MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by instig007 | 2026-02-28 15:53:58+00:00
> I've applied it. (That's why you asked for a general principle. Because I'd applied it to this specific case.) They have not been negotiating in good faith.

> My understanding is there was a genuine desire for diplomacy on the American side.

> A case you've sustained by being unable to find any credible sources

Correction: you were unable to find any credible sources, that could be your intentional bias though, as there are other patterns in your replies that suggest it too.

Also, you didn't apply the principle, you sought external validation to your preferred understanding. You appeal to external voices because there's the evident apprehension to come to inconvenient conclusions if you begin applying the principle uniformly by using your own mind.

Actually, let's see it live. Please provide the line of reasoning, starting with "If the US diplomats' job is to stall and never make any actual concessions to Iran, then ..."

> there was a genuine desire for diplomacy on the American side

By the way, how does that "genuine desire" manifest in reality? I hope it's not "I got those people in front of me extra five minutes to get lost and free my way home"
by ajshahH | 2026-02-28 15:54:08+00:00
> There is no good justification I can give the rest of the company for why we would not incorporate AI tools

Is there definitive proof of long term productivity gains with no detriment to defects, future velocity, etc?

If so I’d say you’re irresponsible at best to put this much trust in a tool that’s been around for a few months (at the current level). Absolutely encourage experimentation, but there’s a trillion dollar marketing hype machine in overdrive right now. Your job is to remind people of that.
by kcplate | 2026-02-28 15:54:20+00:00
Wow…so laser focused on the trees and on the one man aspect of this.

California can certainly choose how to tax it’s residents and businesses and they will own the results of those decisions. Personally I doubt that implementing aggressive wealth taxes will do anything to reverse the population loss trends they are seeing and will help encourage new business investment. Perhaps I will be proven wrong, but I doubt it.
by alienpingu | 2026-02-28 15:54:21+00:00
In my personal experience, when I take a wrong turn, it's impossible to find my way back.
I understand if you're describing the route from one large city to another, but if you need to get to a specific street in even a medium-sized city, it's impossible to remember every turn the first time around.

how old are you? How can you memorize a new route?

Because i am born in the TomTom era and i had google maps on my first phone ( not smartphone ) but it have it
by monkeydust | 2026-02-28 15:54:37+00:00
Prioritisation due to cost of engineering forces you to think hard about what to build (and thus not to build). If that calculation has now radically changed, which it has, then that presents a whole new risk that has not been thought about extensivley yet but I suspect will be. It might be that customers can develop the thing they want (that say not other customer does) themselves through well defined interfaces but then who supports and maintains that code?
by jobs_throwaway | 2026-02-28 15:54:39+00:00
> You can even be a paid movie critic and base your opinions on IMDB just fine. But if you build a website that says "I'll give you my opinion about a film for £5" and it's just based on the input from IMBD I'm sure we can both agree that you crossed the line

I don't agree with this assessment at all. Why would it be fine to be a paid movie critic basic your opinions on IMDB but not for a website to the same?
by googamooga | 2026-02-28 15:55:11+00:00
Yes, fully agree with you. Although, I read some stories that in early 60s a lot of people who used to program in opcodes (because there were no higher-level languages, even assemblers were quite new and "untested") were also struggling to accept new reality that was coming with Algol, Fortran, amd Cobol. But given that the absolute number of programmers in the world at that time was quite low nobody paid attention to their fears and pains.

To me, personally, this shift is really enabling and refreshing. I usually have lot's of ideas but did not neither time nor capacity to play with them. Some of them were just impossible to do as a team of one. Now everything is possible! :)
by manithree | 2026-02-28 15:55:17+00:00
I remember sitting in a senior seminar class in 1989 full of CS students. We were solemnly informed by a very earnest IBM employee that we would regret having majored in computer science because IBM's CASE tools were going to kill job market. That aged like milk.

Will something come along some day that will actually drastically reduce the need for programmers/developers/software engineers? Maybe. Are we there yet? My LLM experience makes me seriously doubt it.
by storus | 2026-02-28 15:55:17+00:00
Because you need to understand the output of coding agents when there is an issue or even a decision to be made. Even Opus-4.6 gets into rough states where it spews out garbage or suboptimal code and juniors might not catch it. Reading somebody else's code and evaluate it quickly is a tough skill to learn compared to writing one's own code; slow thinking vs fast thinking mode.
by NoImmatureAdHom | 2026-02-28 15:55:41+00:00
I don't know the feminist take, but just to explain: the reason there is much much more polygyny than polyandry is basic reproduction mechanics. Women max out at ~13 kids, the most reproductively successful men have had thousands. So, a single well-resourced man can keep a bevy of wives at close to their reproductive limit no problem.

