MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mrguyorama | 2026-02-12 22:19:13+00:00
Because China wants to rule the world. That includes roughly being seen as a great bastion of awesomeness.

The huge solar rollout is very much because China thinks it might end up in a war, and they are currently very vulnerable to a blockade for energy resources, and grid scale solar is unblockadable for like 20 years. You can bomb it, but that's a hard mission.

If what I believe is correct, there would also be evidence of China creating unblockadable food transport lines and relationships.

Global Warming is well understood all over the world. China doesn't want the world to suck right before they finally undo their Century of Humiliation and retake their "rightful" place as mega empire that exports culture and tech and power. They want to be the super power ruling over an awesome world, not ruling over ashes.

I've heard arguments that China has fairly limited "Soft power", and they really want to fix that, which takes actions that at least look altruistic and win-win.

With the US self-defeating, China is in a great place to be the leader of a stable world, and even be a counterweight to an abusive USA.
by acgourley | 2026-02-12 22:19:27+00:00
Sorry the term of art is really soulbound identity right now, I use POS but it's less common. Definitions vary but I say a useful system must allow people to endorse statements with evidence they are a) alive b) not able to be represented by more than one identity (id is linked to your entire soul, not a persona or facet of your being) c) a kind of socially recognized person (human in the expected case)

and then layer on citizenship on top if you want to use this for polling, voting, etc.
by taurath | 2026-02-12 22:19:38+00:00
Just not search. The search product has pretty much become useless over the past 3 years and the AI answers often will get just to the level of 5 years ago. This creates a sense that that things are better - but really it’s just become impossible to get reliable information from an avenue that used to work very well.

I don’t think this is intentional, but I think they stopped fighting SEO entirely to focus on AI. Recipes are the best example - completely gutted and almost all receive sites (therefore the entire search page) run by the same company. I didn’t realize how utterly consolidated huge portions of information on the internet was until every recipe site about 3 months ago simultaneously implemented the same anti-Adblock.
by dakolli | 2026-02-12 22:19:45+00:00
Yeah, that's a good question that I can't stop thinking about. I don't really enjoy much else other than building software, its genuinely my favorite thing to do. Maybe there will be a world where we aren't completely replaced, we have handmade clothes still after all that are highly coveted. I just worry its going to uproot more than just software engineering, theoretically it shouldn't be hard to replace all low hanging fruit in the realm of anything that deals with computer I/O. Previous generations of automation have created new opportunities for humans, but this seems mostly just as a means of replacement. The advent of mass transportation/vehicles created machines who needed mechanics (and eventually software), I don't see that happening in this new paradigm.

I don't think that's going to make society very pleasant if everyone's fighting over the few remaining ways to make livelihood. People need to work to eat. I certainly don't see the capitalist class giving everyone UBI and letting us garden or paint for the rest of our lives. I worry we're likely going to end up in trenches or purged through some other means.
by seizethecheese | 2026-02-12 22:19:47+00:00
“Stochastic chaos” is really not a good way to put it. By using the word “stochastic” you prime the reader that you’re saying something technical, then the word “chaos” creates confusion, since chaos, by definition, is deterministic. I know they mean chaos in they lay sense, but then don’t use the word “stochastic”, just say random.
by geocar | 2026-02-12 22:19:57+00:00
You are confused.

The RFC is a request for comments. The specific one in question is about Internet Mail.

If server implementers want their mail to be delivered these are things they SHOULD do.

That's it.

It isn't something you can give to your lawyer, and nobody cares about your opinion about what you think "should" means you can make someone else do. This is how it is.
by itissid | 2026-02-12 22:20:54+00:00
Good to know its similar. Oh I actually do have a text box as well, but using it to type from the phone is not very convenient. Too much typing, I generally STT into the text box. I don't use it to code much, unless I have specced it out and I know the spec is good. But then to code it up is just a few mins, no?

I spend my time trying to tuning the voice+webapp experience: i.e. how it can explain things, can it surface thinking tokens from claude tools properly etc. The sweat, blood, voice go into `/create_research -> /create_plan` loop before the `/implement_plan`. Sometimes I copy the research and paste it into chatGPT for review or comments as well.

