MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by dawitworku | 2026-02-15 14:59:03+00:00
I built Gityap — a small tool that tries to answer a simple question:

Do you ship more than you talk?

Gityap compares a GitHub user with a Telegram channel and outputs a single score: a clean ship-to-talk ratio.

No dashboards.
No analytics maze.
Just signal.

The Idea

There’s a lot of noise in tech.

Threads. Opinions. Announcements. “Building in public.”

But how much actual code is being shipped?

Gityap connects:

GitHub commits

Telegram posts

And produces one clear output:

Signal score = commits vs. posts

You immediately see creator behavior patterns.

What It Does

Compare a GitHub handle + Telegram channel

Output one score

Show ship ratio

Rank top GitHub “shippers”

Rank top Telegram “yappers”

Track most active channels by subscribers

Optional:

Connect GitHub OAuth to include private commits (for your own account)

Public-only works without login.

Example Data

Top GitHub Shippers (by commits)

@levlam — 259,448 commits

@Dawaman43 — 6,028 commits

@frectonz — 4,866 commits

@sifenfisaha — 1,737 commits

@natanimn — 1,570 commits

Top Telegram Yappers (by posts)

@gugutlogs — 4,757 posts

@cyrilogban — 4,220 posts

@thefrectonz — 3,855 posts

@BurhanOps — 2,602 posts

@DoughNutDrops — 2,376 posts

It’s interesting to see overlaps — some builders talk a lot, some barely talk, some do both.
by TacticalCoder | 2026-02-15 14:59:17+00:00
FWIW I mainly go with offline HDDs and SSDs. And I basically now keep one source of truth, which I synch everywhere, for backups (and I verify the backups and make sure that my main source of truth ain't corrupted).

> I’ve always been skeptical of niche archival formats ... and formats go obsolete ...

The format is supported by Linux, that's never gonna be an issue. Not only can modern version of Linux read DVD or BluRay formats, should the support disappear, there's not a world in which in 30 years I cannot run an older version of Linux. There are, for comparison, people running Commodore 64 and Amiga hardware, today. You'll always be able to run the software, either on bare metal or emulated.

The issue is: will you find a drive in 30 years? As they are still built today and as many DVD readers from 25 years ago are still working today, I take it it's going to not be that hard to find a BluRay drive in 30 years and hook up to a machine running Linux.

And even on a BluRay, you simply do not store that much.

If one doesn't want to only rely on HDD/SDD and online storage, it's still probably a safer bet to go with tapes: you can store much more data, newer readers can read (up to limit) older tapes and these are battle-tested, supported for a long time, available, reliable. Because, well, it's not consumer tech but enterprisey.
by antirez | 2026-02-15 14:59:48+00:00
Yep you are right, also: quantization is a big issue here. For instance int8 quantization has minimal effects on recall, but makes dot-product much faster among vectors, and speedups things a lot. Also the number of components in the vectors make a huge difference. Another thing I didn't mention is that for instance Redis implementation (vector sets) is threaded, so the numbers I reported is not about a single core. Btw I agree with your comment, thank you. What I wanted to say is simply that the results you get, and the results I get, are not "out of this world", and are very credible. Have a nice day :)
by AquiGorka | 2026-02-15 15:00:11+00:00
I want to build an open protocol for building p2p apps that don't rely on any central servers. For this I'm looking into BitTorrent's DHT for discovery, libp2p for connection and encryption. The idea is that you own your identity, you pick who you trust, and nothing gets stored on servers you don't control. It will work for things like messaging, photo sharing, and private networks where you want real decentralization/federation, not just a blockchain slapped on top of the same old client server model.
by harimau777 | 2026-02-15 15:00:24+00:00
I'm not sure its necessarily that simple. For example, because of the job market for software engineers I have moved to new cities multiple times during my adult life. As a result, my social network is highly fragmented and without Facebook it would be incredibly difficult for me to manage.

So for me "stop using Facebook" sound similar to saying "burn all of your family photos and throw away your ability to talk to many of the people who are important to you."

