MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by LexiMax | 2026-02-13 23:42:21+00:00
I don't think you can claim a middle ground here, because I still largely agree with the sentiment:

> The correct response when someone oversteps your stated boundaries is not debate. It is telling them to stop. There is no one to convince about the legitimacy of your boundaries. They just are.

Sometimes, an appropriate response or argument isn't some sort of addressing of whatever nonsense the AI spat out, but simply pointing out the unprofessionalism and absurdity of using AI to try and cancel a maintainer for rejecting their AI pull request.

"Fuck off, clanker" is not enough by itself merely because it's too terse, too ambiguous.
by toast0 | 2026-02-13 23:43:12+00:00
I can see both ways here.

If the maintainer just opens the concise bug report they want (RFC .... Section ... If TLS1.3 is negotiated and client sends session id, server must send cipherchangespec), they have what they want and can move on with their life.

However, if the maintainer can get the reporter to do it, the reporter has become a better reporter and the world has become a better place.

IMHO, the original bug report was pretty out there. Asking a library developer to debug a client they don't use with a sever they didn't write either is pretty demanding. I know openssl has a minimal server, I expect woflssl does too? that would be easier to debug.

Actually, on re-reading the original report, the reporter links to a discussion where they have all the RFC references. Had the reporter summarized that to begin with, rather than suggesting a whole lot of other stuff (like a different wolfssl issue that has to be completely unrelated), I think the issue would have gone better.
by GoatInGrey | 2026-02-13 23:43:49+00:00
It's the evergreen tradeoff between the short and long terms. Do I get the nugget of information I need right now but lose in a month, or do I spend the time and energy that leads to deeper understanding and years-long retention of the knowledge?

There is something about our biology that makes us learn better when we struggle. There are many concepts on this dynamic: generation effect, testing effect, spacing effect, desirable difficulties, productive failure...it all converges on the same phenomenon where the easier it is to learn, the worse we learn.

Take K-12 for instance. As computing technology is further and further integrated into education, cognitive performance decreases in a near-linear relationship. Gen Z is famously the first generation to perform worse in every cognitive measure than previous generations, for as long as we've been recording since the 19th century. An uncomfortable truth emerging from studies on electronics usage in schools is that it isn't just the phones driving this. It's more so the Duolingo effect of software overall emulating the sensation of learning without actually changing the brain state. Because the software that actually challenges you is not as engaging or enjoyable.

How you learn, and your ability to parse, infer, and derive meaning from large bodies of information, is increasingly a differentiator in both the personal and professional worlds. It's even more so the case when many of your peers are now learning through LLM-generated summaries averaging just 300 words, perhaps skimming outputs around 1,000 words in length for "important information". The immediate benefits are obvious, but the cost of outsourcing that cognitive work gets lost in the convenience.

Because remember, this isn't just about your ability to recall specific regex, follow a syntax convention, or how much code you ship in an hour. Your brain needs exercise, and deep learning is one of the most reliable ways to get it. Doubly true if you're not even writing your own class names.

What I am speaking to is not far away or hypothetical, either. Because as of 2023, one in four young adults in the United States is functionally illiterate.

https://www.the74million.org/article/many-young-adults-barel...
by fourside | 2026-02-13 23:44:40+00:00
You also need a system that is ok with giving you some of said abundance without you working.

Last year the US voted to hand over the reigns, in all branches of government, to a party whose philosophy is to slash government spending and reduce people’s dependence on the government.

To all the US futurists who are fantasizing about a post-scarcity world where we no longer work, I’d like to understand how that fits in with the current political climate.
Show HN: Clovr – Generate structured Next.js front ends from a prompt
by alby_churven | 2026-02-13 23:44:57+00:00
Hi HN. I’m Alby. My cofounder Abdul and I are building Clovr.

We’ve been talking to backend-heavy founders and full-stack engineers who keep running into the same issue: the ideation stage to frontend setup is slow. Not necessarily tweaking UI, but scaffolding the initial layout system, routing, component structure, spacing scale, etc. It’s repetitive work but it can set the tone for everything that follows.