I generally use the MCP to get it to follow commands and explain things to me to make progress in this cycle, and I often pause it and ask for drawing me a mermaid a sequence diagram for events or a block diagram showing how pieces go together.
by mrandish | 2026-02-12 22:21:02+00:00
> does leak per definition.

As a measure focused solely on fluid intelligence, learning novel tasks and test-time adaptability, ARC-AGI was specifically designed to be resistant to pre-training - for example, unlike many mathematical and programming test questions, ARC-AGI problems don't have first order patterns which can be learned to solve a different ARC-AGI problem.

The ARC non-profit foundation has private versions of their tests which are never released and only the ARC can administer. There are also public versions and semi-public sets for labs to do their own pre-tests. But a lab self-testing on ARC-AGI can be susceptible to leaks or benchmaxing, which is why only "ARC-AGI Certified" results using a secret problem set really matter. The 84.6% is certified and that's a pretty big deal.

IMHO, ARC-AGI is a unique test that's different than any other AI benchmark in a significant way. It's worth spending a few minutes learning about why: https://arcprize.org/arc-agi.
by lp0_on_fire | 2026-02-12 22:21:03+00:00
Putting aside for a moment that moltbook is a meme and we already know people were instructing their agents to generate silly crap...yes. Running a piece of software _ with the intent_ that it actually attempt/do those things would likely be illegal and in my non-lawyer opinion SHOULD be illegal.

I really don't understand where all the confusion is coming from about the culpability and legal responsibility over these "AI" tools. We've had analogs in law for many moons. Deliberately creating the conditions for an illegal act to occur and deliberately closing your eyes to let it happen is not a defense.

For the same reason you can't hire an assassin and get away with it you can't do things like this and get away with it (assuming such a prompt is actually real and actually installed to an agent with the capability to accomplish one or more of those things).
by quailfarmer | 2026-02-12 22:21:33+00:00
I’m very mixed about WASM. It’s clearly a very cool technology, and enables cool things by allowing native performance without needing multi-platform support.

But at the same time, it provides a vector for foreign, non-free software to run on my computer. Every time someone sends me a Google doc blocking printing/copying (on _my_ computer!), it makes me want to join a monastery.
by cyberax | 2026-02-12 22:21:40+00:00
The whole discussion about "fixing" cities is stupid. Dense cities can't be fixed, and using ad-hoc regulations like this is just like plugging the holes in a dike with fingers.

Next you'll find that you also need to do the same for schools. But schoolteachers won't be able to afford living near the areas that they serve. So you need subsidized housing for them.

Oh, and the same for kindergarten. But what about at-home childcare? And so on.

And no, "land value capture" won't fix it. You'll just move the complexity from giving out subsidies into assessing the value of kindergartens and schools.
by krapp | 2026-02-12 22:21:55+00:00
>I'd agree with this logic if we were discussing all kinds of different topics here, and one's stance on gender would be immediately visible to anyone.

We do discuss all kinds of different topics here. Despite what many people here want to believe, Hacker News isn't exclusively for tech and tech-related subjects.

>and pretty sure anything openly transphobic would be flagged or deleted pretty soon.

But not banned, that's the problem. The guidelines are extremely pedantic but nowhere is bigotry, racism, antisemitism or transphobia mentioned as being against those guidelines. You might say that shouldn't be necessary, but it's weird that so much effort is put into tone policing specific edge cases but the closest the guidelines come to defending marginalized groups is "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." Transphobia is treated as a mere faux pas on the same par as being too snarky, or tediously repetitive. The real transgression being not the bigotry but "trampling curiosity." Any trans person who posts here knows that bigots who hate them and want to do them harm aren't going to suffer meaningful consequences (especially if they just spin up a green account) and that the culture here isn't that concerned about their safety.

Read the green account just below me. That sort of thing happens all the time. Yes, the comment is [dead] but why should a trans person be comfortable here, or consider themselves welcome, knowing that this is the kind of thing they'll encounter?
by Alifatisk | 2026-02-12 22:22:03+00:00
”Training Hardware: Huawei Ascend”

https://glm5.net

https://www.digitalapplied.com/blog/zhipu-ai-glm-5-release-7...