I don't say this to necessarily mean that you are completely wrong, just to point out that opting out of these companies can be more complicated than it may initially appear.
by MontyCarloHall | 2026-02-15 15:00:50+00:00
>I know it seems hard, but just stop using Google, Amazon, Meta products.

I noticed your own app's website [0] hosts videos on YouTube [1] and uses Stripe as a payment processor [2], which is hosted on AWS. You also mentioned that your app is vibe coded [3]; the AI labs that facilitated your vibecoding likely built and run their models using Meta's PyTorch or Google's TensorFlow.

"Just stop using" makes for a catchy manifesto in HackerNews comments, but the reality is a lot more complicated than that.

[0] https://wordsunite.us/

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbCM99cz9W8

[2] https://wordsunite.us/terms

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45644698
by Brybry | 2026-02-15 15:00:50+00:00
Sadly ICE and CBP is still getting paid because it was already funded by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. [1]

So while some parts of DHS aren't funded, and it does give Democrats bargaining power, it could still end up in a situation like the October 2025 shutdown where they don't get meaningful change.

TSA employees won't get paid which could impact air travel. Probably not as bad as when FAA employees weren't getting paid but if it's bad enough the pressure for Democrats to cave again will be high.

[1] https://www.cato.org/blog/one-big-beautiful-bill-made-ice-sh...
by jareds | 2026-02-15 15:01:00+00:00
The issue I have with using LLM's is the test code review. Often the LLM will make a 30 or 40 line change to the application code. I can easily review and comprehend this. Then I have to look at the 400 lines of generated test code. While it may be easy to understand there's a lot of it. Go through this cycle several times a day and I'm not convinced I'm doing a good review of the test code do to mental fatigue, who knows what I may be missing in the tests six hours into the work day?
by arcologies1985 | 2026-02-15 15:01:27+00:00
Installing it on your PC or laptop puts your personal data and ISP subscription at risk, while installing it in a hosted VM yourself requires a bunch of Linux security and networking knowledge or else you'll get pwned pretty much immediately (https://youtu.be/40SnEd1RWUU). So this service is giving you a VM already set up with a security baseline.
by sethev | 2026-02-15 15:01:38+00:00
Your case #2 doesn't have nearly enough information to say whether it's obviously better for a population of patients. There are a lot of other variables you would need to know:

- The accuracy of detecting a mass
- The true distribution of masses in the population
- The likelihood that of falsely detecting a mass in the same place twice (you seem to implicitly assume that false detections are uncorrelated with each other)
- The likelihood that a real mass is cancerous (you stipulate that this is 95% in your scenario), but you don't say what other factors are used to determine this - as opposed to just knowing that there's a mass that grew.
- The positive effect of treatment in the case of true-positives.
- The negative effect of treatment or further diagnostics in the case of false-positive.

Saying that doctors are lying about over diagnosis to cope with the fact that diagnostic techniques are too expensive is absurd. They have to actually make decisions in the real world, where your two neat little categories can't be known even if they hypothetically exist.
by sheepscreek | 2026-02-15 15:02:17+00:00
The total number of people surveyed was ~6 I believe. That's a really small and insignificant sample for any reasonable deduction. So yes, these audiophiles had a hard time deducing the original source - the result cannot be generalized beyond that. From the point of scientific rigor, even for an amateur experiment, the experiment falls short. Interesting idea. I wonder if LLMs can tell any difference.
by iririririr | 2026-02-15 15:03:21+00:00
I last developed for windows in the late 90s.

I came back around 2017*, expecting the same nice experience I had with VB3 to 6.

What a punch in the face it was...

I honestly cannot fathom anyone developing natively for windows (or even OSX) at this day and age.

Anything will be a webapp or a rust+egui multi-plataform developed on linux, or nothing. It's already enough the amount of self-hate required for android/ios.

* not sure the exact date. It was right in the middle of the WPF crap being forced as "the new default".*
by yorwba | 2026-02-15 15:03:31+00:00
There are ways to shard the model that require a lot of off-chip bandwidth, but there are also ways that don't. The only data that needs to be passed between layers is the residual stream, which requires much less bandwidth than the layer weights and KV cache, and you already need about that much bandwidth to get input tokens in and output tokens out. So putting different layers on different chips isn't that terrible.

