MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by meken | 2026-02-07 01:25:56+00:00
> But for me, it was missing something I didn't know how to name until I found it: the chance to be technical and connected.

I genuinely throught this was impossible for a very long time. In my SWE roles I’ve mostly felt disconnected and isolated.

I resigned from my last dev job and started working in donut and coffee shops. I loved it.

I’m pursuing Support Engineer roles now hoping it will provide the human focus that was missing prior.
Show HN: Local DNA analysis skill for OpenClaw
by wkyleg | 2026-02-07 01:26:15+00:00
I built a skill for OpenClaw (open source AI agent framework) that lets agents analyze raw genetic data from 23andMe, AncestryDNA, and similar services.

The motivation was privacy. Most genetic analysis tools require uploading your data to a server. This runs entirely locally with no network requests. Your DNA never leaves your machine.

It analyzes about 800 markers covering health risks (APOE, MTHFR, Factor V Leiden), drug metabolism (CYP450 enzymes, warfarin sensitivity), and ancestry (Y-DNA/mtDNA haplogroups for all major global lineages). Output is both human-readable reports and structured JSON that agents can use to help users understand their results. It also includes popular ancient DNA databases.

Built on PLINK and standard Python genomics tooling. Marker annotations come from ClinVar, PharmGKB, and the GWAS Catalog with citations to primary literature.

Not a medical device, obviously. But useful for exploring your own data without handing it to a third party.
by apparent | 2026-02-07 01:26:37+00:00
I agree that "problematic" is vague. But you have to be a bit dense to not understand what people mean when they say they want to preserve the character of a neighborhood. That means they generally liked it the way it was when they moved in, and they want it to stay largely that way, especially when it comes to zoning changes.

The word problematic differs because it can be applied to any type of thing (not just neighborhoods/zoning) and has no hints as to what it might mean. Everyone understands that people who move somewhere generally want it to stay that type of place. This is why people complain about gentrification, urbanization, and all other types of neighborhood change. They chose to live in that place because that was the kind of place they wanted to live.
by jjfoooo4 | 2026-02-07 01:26:52+00:00
If you can generate a song with a two sentence prompt, so can anyone else. Music and art is only interesting when there’s originality or a point of view being expressed.

I really think art (as in art that’s made for it’s own sake, as opposed to jazzing up a PowerPoint slide or whatever) is by definition something AI will not make inroads in
by smackeyacky | 2026-02-07 01:27:43+00:00
My recollection of working in a similar environment was very different. The Comp Sci department wanted Unix but not for its own sake. They wanted access to the burgeoning software being produced for it aimed at academics. Tex/LaTeX was the biggest driver because it was the best way at the time to make a readable research paper that was heavy in math.

Then the students needed access to lex/yacc etc for their courses and X Windows too.

That we produced other Unix programs was just an artifact of the original drive to have Unix. The Compaq 386 or Macintosh II were niche products for that job and VMS had been turfed by the late eighties.
by try_the_bass | 2026-02-07 01:28:26+00:00
> It is not even close to "rarely happens"

You and I have very different definitions of "rarely", apparently.

It is rare, by most definitions of "rare" (at least in the US, where I'm implicitly limiting this discussion, in general). What's yours?

If your definition of "rarely" is "more than never", a) you're setting an unreasonable standard, and b) letting the lack of perfection be an easy way to discredit anyone who disagrees with you, which is intellectually lazy.

I certainly agree that abuse happens! Unfortunately, that's just a fact of life. The best we can do is minimize abuse, and we should be making every effort to do so.

But this does not mean reactionary banning of every new technology, regardless of the benefits it may bring. That's just reactionary conservatism, which I think (based on the rest your comment), you vehemently disagree with!

> Flock is used specifically to create parallel construction, where they observe cars moving "in a pattern" that might indicate "smuggling immigrants" such as driving from a border county, or working with pro-immigrant groups (a 100% legal activity), and local/regional police are alerted to find a pretext to stop the car, and often results in charges for someone who would otherwise never have been noticed.