Most "vibe-design" tools we tested either generate mockups or output code that looks fine in a screenshot but isn’t structured in a way you’d want to extend.

Clovr’s current approach is to generate a structured Next.js project from a prompt. An actual scaffold with a consistent design system and readable components. The goal is to make the output something you’d actually commit and build on.

Right now it focuses on greenfield projects. We’re experimenting with:

- How opinionated the design system should be

- How much control to expose vs abstract

- What “ready to use” should mean for generated frontend code

It’s still early and we’re actively validating and refining the generation pipeline.

If you’re building frontends and this sounds interesting, there’s a small waitlist up!

Would genuinely appreciate feedback from people who ship real apps.
by dakolli | 2026-02-13 23:45:09+00:00
When we created cars that replaced buggies, that came with new machines for manufacturing, who need mechanics. The same for most physical automation. When we automated pen and paper business processes with SaaS, we created new managment positions, and new software jobs.

LLMs don't create anything new, they simply replace human computer i/o, with tokens. That's it, leaving the humans who are replaced to fight for a limited number of jobs. LLMs are not creating new jobs, they only create "AI automate {insert business process} SaaS" that are themselves heavily automated.. I suppose there are more datacenter jobs (for now), and maybe some new ML researcher positions.. but I don't really see job growth.. Are we supposed to just all go work at a datacenter or in the semiconductor industry (until they automate that too)?
by rootusrootus | 2026-02-13 23:45:24+00:00
I think it's just what you get used to. Every method has ups and downs. And different regions are going to gravitate to different materials based on availability (for example, my Indian coworkers just cannot fathom why we would ever build houses from trees instead of reinforced concrete; doesn't it rot?!!).

I don't think of the walls as especially flimsy, though. Built correctly, they are totally fine. Yes you can punch a hole in one if you are sufficiently motivated (and you better miss the stud...), but the only times I've ever punched any hole in drywall it was because the door stop was removed for whatever reason and a dumb teenager threw the door open with no regard for propriety. At least drywall is trivial to fix.
by UltraSane | 2026-02-13 23:45:36+00:00
Human eyes and vision system are so much better than current cameras and GPUs they aren't really comparable.

Also we should be aiming at creating autonomous driving systems that are SAFER than humans and this requires as many sensor modalities as possible. Vision + LIDAR + Radar + Sonar + terahertz Radar.

Terahertz radar is a very interesting new kind of radar. https://teradar.com/
by trhway | 2026-02-13 23:45:46+00:00
to me it isn't about addictive design, it is about infinite scrolling jerking/straining my eyes (and thanks to that strain, it brings me back to reality, and i immediately disconnect from the content thus avoiding whatever addiction it could have sucked me in).

That actually makes me think that any page containing addictive design elements should, similar to cigarette warning, carry a blinking, geocities style, header or footer with "WARNING: Ophthalmologist General and Narcologist General warn about dangers of addictive elements on this page".
by sovande | 2026-02-13 23:45:56+00:00
The most important tool for AI-assisted coding isn't an agent framework. It's a timer that forces you to take regular breaks.

Back in 2010 Chetan Surpur introduced the Magic Work Cycle productivity technique. The idea: 30 min focused work, 30 min genuine break.

https://chetansurpur.com/blog/2010/11/magic-work-cycle.html

Regular breaks trigger diffused mode thinking, where the brain subconsciously makes connections that lead to "aha!" moments.

I built a completely free iOS and Apple Watch app for this. Maybe others find it useful too.
by lemoncookiechip | 2026-02-13 23:46:29+00:00
This comes from the same EU that's wholeheartedly embracing gambling across their member states, gambling mind you that children can just as easily jump into with their phones and some will, but devastating for grown-ups just as much.

They're not alone in this by any means, America has also opened their doors for all forms of gambling like Kalshi which now even sponsors news networks of all things.