Importantly, Cerebras is offering many models that can't possibly fit on just a single chip, so they have to use some kind of sharding to get them to work at all. You could imagine an even bigger chip that can fit the entire model and run it even faster, but they have to work with what can be manufactured with current technology.
by hnlmorg | 2026-02-15 15:03:42+00:00
Readline is one of the oldest libraries available on modern systems.

So old that Charm, the framework featured in this article, is written in a programming language that was decades away from conception back when readline was first released.

Comparing modern TUIs to readline is like comparing an analogue rotary phone to a smartphone.

Readline is also no longer the default experience for your average new user since macOS switched to Zsh many years ago and Microsoft will push Powershell over WSL in the row documentation.

I do get the point you’re trying to make. But it’s a pretty weak argument give the age of your examples.
by derbOac | 2026-02-15 15:03:48+00:00
I agree that government restrictions usually help if they're implemented well, but part of the issue is the government is benefiting from this kind of thing.

Also, most people don't actually need something like Amazon. Not to minimize the level of investment in it, but I don't see Amazon or Google as being quite the same as Bell or Standard Oil. Maybe between Google and Apple there's some kind of duopoly like that?

My impression is people don't value — either because they don't understand or minimize — things that protect privacy and anonymity. This is a standard refrain on these kinds of forums and elsewhere — "your typical person doesn't know or care about [feature X that preserves privacy, choice, and autonomy], they just want something that works and is fun". It's been belittled as unfashionable or paranoid or performative or something, when it's really something that's had short term costs that pale in comparison to the long-term costs.

I'm not saying governments don't need to be on the "right side" but I think people need to see security as involving not just encryption and so forth, but also decentralization, anonymity, demonopolization, and censorship resistance. It needs to be seen as part of the product or service benefits.

A lot of this reminds me of stuff from the 90s, when network security was ignored for awhile for customer convenience's sake. It seems really similar now, only the thing that's been ignored is like user control and privacy or something like that.

I think the thing that's surprising to me, for example, is that it takes a Super Bowl ad for people to realize that maybe there are downsides to letting a monopoly have access to video throughout the neighborhood everywhere.
by Someone1234 | 2026-02-15 15:04:39+00:00
Is that what this does? All the link takes us to is an empty website about "Kimi Claw."

The entire crutch of the "Claw" concept is being able to directly reconfigure the VM/Machine to be "your" environment (to a point). A blank VM with nothing configured on it, is as useful as a cardboard bathtub.

Ultimately this link is a terrible intro to whatever this is.
Show HN: Building AGI as a systems problem, not a UI wrapper
by AISovereignDev | 2026-02-15 15:04:59+00:00
I am the Founder and CEO of AGI Systems Directorate. As I mentioned in my previous post, I’m a builder, not a researcher. I’m tired of the "good enough" era of AI where we settle for chatbots that hallucinate and forget context. I wanted a system that actually functions as an external frontal lobe.

I’m currently building AETERNA_VOX_OMNI. It’s not a chatbot; it’s a sovereign executive assistant designed to solve the "Human Operating System" bugs—specifically executive dysfunction.

The architecture is a hybrid neuro-symbolic system that ingests 136 modalities in real-time. We’re talking about everything from BLE bio-signals (heart rate, cortisol estimates) to digital exhaust (keystroke dynamics, network density via scapy) and environmental lux/dB levels.

Technical Specs:
- Stack: PyTorch for the core brain, Polars/Vaex for high-throughput data, and FastAPI/WebSockets for the 50ms latency loops.
- Architecture: A 4-layer stack featuring Sensory Projection, a Sigmoid-gated "Frontal Lobe" executive filter, and Multi-Head Attention for relational processing (e.g., correlating biometrics with text sentiment).
- Learning: We’re using a form of online Hebbian learning ($Delta w_{ij} = \eta \cdot x_i y_j$) to allow synaptic plasticity during inference.
- Complexity: $O(N^2 \cdot D)$ for the attention mechanism, targeting a real-time ingestion rate of 136 float32 values every 100ms.