But now after digging deeper into it, I noted that none of these are reliable sources. I thought the founder of z.ai owned glm5.net, but he owns glm5.com
by jsheard | 2026-02-12 22:22:20+00:00
Eh, the worldwide rollout hasn't happened yet so currently the only people getting directed to Persona after they promised client-side scanning are those who are fiddling around with Discords internals to trigger the age verification flow early. But yeah if they stick with Persona then they will need to retract the client-side promise before the proper rollout, and that'll be even more fuel on the fire.
by philipallstar | 2026-02-12 22:22:31+00:00
What I'm getting at is you also don't seem to be applying the balony detection kit to what you're saying. I could be wrong, but you seem to be describing people with center or right wing views. That seems like tribalism rather than anything reasoned, as while the right has people like that, the left does too, and perhaps currently with more fundamental reasoning issues.
by adolph | 2026-02-12 22:22:46+00:00
Are those terms substantially different from the article's claims?

THe wikipedia definition of meme is "memes: ideas, behaviors, beliefs, and expressions." The author discusses frames and mental models as a topic [0]. "[A] framing is a choice of boundaries" and "A model is an analogy. It is a simplified simulation of something else." These seem to map to meme-concepts ideas and beliefs respectively and loosely. ("Frame" is probably a meta-meme or ontology that expands or contracts what memes can exist at all or what can be discerned at all.)

0. https://aethermug.com/posts/a-framing-and-model-about-framin...
by whaleidk | 2026-02-12 22:22:47+00:00
The author thinks that it’s fine to do this for code, which I find strange. I have big time ai:dr; when a commit comes in for me to review and it’s 300 lines for something that is already built into a single function of the framework we use, or I see a (important) comment they forgot to delete. I should not be expected to become more familiar with the authors code than he is himself, and I certainly shouldn’t be the first one verifying that even works.
by mwcampbell | 2026-02-12 22:23:27+00:00
> the actual object-level question ("is this tool useful for this task")

That's not the only question worth asking though. It could be that the tool is useful, but has high negative externalities. In that case, the question "what kind of person uses/rejects this" is also worth considering. I think that if generative AI does have high negative externalities, then I'd like to be the kind of person that rejects it.
by PKop | 2026-02-12 22:23:31+00:00
LLM spammers are not rationale, smart, nor do they deserve courtesy.

Debate is a fine thing with people close to your interests and mindset looking for shared consensus or some such. Not for enemies. Not for someone spamming your open source project with LLM nonsense who is harming your project, wasting your time, and doesn't deserve to be engaged with as an equal, a peer, a friend, or reasonable.

I mean think about what you're saying: This person that has wasted your time already should now be entitled to more of your time and to a debate? This is ridiculous.

> I really wonder if this has literally ever worked.

I'm saying it shows them they will get no engagement with you, no attention, nothing they are doing will be taken seriously, so at best they will see that their efforts are futile. But in any case it costs the maintainer less effort. Not engaging with trolls or idiots is the more optimal choice than engaging or debating which also "never works" but more-so because it gives them attention and validation while ignoring them does not.

> What is it about legitimacy that's so scary?

I don't know what this question means, but wasting your time, and giving them engagement will create more comments you will then have to respond to. What is it about LLM spammers that you respect so much? Is that what you do?. I don't know about "scary" but they certainly do not deserve it. Do you disagree?
by dang | 2026-02-12 22:23:34+00:00
Recent and related. Others?

Discord/Twitch/Snapchat age verification bypass - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46982421 - Feb 2026 (435 comments)

Discord faces backlash over age checks after data breach exposed 70k IDs - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46951999 - Feb 2026 (21 comments)

Discord Alternatives, Ranked - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46949564 - Feb 2026 (465 comments)

Discord will require a face scan or ID for full access next month - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46945663 - Feb 2026 (2018 comments)`
by gpm | 2026-02-12 22:24:03+00:00
Those people came to those views somehow. I'd hope that a less radicalizing social media platform might move them away from those views. Finding common ground isn't just about figuring out where people currently agree, it's also an act of persuasion convincing people to change views to then-mutually shared views.

Wanting people dead or imprisoned simply for existing is the sort of inconsistent view that is likely easiest to change by moving people out of radicalized spaces...
by wahern | 2026-02-12 22:24:17+00:00
> I hate that the executive and judicial branches have to do so much work that should be done by Congress.