The EU has this disconnect with the things they push, which makes sense considering their size and the speed at which it moves. One example that comes to mind is how they're both pushing for more privacy online while also pushing for things such as chat control which is antithetical to privacy.

Does social media need regulating? Yeah. Is infinite scrolling where they should be focusing? Probably not, there's more important aspects that should be tackled and are seemingly ignored.
by BadBadJellyBean | 2026-02-13 23:46:38+00:00
I have been running Linux for a long time as well (I used Mandrake linux) and I find Ubuntu mostly nice. What I would not say is that it is not stable or useful. The long LTS cadences give it much time to be very stable and you can also be more on the edge when you use the in between versions.

So I'd say it is very much a personal preference but just saying it is not stable is just not generally true. I could say the same about Fedora that shipped graphics drivers so new that all my software was broken for a while. To each their own I guess.
by dang | 2026-02-13 23:46:48+00:00
IIRC, it got flagged by users. That might have been a good thing in this case.

HN gets tons of thought-piece submissions about AI so we try to keep the bar relatively high (notice that word 'relatively'. I'm not saying it's as high as all that!) If discussion here is somewhat uncorrelated with discussion on the rest of the internet, that's good, at least for this kind of content.
by JKCalhoun | 2026-02-13 23:46:59+00:00
When I began at Apple in 1995, we followed "Tog on Interface" to the letter. It was not uncommon to expect arguments over what the Right way was during lunch.

I watched as Steve Jobs came back to Apple—he really took hold of the reins of UX (aided by his team of designers).

Personally, (and I say this as it is often a matter of taste) I didn't care for a lot of it.

A simple example: the URL field of Safari should have been, to my Tog sensibilities, an editable text field. Perhaps somewhere (below?, to the right?) you include a progress bar. But a designer (I will not name, ha ha) came up a combined textfield/progress bar. It looked to my eye as though, as the page loaded, the text was being selected.

Jobs loved it!

It was then I think that Apple departed "Tog" for these "one-off" UX experiments.

I have rationalized this move away from a standard since, with the advent of the web, the customer is now being bombarded with all manner of UX—ought to be comfortable with one-off UX.

(Thankfully I see that now we have a thin line that seems to grow along the lower edge of the URL field.)
by m463 | 2026-02-13 23:47:07+00:00
but anyone who uses the keyboard knows the statements to be true.

I have just switched to turning autocorrect off.

The "select all" comment hit home. I frequently try to copy/paste text and it is maddening to try to locate "select all"

And cursor movement? ugh. It is so painful to move the cursor to one specific letter that I frequently just erase everything and start over.
by UltraSane | 2026-02-13 23:47:26+00:00
Everyone at Tesla probably thinks they should use LiDAR but Musk doesn't want to so they don't. Just like so many people must have told Musk using stainless steel for the body of the cybertruck was a terrible idea and he did it anyway. Musk is deep in the "only talks with yes men" phase of being a billionaire.
by flanked-evergl | 2026-02-13 23:47:36+00:00
You know. I have worked for almost two decades now, I can't afford to buy an apartment. People who have been useless their entire lives are getting government loans that they then pay off with welfare they get because they are doing nothing.

I'm not the ownership class, this is unfair. You are the ownership class. People with money or who grew up with money are overwhelmingly left leaning.
by Cyphase | 2026-02-13 23:48:15+00:00
To be clear, the story here is that Ars Technica published an article featuring quotes from Scott Shambaugh (recently in the news for having an AI bot write a hit piece against him), and Scott commented on the article saying the quotes in the second half of the article were inaccurate (based on my reading, starting from the heading "A new kind of bot problem").

Wayback Machine archive of the article on Ars: https://web.archive.org/web/20260213194851/https://arstechni...

Earliest archive of Scott's blog post that is claimed in the article to be the source of the quotes: https://web.archive.org/web/20260212165418/https://theshambl...