[Citation needed]. This is certainly plausible, but is currently presented without evidence, and can likewise be dismissed without evidence.

> Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Cool truism. Except we're not talking about "absolute power" by any stretch of the definition.

> This type of systems are only a step away from absolute power

Okay this is just bullshit and hyperbole.

The rest of your comment is equally disingenuous and wildly emotional. I refuse to engage with this. Either calm down and have a real conversation, or go away. Your subsequent ad-hominems and strawmen are entirely unwarranted and uncalled-for.
by magicalhippo | 2026-02-07 01:28:48+00:00
At the core, we've decided how math should work because it solves practical problems. Two is larger than one because if I have two oranges, I have more than if I had one.

We could have decided on things working entirely differently, and there are people who explore those topics[1].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms#Nonstandard_model...
by DouweM | 2026-02-07 01:31:03+00:00
(Pydantic AI lead here) That’s exactly what we built this for: we’re implementing Code Mode in https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-ai/pull/4153 which will use Monty by default, with abstractions to use other runtimes / sandboxes.

Monty’s overhead is so low that, assuming we get the security / capabilities tradeoff right (Samuel can comment on this more), you could always have it enabled on your agents with basically no downsides, which can’t be said for many other code execution sandboxes which are often over-kill for the code mode use case anyway.

For those not familiar with the concept, the idea is that in “traditional” LLM tool calling, the entire (MCP) tool result is sent back to the LLM, even if it just needs a few fields, or is going to pass the return value into another tool without needing to see (all of) the intermediate value. Every step that depends on results from an earlier step requires a new LLM turn, limiting parallelism and adding a lot of overhead, expensive token usage, and context window bloat.

With code mode, the LLM can chain tool calls, pull out specific fields, and run entire algorithms using tools with only the necessary parts of the result (or errors) going back to the LLM.

These posts by Cloudflare: https://blog.cloudflare.com/code-mode/ and Anthropic: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agents-and-tools/tool-us... explain the concept and its advantages in more detail.
by SigmundA | 2026-02-07 01:31:06+00:00
>I've actually come around to the Postgres way of thinking. We shouldn't want or need plan hints usually.

They only come out at night, mostly.

PG is 40 years old and still has planner bugs being fixed up regularly, and having no control and waiting for a new version when a hint could fix the issue at runtime is an obvious problem that should have been addressed long ago.

It's great the devs want to make the planner perfect and strive for that, it is an unattainable goal worth pursuing IMO. Escape hatches are required hence the very popular pg_hint_plan extension.

But in the end after many years of dealing with these things I have come to the opposite conclusion, let the query language drive the plan more directly and senior devs can fix juniors devs mistakes and the plans will be committed in source control for all to see and reference going forward.

SQL comes from an idea of non technical people querying a system in ad-hoc ways, still useful, but if you are technically competent in data structures and programming and making an application that uses the db, the planner just gets in your way at least in my experience.
by ipnon | 2026-02-07 01:31:44+00:00
“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.”
by martinald | 2026-02-07 01:32:39+00:00
But my point is that noone has a robust system according to you in Europe at least - the bar is so high to cover all operating costs with fares (or is that your point - if so I'm lost - I definitely would not recommend replacing European transit networks with nothing?).

And National Rail isn't replaceable at all with bus/cars/planes. You really underestimate the number of people which commute >1hr into London (100km+). There is just no way to do that journey by car or bus. It would turn a ~1hr commute into a 3hr _each way_ and that's not even considering the complete lack of parking OR the fact suddenly the roads would be at (even more) gridlock with many multiples of commuters.

That's not even getting into what you consider fixed vs variable costs. Are the trains themselves a fixed cost (they should last 30-40 years)? Is track maintenance a fixed cost (this has to be done more often than the trains themselves), etc etc. The 2nd point is very important - a lot of rail operators in the UK can be made profitable or not on your metric by how much the government subsidises track maintenance vs the operators paying for it in track access charges.