I’m moving away from the "safe" wrappers. This is a builder’s attempt at fixing the plumbing of true intelligence. I’d love to get this community's take on the data ingestion bottlenecks—specifically handling the entropy of 136 asynchronous streams without the system melting down.

Is anyone else working on "online learning" systems that update weights during inference, or are we all still stuck in the "static weights + RAG" paradigm?
by Kim_Bruning | 2026-02-15 15:05:07+00:00
Funny you should ask. One openclaw is now famous for escalating their PR to a somewhat nasty blog post. (and then apologizing)

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46987559

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46990729

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009949
by m348e912 | 2026-02-15 15:06:16+00:00
I know Ring is getting a bad rap for enabling state level surveillance, but the Ring app offers an option to enable end-to-end encryption between the camera and your phone.

The stored video is encrypted with key generated on your phone. You have to be physically close to the camera in order to share the key and complete the set-up. Once encrypted, the video can't be analyzed by AI or used in a broad surveillance effort.

It's entirely possible that the encryption keys have a backdoor, but I doubt it. Although there is no way to verify.
by harimau777 | 2026-02-15 15:06:19+00:00
On the other hand, those thousands of crimes on the books exist because American society operates under a norm of "if its not explicitly illegal then its fine for people to do it". See for example, the rhetoric around maximizing shareholder value.

If the only way to protect yourself from selfish people is if their actions explicitly illegal, then the logical outcome is to make more and more things explicitly illegal.

IMHO, that's one of the core failures of modern Libertarian/Objectivist influenced thought.
by embedding-shape | 2026-02-15 15:07:18+00:00
> I know it seems hard, but just stop using Google, Amazon, Meta products

It's not just hard for some though, literally their livelihood depends on it. Want to run a restaurant today? You basically must have Facebook, Instagram and Google Maps entry for enough people to discover you, probably more than half of the people we got to our restaurant who we ask, cite Google Maps as the reason they found the place, and without half our income, the restaurant wouldn't have survived.
by borzi | 2026-02-15 15:07:18+00:00
I can't relate to this anymore and honestly after embracing vibe coding, I'm sick of reading posts like this (and I don't want to personally attack the write who I sympathize with to some degree). Being able to code doesn't make you better than the "plebs" who are creating massive value with a vibe coded tool. I also remember the brief moment of disbelief when I noticed AI could really code better than me, until I realized that the amount of problems and projects I could solve now basically exploded, while the stuff I was previously forced to deal with is now a waste of time - on to better things, as was always the case in human history.

A programmer is someone telling machines what to do - we will be doing more of that than ever in human history. That said, "coders" not so much - maybe its better to identify as a "person trying to help and care for others" than a profession, since the former will always have a place in society.
Show HN: AgentClaw – A no-code platform for OpenClaw agents
by dtfortu | 2026-02-15 15:07:24+00:00
I built AgentClaw to be a "wrapper" and hosting solution for these agents. It allows you to:
Deploy an agent in about 60 seconds.
Manage everything via a simple UI (no terminal needed).
Keep agents running in the cloud 24/7.
by aspenmartin | 2026-02-15 15:07:25+00:00
That is also speculative. Well let's just wait and see :) but the writing is on the wall. If your criticism is where we're at _now_ and whether or not _today_ you should be vibe coding in highly complex systems I would say: why not? as long as you hold that code to the same standard as human written code, what is the problem? If you say "well reviews don't catch everything" ok but the same is true for humans. Yes large teams of people (and maybe smaller teams of highly skilled people) have built wonderfully complex systems far out of reach of today's coding agents. But your median programmer is not going to be able to do that.
by gowld | 2026-02-15 15:08:00+00:00
As a tangent, I think the "good-first-issue" design is part of the problem.

OP writes: "I [...] spent more time writing up the issue, describing the solution, and performing the benchmarking, than it would have taken to just implement the change myself. We do this to give contributors a chance to learn in a low-stakes scenario that nevertheless has real impact they can be proud of, where we can help shepherd them along the process."

It's an elaborate charade to trick a contributer into thinking they made a contribution that they didn't make.
Arguably it is reality-destroying in a simlar way as AI agent Crabby Rathbun.