Early Mastodon post about this situation, with a screenshot of Scott's comment: https://infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/116065340523529645

A couple of posts on the Ars forum; the first ends with a reply from a staff member:

https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/journalistic-standards...

https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/um-what-happened-to-th...
by Aeglaecia | 2026-02-13 23:48:41+00:00
ive employed the laymans heuristic that if you die with covid it is most likely what killed you, the comorbidities don't matter to me. on the surface your excess death metric makes sense but im not convinced and need time to reflect.

its too much of a coincidence for me that mrna was not viable until the very moment that it was needed. i vehemently disagree that further testing would have been redundant. moreover the non-mrna covid vaccine by novavax (released to the public less than a year after covid mrna vaccines) has a significantly better safety profile. no, mandatory vaccination of the entire population didnt happen, only the majority of able bodied workers (aka the powerhouse of the economy, hence a bit of rounding occurred when i took artistic liberty).

therefore the world could have waited a year, locked down, and not subjected its driving force to deadly peril. this did not occur, consequently the world's workers were forced to suffer so that pharma companies could make money, the world's elderly/immunocompromised could be protected, and goverments could print less money.
by armchairhacker | 2026-02-13 23:49:05+00:00
I’d be happy if people stop linking to paywalled sites in the first place. There’s usually a small blog on the same topic and ironically the small blogs poster here are better quality.

But otherwise, without an alternative, the entire thread becomes useless. We’d have even more RTFA, degrading the site even for people who pay for the articles. I much prefer keeping archive.today to that.
by overgard | 2026-02-13 23:49:05+00:00
I have mixed feelings on this (besides obviously being sad about the loss of a good person). I think one of the useful things about AI chat is that you can talk about things that are difficult to talk to another human about, whether it's an embarrassing question or just things you don't want people to know about you. So it strikes me that trying to add a guard rail for all the things that reflect poorly on a chat agent seems like it'd reduce the utility of it. I think people have trouble talking about suicidal thoughts to real therapists because AFAIK therapists have a duty to report self harm, which makes people less likely to talk about it. One thing that I think is dangerous with the current LLM models though is the sycophancy problem. Like, all the time chatGPT is like "Great question!". Honestly, most my questions are not "great", nor are my insights "sharp", but flattery will get you a lot of places.. I just worry that these things attempting to be agreeable lets people walk down paths where a human would be like "ok, no"
by johncena69420 | 2026-02-13 23:49:32+00:00
everyone thinking the llm is doing this entirely autonomously is giving free publicity to the clawdbot nonsense which is clearly not capable of nearly what people are claiming for today's ai models

It is literally just trolling using AI spam, I've been doing this since 2022 towards my TIs (Targeted Individuals) in my mass gangstalking operations.
by varenc | 2026-02-13 23:49:44+00:00
Thank you for actually extracting the historical mission statement changes! Also I love that you/Claude were able to back-date the gist to just use the change logs to represent time.

Worth noting in 2021 there statement just included '...that benefits humanity', and in 2022 'safely' was first added so it became '...that safely benefits humanity'. And then on the most recent one it was entirely changed to be much shorter, and no longer included the word 'safely'.
by array_key_first | 2026-02-13 23:49:47+00:00
Incorrect, the reason they don't get a full salary is because tipping is allowed.

If you don't tip, the worker does not magically get a salary. How would they? No, they actually make less money.

This whole "well if you think about not tipping is actually giving them more money" thing is the purest and most refined form of cope I've ever seen. It obviously doesn't work like that. Maybe if everyone did it. But you just doing it does nothing.

You're 100% allowed to not tip. What you're NOT allowed to do is not tip and then somehow try to claim you're helping the worker. You're not. Like, objectively, you're not. That's just literally not true.
by parpfish | 2026-02-13 23:50:23+00:00
There’s the issue of the job itself being more demanding, but also the managers in “low skilled” jobs being ultra-demanding petty dictators.