(Well, problems come when you do this as a society and create an age group of young men who have no shot at a wife because of 50/50 birth ratio. They get violent.)
by toteroni | 2026-02-28 15:56:08+00:00
i agree 100% and it occurs more often the closer you drive near a big city where the traffic is already aggravating. that one driver doing something maneuver to save themselves 1-2 minutes while delaying everyone behind them 10 seconds..which adds up across the 10-20 people that just got cut off.

curious what your solution/remedy to this problem is? more police on the streets with pre-filled tickets they can quickly hand out? self policing via dash cams and if you send in a video to the police they can ticket them and get a 30% cut of the ticket the law breaker paid? mass traffic surveillance and get sent a ticket instantly to your address/email when traffic laws are broken?
when i travel outside of the US i usually take the country’s public transport instead of driving so don’t really know if this has been solved for successfully
by urav | 2026-02-28 15:56:09+00:00
Thanks! The story generator is pretty simple right now — every 10,000 ticks the sim snapshots population stats, brain complexity, species changes, births/deaths, communication activity and runs it through a template that writes a plain-english chapter.

Building out a more engaging version, and will hopefully stream it onto X again as a story - but this time without chewing api tokens every couple of seconds.

NEAT for trading is interesting - on BTC i used a kernels method that worked quite well and closer to that <2 sharpe on a monthly.
by kelvinjps10 | 2026-02-28 15:56:45+00:00
>AI safety and wide distribution of benefits are the core of our mission. Two of our most important safety principles are prohibitions on domestic mass surveillance and human responsibility for the use of force, including for autonomous weapon systems. The DoW agrees with these principles, reflects them in law and policy, and we put them into our agreement.

So they're saying anthropic is lying or what? Because Sam Altman is saying that DOW agrees with no mass surveillance and no autonomous drone killing.
Also if not, how safety is their priority?
by empath75 | 2026-02-28 15:56:48+00:00
But i don’t want to learn how to do that. I already know how to write code and i have built a bunch of production rust apps from scratch. I would prefer if i never have to write code. I don’t enjoy writing code, don’t take pride in having that skill. I enjoy the process of identifying a problem and producing a solution to that problem. Coding is just something i had to learn how to do in order to solve problems.

The absolute moment that ai is capable of producing all the useful code for a project I probably will never write another line of code again.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-02-28 15:57:18+00:00
I can't say this for the companies listed above but atleast within the realm of social media, they also want to bypass regulations and well, we all know how's it going.

On a long term, I do feel like there will be a drop in producitivity, thus destruction of economic value because of lack of enforcement of policies/such companies having reckless attitude about them.

Many of the products listed above actually seem to be very rent-seeking in my opinion (IIRC Someone on HN once said that from their personal experience talking to drivers, uber takes an approximate at the very least 40% cut or more)

(This might be a little off-topic?_ but one thing I think about tech regulations is that Facebook used to see if a young girl/minor girl took a selfie and then if they don't upload it, detect that she was insecure and then try to show them face beauty recommendations.

These girls can be our sisters/daughters fwiw. Facebook profits from insecurity/rage-bait and I would say that many social medias are the same as well, its just that the facebook example to me feels so eggregious and should be a uniting front for many to agree that there's a problem indeed.

You will be right when you say economical value is generated from profiting from insecurity/bypassing regulations but at what cost?
by aldanor | 2026-02-28 15:57:26+00:00
Yes. To me personally, Rust and both its restrictions and features (ie no OOP and prevalence of sum types and hence other goodies) makes approaching the implementation of big problems differently; eventually the experience with Rust also changes (to some extent) the way you write and structure the code in other languages. One might argue that Rust is not unique here and this would also apply to languages like ocaml etc - sure, perhaps; but I can't write in any of those languages at work on daily basis since they don't fit performance-wise or for many other reasons.
by FireBeyond | 2026-02-28 15:57:27+00:00
Meanwhile "from the river to the sea" was actual Likud's election slogan before Hamas co-opted it. There are absolutely elements in Israel - and to be clear, in its government, with the ability to and motivation to make it happen, not just extremists posting on their forums - what are quite happy with the idea of razing both Gaza and the West Bank to the ground for settling. And their idea of what to do with the people displaced by this ranges from collateral damage to a shrug of the shoulders and making them someone else's problem.
by reliabilityguy | 2026-02-28 15:57:32+00:00
> You seem to have forgotten that the US attacked Iran first, which made this regime even possible in the first place.

Bombing of US marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 was funded, and organized by Iran. Just take half day off, and read a bit on the role of Islamic Republic in Middle East in the past 40 years. I guarantee your stance of "US attacked first" will change to the "unclear" at the least.
by getnormality | 2026-02-28 15:57:42+00:00
I find it so fundamentally unhinged that people think things will get fully automated to the point that humans no longer matter. We are centuries into the deep automation of certain things, like looms, but people with deep understanding of those things are still needed to guide the automation and keep it working to meet human needs.