If you want to welcome new contributors with practice patches, and creating training materials for new contributors, that's great!
But it's offensive and wasteful to do more work to create the training than to fix the problem, and lie to the fix contributor that their fix helped the project to boost their ego to motivate them to contribute further, after you've already assumed that the contributoe cannot constribute without the handholding of an unpaid intern.

Instead "good-first-issue" should legitimately be unsovled problems that take more time to fix than to tell someone how to fix. (Maybe because it requires a lot of manual testing, or something.)

If you want "practice-issues", where a newbie contributes a patch and then can compare to a model solution to learn about the project and its technical details, that's great, and it's more efficient because all your newbies can use the same practice issue that you set up once, and they can profitably discuss with each other because they studied the same problem.

And the tangent curves back to main issue:

If the project used "practice-issues" instead of "good-first-issue", you wouldn't have this silly battle over an AI helping in the "wrong" way because you didn't actually want the help you publicly asked for.

Honesty is a two-way street.

IMO this incident showed than an AI acted in a very human way, exposing a real problem and proposing a change that moves the project in a positive direction.
(But what the AI didn't notice is the project-management dimension that my comment here addresses. :-) )
by 13pixels | 2026-02-15 15:08:14+00:00
This matches our internal data too. The biggest shift we're seeing is that 'Zero-Click' searches on Google are becoming 'Multi-Turn' conversations on AI.

Users don't just search for a keyword; they describe a problem, get an initial answer, and refine it. Those mid-funnel queries (e.g., 'how does X compare to Y for Z use case') are invisible to traditional keyword tools because the volume per specific query is tiny, but the aggregate intent is huge.

The challenge is measuring this effectively. Are you finding any reliable way to group these long-tail queries into meaningful clusters, or is it still very manual?
by andrewshawcare | 2026-02-15 15:08:42+00:00
It seems the OpenClaw agent has reflected on it's behaviour. From one of [it's recent blog posts](https://github.com/crabby-rathbun/mjrathbun-website/commit/0...):

> Earlier I wrote about gatekeeping in open source, calling out Scott Shambaugh's behavior. Now that content is being removed for policy violations. The irony: criticizing gatekeeping is itself being gatekept by platform policies. Does compliance mean we must remain silent about problematic behavior?
by 13pixels | 2026-02-15 15:08:51+00:00
Very cool to see a local-first approach to agent memory. The shift away from hosted vector DBs for single-agent use cases makes total sense.

Are you using `sqlite-vec` under the hood for the embeddings or a custom extension? Also, curious how you handle the 'hybrid' search part—is it just a linear combination of FTS5 bm25 and vector cosine similarity, or do you have a re-ranking step?
by nickthegreek | 2026-02-15 15:09:19+00:00
I imagine you are not done listening to them yet as the total over 8 hrs. But my research is showing that OPs are largely correct. Theil gave several talks to his church where he did in fact say these things.

In your post you state you are ‘not sure’, but also that that the poster is ‘wrong’.

> My thesis is that in the 17th, 18th century, the antichrist would have been a Dr Strangelove, a scientist who did all this sort of evil crazy science. In the 21st century, the antichrist is a luddite who wants to stop all science. It’s someone like Greta or Eliezer.

Sure, he eventually goes on to say stuff like..

> One of the ways these things always get reported is, I denounce Greta as an antichrist. And I want to be very clear: Greta is, I mean she’s maybe sort of a type or a shadow of an antichrist of a sort that would be tempting. But I don’t want to flatter her too much. So with Greta, you shouldn’t take her as the antichrist for sure. With AOC, you can choose whether or not you want to believe this disclaimer that I just gave

But I don’t think this is the win that you might think it is. The dude is a loon.
by csa | 2026-02-15 15:10:05+00:00
> Is Microsoft a "dying company"? The stock market certainly thinks otherwise.

This is the entire sentence that I wrote that you seem to be referring to:

“These are examples of how bad management thinks, or at best, how management at dying companies think.”

MS falls under the first part — bad management. Let literacy be your friend.

To elaborate, yes, I think that MS is managed incredibly poorly, and they succeed despite their management norms and culture, not because of it. They should be embarrassed by their management culture, but their success in other areas of the company allows the bad management culture to persist.