As a white collar computer guy, I can waste some time on Reddit. Or go for a walk and grab coffee. Or let people know that I’m heading out for a couple of hours to go to the doctor. There are a LOT of little freedoms tha you take for granted if you haven’t worked a shitty minimum wage job. Getting on trouble for punching in one minute late, not being allowed to sit down, socializing too much when you’re not on a break.

I’m pretty sure that most tech employees would just quit when encountering a manager like that
by dang | 2026-02-13 23:51:25+00:00
Related ongoing thread:

The "AI agent hit piece" situation clarifies how dumb we are acting - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47006843 - Feb 2026 (39 comments)

Before that:

An AI agent published a hit piece on me - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46990729 - Feb 2026 (919 comments)

AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46987559 - Feb 2026 (739 comments)
by lich_king | 2026-02-13 23:51:34+00:00
Neither datacenters nor chip manufacturing employ a whole lot of people. But I think you're looking at it wrong. Jobs come from people with money wanting to pay for jobs. That's not going to change.

The jobs of the future may be that you're a court jester for Larry Ellison, or that you do something else that's fundamentally pointless but is something that a person with money wants. Companion, entertainment, errands. Now, that may sound dystopian, but on some level, so are most white collar jobs today. Microsoft employs 200k people. How many of these are directly involved in shipping money-making products - five percent? Ten? The rest is there essentially for the self-sustaining bureaucracy itself. And there's no reason for that bureaucracy to exist except the whims of people with money and power - delegation, empire-building, pet projects, etc.
by simonw | 2026-02-13 23:52:08+00:00
They're a Public Benefit Corporation but not a non-profit, which means they don't have to file those kinds of documents publicly like 501(c)(3)s do.

I asked Claude and it ran a search and dug up a copy of their certificate of incorporation in a random Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/17szwAHptolxaQcmrSZL_uuYn5p-...

It says "The specific public benefit that the Corporation will promote is to responsibly develop and maintain advanced AI for the long term benefit of humanity."

There are other versions in https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ImqXYv9_H2FTNAujZfu3... - as far as I can tell they all have exactly the same text for that bit with the exception of the first one from 2021 which says:

"The specific public benefit that the Corporation will promote is to responsibly develop and maintain advanced Al for the cultural, social and technological improvement of humanity."
by jerlam | 2026-02-13 23:53:09+00:00
> Is the consumer going to pick a more expensive, ugly, non integrated vehicle for their trip?

The consumer does not care about which car picks them up or what hardware integration it has. The consumer cares about which car is available in their service area, how quickly it will arrive, how much it will cost, how safely it can get to their destination, and safely it will do so.
by trcf23 | 2026-02-13 23:53:17+00:00
Never thought to check the debug log.

I would say mostly with the agent panel going into panic in longer conversation or not able to proceed for some reason.

Claude code in terminal also has issues rendering. Never have that with vscode or iterm so I guess it’s zed related.

And sometime for eslint it won’t check ts errors then start adding false errors everywhere and become unusable if I don’t start over.
by AIorNot | 2026-02-13 23:53:17+00:00
Its Dario's job to hype the product and he hypes the product to get the billons they need- a bit more engineering focused than Altman, but no fundamental difference.

A large language model like GPT runs in what you’d call a forward pass. You give it tokens, it pushes them through a giant neural network once, and it predicts the next token. No weights change. Just matrix multiplications and nonlinearities. So at inference time, it does not “learn” in the training sense

we need some kind of new architecture to get to next gen wow stuff
e.g differentiable memory systems. ie instead of modifying weights, the model writes to a structured memory that is itself part of the computation graph. More dynamic or modular architectures not bigger scalling and spending all our money on data centers

anybody in the ML community have an answer for this? (besides better RL and RHLF and World Models)
by Obscurity4340 | 2026-02-13 23:53:22+00:00
I got it to write me a tracklist generator for playlist downloaded videos and it honestly would have taken a lot longer to get it just right over the 5 quick iterations I was able to do with assorted LLMs. I could definitely hack it together but it was far more expedient to simply prewrite out a prompt and tighten up the iterations when I noticed an edge case from daily use