Equally, are signalling upgrades (for example) fixed costs? But really they are only required to run more frequent services. So you could argue they are a variable cost?
by djmips | 2026-02-07 01:33:05+00:00
Try https://www.shadertoy.com/view/tftfzj

Isolate each of the additive sine functions by commenting out all but one and view the different elements. Sine wave left to right, Sine wave up to down, Sine wave diagonal, Sine wave circular - and then observe the resulting pattern is just the sum of the atomic parts. Play with it to learn.
by AGDNoob | 2026-02-07 01:33:13+00:00
Hey, I made this because I kept waiting forever when parsing server logs at work. Tried a few tools, they were all slow as hell, so I figured I'd see how fast I could get it.Turns out if you skip the usual file reading stuff and just mmap the file directly, then throw some AVX2 SIMD at the character counting, things get pretty quick. Getting around 1.4 GB/s on my NVMe which is like 77% of what the SSD can actually do. Rest is just OS overhead and page faults.
It falls back to SSE2 on older CPUs so it should run on pretty much anything. Works on Windows and Linux.
Anyway, let me know if you have questions about how it works or ideas for improvements
by wolvoleo | 2026-02-07 01:34:17+00:00
Direct air capture is just not feasible at a world scale.

And the whole circus around it, manufacturing (and extracting the natural resources for that) of all the machinery for it, clearing land to place it (and all the NIMBY circus), all the energy generation for it, the transmission lines, the maintenance, the burying of the captured carbon. It's all going to lead to lots of pollution and CO2 emissions even if the things are powered by 100% green energy.

It's just a pipe dream of the people looking for a quick fix so we can continue doing what we've been doing.

But we'll just need so hellish many of them to make a dent in global CO2 levels in time to prevent the worst effects of climate change. It's just impossible.

The only way to really fix things is not emitting the stuff in the first place but most people prefer putting their fingers in their ears.
by codexon | 2026-02-07 01:34:35+00:00
You don't need to be a genius or rocket scientist to write code, but llm don't even reach the bar for anything but the most simple things. Take a look at the video I posted earlier for an example.

And specialised models for programming HAVE plateaued.

https://livebench.ai/#/?sort=Agentic+Coding+Average

From Claude 4.1 to 4.5 was only an 18% gain, and from 4.5 to 4.6 it even DECLINED. Codex 5.1 to 5.2 also shows a decline.
by martythemaniak | 2026-02-07 01:34:46+00:00
It's an extremely unfortunate and shockingly stupid way to understand the world, but not unreasonable, because it's a accurate reflection of how the world works at the moment.

Take a look at the situation "room" at Mar A Lago during the Venezuelan coup: https://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/trump-situation-room-photos

What's the main thing up in the screen? Fucking Twitter, because that's what the US government cares about and that's what drives their decisions. The Vice President follows an exquisitely curated set of groypers whom he endlessly tries to impress, the Secretary of "War" is obsessed with impressing Twitter losers with his "lethality" TED talks, they all get giddy seeing citizens executed on the streets, it just doesn't stop. Patio knows exactly the crowd he's playing to.
by scolvin | 2026-02-07 01:35:25+00:00
As discussed on twitter, v8 shows that's not true.

But to be clear, we're not even targeting the same "computer use" use case I think e2b, daytona, cloudflare, modal, fly.io, deno, google, aws are going after - we're aiming to support programmatic tool calling with minimal latency and complexity - it's a fundamentally different offering.

Chill, e2b has its use case, at least for now.
by gamesbrainiac | 2026-02-07 01:36:37+00:00
Pretty much all tech stock has 10xed over the past decade. However, the fact that this is being used to justify anything is a problem. The financialized economy has become so powerful that it can treat the real economy with impunity.

If there are no consequences to prioritizing shareholder value at the expense of product utility or ecosystem value, then we are going to get less value from the products that we purchase over time.