To ignore that pattern and say everything's going to be automated and humanity will be irrelevant seems to me to be... more of a death wish against human agency, than a prediction based on reality.
by helpfulclippy | 2026-02-28 15:57:55+00:00
I’m skeptical because while I can totally believe that the deal presently contains restrictive language, I can totally believe that OpenAI will abandon its ethical principles to create wealth for the people who control it. Sort of like how they used to be a non-profit that was, allegedly, about creating an Open AI, and now they’re sabotaging the entire world’s supply of RAM to discourage competition to their closed, paid model.
by base76 | 2026-02-28 15:58:16+00:00
Happy to answer questions from anyone testing it.

The core loop is simple: every request through the gateway gets a trace_id, a trust score, and a signed decision context. The audit trail stays in your own infrastructure — no external
calls.

One thing we're actively working on: calibrating trust thresholds per risk category under EU AI Act Article 13. If anyone's done similar work on confidence scoring for high-risk AI
systems, I'd genuinely like to compare notes.

Repo + 5-minute quickstart: https://github.com/base76-research-lab/cognos-proof-engine
by throwawayheui57 | 2026-02-28 15:58:22+00:00
> there would be no war without the US and Israel starting it, PERIOD.

“there would be no war without Hamas starting it, PERIOD.”

See how dishonest and ignorant that sounds?

For everyone else reading this thread as Iran being bombed: In 47 years of constant confrontation, islamic regime has not built one fucking bomb shelter for its people for these days. Let that sink in. Don’t believe these people who suddenly start to care about Iranian lives by taking the regime’s side and also don’t believe US officials when they say they do all these for our freedom.
by nickdirienzo | 2026-02-28 15:59:02+00:00
I tried NanoClaw and love the skill (and container by default) model. But having skills generate new code in my personalized fork feels off to me… I think it’s because eventually the “few thousand auditable lines” idea vanishes with enough skills added?

Could skill contributions collapse into only markdown and MCP calls? New features would still be just skills; they’d bring in versioned, open-source MCP servers running inside the same container sandbox. I haven’t tried this (yet) but I think this could keep the flexibility while minimizing skill code stepping on each other.
by rbliss | 2026-02-28 16:01:01+00:00
A reasoned argument I agree with.

The challenge is that the competitive and economic pressures make this moot.

A person, entering the field via AI driven development, will have none of the qualms about skill, seniority, understanding the codebase, or craftsmanship. Those arguments are handwringing by the previous generation of engineers. Their focus is solely on the outcome and value produced from the input prompt. That aligns closer to how businesses see their codebase: something they have to prompt their engineers to produce in order to generate business value.

Similarly, new AI driven companies focused on delivering value at speed and lower costs will have none of the baggage of the legacy code companies with engineers stuck debating these questions. These new gen companies will be focused on delivering value, doing so at quicker speeds and lower costs, raising the level of competition for existing incumbents.

Will existing businesses be willing to spend money to purchase services from these new gen companies of AI developed products? Seems like it.

There are real problems with these AI developed codebases. They tend to collect baggage and start to feel like a house of cards. A big open question is whether AI models will continue to improve in order to patch all the vibe-holes being generated. Seems like they will improve.
by elricwan | 2026-02-28 16:01:38+00:00
Hi HN,

I built a personal blog that’s essentially a reaction to the modern web.

It’s just text. No tracking, no sidebars, and almost zero JavaScript. I wanted to see how far I could go by just focusing on typography and white space.

The goal was simple: make it feel instantaneous.

I’m curious if this "back to basics" approach still resonates in 2026, or if it feels too stripped back. Would love to hear your thoughts on the readability or anything that feels off.

https://xiangpengwan.com
by elbanic | 2026-02-28 16:01:48+00:00
The moment I let my guard down, my AI agent started burning through my wallet.
I stepped away for a brief moment to grab a coffee, and it got stuck in an infinite loop, trying to fix a bug with the same failing approach over and over for 30 minutes. By the time I checked back, it had chewed through $10 in tokens.

That moment made me realize, AI agents lack the "Struggle Equity" that senior developers carry.

We have a "gut feeling" for architectural risks such as race conditions, retry storms, consistency failures, learned through years of painful experience. But these patterns don't always surface when we're context switching or delegating to AI.

Dev Sentinel is my attempt to externalize this intuition.

Instead of just documenting knowledge, it treats failure patterns as triggers. When the agent is about to walk into a trap I've fallen into before, Dev Sentinel signals a reminder. Crucially, it evolves these isolated moments of frustration into generalized patterns, turning subjective struggle into reusable architectural intuition.

