be ashamed and turn away, if you cannot stomach the taste but to replace it
with deception.
by bsder | 2026-02-06 06:22:06+00:00
Andrew Carnegie funded a whole lot of stuff we still enjoy today. He was still a piece of shit and responsible for a lot of people winding up dead.

Gates has always been a piece of shit. For example, when Paul Allen got diagnosed with cancer, Gates and Ballmer tried to screw him out of Microsoft stock that he owned (this was roughly 1982-ish?).

You're a shit person if you try to screw over your "friend" like this. You're a shit person squared if you do it when they just got diagnosed with cancer.
by simianwords | 2026-02-06 06:22:15+00:00
What I find hardest about CI offerings is that each one has a unique DSL that inevitably has edge cases that you may only find out once you’ve tried it.

You might face that many times using Gitlab CI. Random things don’t work the way you think it should and the worst part is you must learn their stupid custom DSL.

Not only that, there’s no way to debug the maze of CI pipelines but I imagine it’s a hard thing to achieve. How would I be able to locally run CI that also interacts with other projects CI like calling downstream pipelines?
by andai | 2026-02-06 06:24:35+00:00
> the scope is so small there's not much point in using an LLM

Actually that's how I did most of my work last year. I was annoyed by existing tools so I made one that can be used interactively.

It has full context (I usually work on small codebases), and can make an arbitrary number of edits to an arbitrary number of files in a single LLM round trip.

For such "mechanical" changes, you can use the cheapest/fastest model available. This allows you to work interactively and stay in flow.

(In contrast to my previous obsession with the biggest, slowest, most expensive models! You actually want the dumbest one that can do the job.)

I call it "power coding", akin to power armor, or perhaps "coding at the speed of thought". I found that staying actively involved in this way (letting LLM only handle the function level) helped keep my mental model synchronized, whereas if I let it work independently, I'd have to spend more time catching up on what it had done.

I do use both approaches though, just depends on the project, task or mood!