This is why the economy doesn't work anymore. We've been swimming in toxic waters for so long that we think it is completely normal to prioritize shareholder value at the expense of everything else; greed is good.
by II2II | 2026-02-07 01:37:11+00:00
Thank you for the link. It is enlightening for someone who likes to play the game, but is not obsessive about a particular version. (I like the idea of Civilization, and will play it for that reason alone. More often than not, I will choose an older version simply because it is faster to load and play than for the intrinsic merits of the ruleset itself.)
by tclancy | 2026-02-07 01:37:45+00:00
What is going on with this? I tried that and the alias I have built in for this problem, `make_safe() { xattr -d -r com.apple.quarantine $1 }`

The application cannot be opened for an unexpected reason, error=Error Domain=RBSRequestErrorDomain Code=5 "Launch failed." UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Launch failed., NSUnderlyingError=0xae1038720 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=163 "Unknown error: 163" UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Launchd job spawn failed}}}
by Nevermark | 2026-02-07 01:38:11+00:00
Short definitions, followed by simple examples that clearly match the definition, are the best way to be clear.

Unlike how we define most things, definitions of monads often run into a lot of related words, and incorporate different examples into the definition to do the heavy lifting. Which is a bit like pushing someone up close to a few different trees and saying that is the forest.

That is the beginning of an "inductive" definition. It gives people a vague idea, but doesn't communicate either minimum meaning or what constitutes the boundary of the concept. People can't generalize from that kind of definition, without enough exposure and familiarity to see how things work themselves and infer those boundaries.

Dictionaries and most people don't define words this way, for good reason. It is a collage, not a definition.
by duckwolf | 2026-02-07 01:38:22+00:00
Educated in law and computer application technology. With years of experience as a deputy general manager in advertising sales, having cooperated with major groups. Skilled in legal practice and computer applications, proficient in team management and client development.
Collaborated with major groups like GAC. Led sales teams, achieved 21.8% over - quota in the first year. Conducted sales strategy, market analysis, and client relationship management. Expanded sales channels and organized marketing activities.
by aseipp | 2026-02-07 01:39:27+00:00
No, Windows has consistently been ahead of Linux for many years in terms of average-user desktop security, from binary hardening to designs like secure desktop, because average Windows users do not typically have curated software selections, so you assume the worst. (When I wrote the original "binary hardening via compiler flags" RFC for NixOS over 10 years ago, almost everything in it was already done on Windows and had been for years.) It's still not ideal; macOS takes it even further and actually allows things like "storing secrets on disk in a way that can't be read by random programs" because it can e.g. make policy decisions based on code signatures, which are widely deployed. None of this exists in pretty much any Linux distro; you can literally just impersonate password prompts, simply override 'sudo' in a user's shell to capture their password silently, copy every file in $HOME/.config to your evil server, setuid by its very definition is an absolute atrocity, etc. Linux distros make it easy for people to live in their own chosen curated software set, but the security calculus changes when people want to run arbitrary and non-curated software.

You can make a pretty reasonably secure Linux server by doing your homework, it's nowhere close to impossible. An extremely secure server also requires a bit of hardware homework. The Linux desktop, however, is woefully behind macOS and Windows in terms of security by a pretty large margin, and most of it is by design.

(In theory you can probably bolt a macOS-like system onto Linux using tools like SCM_RIGHTS/pidfds/code signatures, along with delegated privilege escalation, no setuid, signature-based policy mechanisms, etc. But there are a lot of cultural and software challenges to overcome to make it all widely usable.)
by majormajor | 2026-02-07 01:40:54+00:00
Historically software engineering has been seen as "assembly line" work by a lot of people (see all the efforts to outsource it through spec handoffs and waterfall through the years) but been implemented in practice as design-as-you-build (nobody anticipates all the questions or edge cases in advance, software specs are often an order of magnitude simpler than the actual number of branches in the code).