It’s an experiment: Can we turn our intuition into automated architectural guardrails?

I’m looking for feedback from others who have tried to formalize their "gut feelings" into code. Does this resonate with your workflow, or is there a better way to offload "Struggle Equity" to AI agents?
by smeej | 2026-02-28 16:02:31+00:00
I wonder whether there's a relevant analogy between human languages and computer languages.

I've read hundreds of books. It may be thousands if you count the multiple series I devoured as a bookish child. I think my understanding of my mother tongue is probably in the top decile of native speakers.

But I haven't ever written a book. I'm not sure I would want to write a book, though I'm reasonably sure it wouldn't be the linguistic skills that would keep me from finishing one if I did.

Not having written any books doesn't keep me from knowing whether a book I'm reading was written well or poorly. I can tell that from my extensive experience reading a variety of books of different quality.

Maybe that's what's coming for computer languages. Maybe people who like reading, interacting with, and understanding computer languages will become highly skilled readers, with the ability to recognize well-written and poorly-written code. Perhaps they'll be the ones guiding the models to improve the code generation, or finding the structural changes that would improve the code for companies making truly important projects.

Or maybe we're just going to end up with incredible amounts of poorly written drivel that works well enough for some niche audience and makes a few bucks for the person who spins it up, and most software won't ever matter on any sort of large scale, just like most books aren't ever read. Maybe there will be some pockets that really care about writing very well and producing excellent things, and they'll hire the people who love bringing that about, and the rest of the people currently developing software will have fun little hobby projects that only their friends and family ever bother to use.

This doesn't seem that different from what has happened with written human language to me.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-28 16:02:41+00:00
> Those ungrateful bastards

Well yes, we turned them into a suzerainty. The Iranians didn't like it when America did it through the Shah. The Bangladeshis don't like it when Indians think they should be a supplicant sovereign. (Sheikh Hassina was to New Delhi what the Shah was to D.C.)

Like, America rescued Japan from a ruinous autocracy. It would still be mean and violent to demand their gratitude for us nuking them.

> India could have easily took over Bangladesh

And it would have had another Kashmir. In practice, buffer state was the only correct play. (Arguably, it's what China should have done with Tibet.)

> India was never directly involved in the conflict. Except for the peace keeping forces

Yeah. The entire American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan was done with "peacekeeping" forces. The peacekeepers in both cases committed documented atrocities.
by gruez | 2026-02-28 16:02:50+00:00
>That’s not their call to make. Inventors of technologies that could be used for war have never had the right to deny access to those technologies to the elected civilian government.[1]

>[1] The government can make you go over to southeast Asia and kill people personally.

Is this a normative statement? In other words are you simply claiming "the government has men with guns and therefore can force people/companies do whatever they want", or are you claiming that "the government should be able to commandeer civilian resources for whatever it wants"?
by kdheiwns | 2026-02-28 16:03:01+00:00
To be fair, nuking a piece of land that you claim you own and is also just a few miles away and downwind of your own citizens is a fairly difficult thing to do. Nukes are a great deterrent when it's a place at least 100 miles from your borders, and better if even farther. They're useless in your own backyard.
by reliabilityguy | 2026-02-28 16:03:28+00:00
> Not directly but OP seemed to intuit some sort of moral justification for this war of aggression

There is an absolute moral justification for this war. Saying that US is the aggressor here is an absolute revisionism of history. Let us not pretend that Islamic Republic minded its own business since its inception, and suddenly the US and Israel decided to wage war on it.

One example of IR's aggression is Beirut bombing in 1983 sponsored and planned by IR.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-02-28 16:03:30+00:00
why are publicly traded companies special? The speculation is not on securities.

You're not participating in a "market" (even though they call it that), you're purely gambling and speculating. People have been doing this since currency was a thing. Even gambling laws don't apply in my opinion. If I told you the government will publish evidence of aliens existing tomorrow, and we make a bet on it, that's not really gambling, it's not so much a game of choice as it is a competition of who can predict things better. The other person might have insider knowledge, but it's up to you to either take on that risk or assume despite that your knowledge about the topic will overcome their potential insider knowledge.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-02-28 16:03:33+00:00
I agree, once they have bypassed regulations, they use that to essentially rent-seek from their monopoly/their unique position where the rent is paid by us public.

Their behaviour is very rent-seeking imo and at moments like these, its best to remind us that even the father of Capitalism, Adam Smith didn't like landlords

Had to search up some quotes from adam smith right now but here's a relevant one (imo) to this discussion:

"[the landlord leaves the worker] with the smallest share with which the tenant can content himself without being a loser, and the landlord seldom means to leave him any more." - Adam smith