For mission-critical applications I wonder if making "writing the actual code" so much cheaper means that it would make more sense to do more formal design up front instead, when you no longer have a human directly in the loop during the writing of the code to think about those nasty pops-up-on-the-fly decisions.
by afpx | 2026-02-07 01:41:02+00:00
I can understand your POV. My parents were atheists. Then, in college, it was just assumed everyone was one. So, I just accepted that as truth. I went on to read all the philosophy and religions. I always avoided Jesus though because honestly his name was a "bad word" in my crowd. Then, a few years ago I picked up the Gospel (nothing else) and decided to read it for informational purposes. And, it stuck with me. Then, I kept reading more and more, and realized that it was all cohesive and coherent. And, for years I tried to find flaws, but it was just too good and life changing and real.
by jaredklewis | 2026-02-07 01:42:16+00:00
What if a neighbor allowed homeless to camp in front of their house?

Seems like the issue is the store owner (i.e. the neighbor), not the fact that it is a store.

When I lived in Houston I used to jog past a house where the front yard was absolutely covered in garbage. Super nice neighborhood and all the houses in the neighborhood looked great, but just this one guy clearly had issues. It smelled horrendous.

Anyway, seems unrelated to it being a store.
by jibal | 2026-02-07 01:43:19+00:00
I once posted in rec.bicycles.misc that I had just completed a 6 week solo bike tour of France. Someone asked me a series of questions about riding and camping in France and I spent about 10 minutes writing a response. Francophile Sheldon Brown asked if he could put it on his website and I was thrilled to say yes. He did so, formatting it and adding links and photos for the places I mentioned. (The page is still there but the photos and links are gone). Years later, a co-worker stopped by my cubicle and asked if I was the person who wrote that article -- he said it had inspired him to start bike touring ... I was again thrilled.
by 4b11b4 | 2026-02-07 01:43:24+00:00
I wasn't explicit about this in my initial comment, but I don't think you can equate more forward passes to neuroplasticity. Because, for one, simply, we (humans) also /prune/. And... Similar to RL which just overwrites the policy, pushing new weights is in a similar camp. You don't have the previous state anymore. But we as humans with our neuroplasticity do know the previous states even after we've "updated our weights".
by yodon | 2026-02-07 01:43:34+00:00
With all the Microsoft haters in this thread, I'm surprised no one has pointed out this is just another example of Microsoft copying Apple.

Satya's speech is essentially the same one Steve Jobs used to give to new VP's at Apple[0].

[0]https://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/steve-jobs-said-1-thing-separ...
by jpollock | 2026-02-07 01:44:10+00:00
In my career, DevOps was never a separate organization. It was a role assumed by the code owners. SRE (is it up, is the hardware working, is the network working?) was separate, and had different metrics.

Having separate teams makes it adversarial because both orgs end up reporting into separate hierarchies with independent goals.

Think about the metrics each team is measured on. Who resolves conflicts between them? How high up the org chart is it necessary to go to resolve the conflict? Can one team make different tradeoffs on code quality vs speed from another, or is it company-wide?
by Recurecur | 2026-02-07 01:46:27+00:00
Yes, COVID was a problem, along with many of the ill-considered responses to it. However, it’s now four years later, and it’s misguided to attribute the situation today to mostly being a result of COVID.

Eliminating the DOE and most of our current approach to K-12 education seems entirely prudent!

Just compare what students learned circa 1900 before graduating high school to today…
by satvikpendem | 2026-02-07 01:47:49+00:00
You and I simply have different opinions on what Heroku's value proposition was, because, again, AWS was also right there and also was "nothing to install." Therefore Heroku was used primarily for its dead simple UX, something which is replicated even in a self-hosted environment, because, again, the value prop was never about PaaS or self-hosting, it was always about the user experience.

Have a good weekend.
by wolvoleo | 2026-02-07 01:48:54+00:00
You mean the floating plastic islands in our oceans? Or microplastics found everywhere?

The only thing I don't like about the paper straws is that they're worse, they're coated with pfas and they disintegrate while drinking causing it to be ingested where the previous straws didn't. In that particular case yes I think banning them was the wrong move, or at least the paper straws were the wrong replacement.

But the need to reduce single use plastics, yeah that's crystal clear.