In recent years the Supreme Court has turned against the use of regulatory agency rule making authority to stretch the meaning of older statutes and accomplish what Congress is too gridlocked to do. Most notably was the 2022 decision striking down Obama-era EPA power plant carbon emission limits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_v._EPA), but there are many other decisions in a similar vein (e.g. overturning Chevron), and more coming down the pipe (see https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/10/supreme-court-allows-epa-...).

Between SCOTUS decisions limiting how older statutes can be reinterpreted to encompass global warming on the one hand, and fundamental economic incentives on the other (the West Virginia decision didn't result in a rush back to coal), this move by the Trump administration is unlikely to change the course of things, except to perhaps spur Congress to involve itself more heavily one way or the other.

Rather than handwringing, the left needs to finally accept that relying on lawsuits and aggressive Federal regulatory agencies, rather than the ballot boxes (plural--not just the presidential election), to enact their social and environmental policies is no longer viable. But it's going to be a difficult change because the Democrats sacrificed a ton of grass roots support (real, substantive support, as opposed to professional class and social media popularity contests) as they came to rely almost exclusively on imaginative legalistic and technocratic solutions, an evolution that started decades before the courts took their sharp conservative turn.

I, for one, invite diminished environmental regulatory agencies. In so far as it concerns global warming, renewable energy, and land use (e.g. mass transit, housing, etc), they've become impediments much more than enablers of (net) environmentally friendly change. What does it matter if an agency favors one set of policies over another when it takes years if not decades for projects to make it through the thicket of red tape? For energy policy specifically, the economics favor renewables, so less regulation can only hasten the transition.
by plagiarist | 2026-02-12 22:24:29+00:00
> The sheriff had him arrested. Weems wouldn't speak to NPR, but last fall he spoke to NewsChannel Five in Nashville. At the time, he blamed Bushart for refusing to delete the post.

> "We sent Lexington police department out to speak to him, and he refused to do that," Weems said. "What kind of person does that? What kind of person says he don't care, 'I'm not taking it down?'"

Hard to be a clearer violation of 1A rights than that. Wish Weems would be held personally liable. Unfortunately I'm sure because of the Post-It note on the QI ruling it'll turn out that "he couldn't possibly have known it was unconstitutional to order someone to take down a comment and arrest them after their refusal."
by jolovicdev | 2026-02-12 22:24:30+00:00
It's a schema-first LLM extraction framework with entity grounding, multi-pass extraction, and deterministic post-processing.

Target Audience

People who want to build:

Regulatory compliance extraction.

SEC filing and earnings-call intelligence.

Contract clause extraction and renewal tracking.

Policy change monitoring.

Research paper benchmark extraction.

Incident/postmortem structure mining.

Comparison

Compared to google/langextract, it uses blackgeorge framework - which uses litellm so access almost any model + actually more correct in most of bencmarks I ran!
by apatheticonion | 2026-02-12 22:24:47+00:00
Totally agree.

It can be made better if you write it using non standard patterns - but the community is so dogmatic you'll get laughed out of the room.

All of my personal react projects use the MVC/MVVM architecture and are so much easier to work with

export class AppViewModel {
@rx accessor message = new TextField()
}

export function App() {
const vm = useViewModel(AppViewModel)

return <div>
<p>{vm.message.value}</p>
<input
onChange={vm.message.fromEvent}
value={vm.message.value} />
<div>
}

Makes it vue/angular/svelte-like, but unlike Vue/Angular/Svelte, you pick the version of TypeScript, the tools and don't need brittle plugins for your IDE to work with it.
by alwillis | 2026-02-12 22:25:35+00:00
> It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money.

Anthropic went from zero to $14 billion in revenue in less than 3 years, growing at 10x per year.

That's what they're investing in.

Also Anthropic seems laser-focused, unlike some of their competitors who are throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks.
by bpt3 | 2026-02-12 22:25:35+00:00
This conversation was over before it started, because you saw a need to interject (without reading everything that was written beforehand) with a challenge to get me to "admit" to something (that I already agree with by the way because it is a fact) and I'm not going to participate.

You're the one who chose hostility, and of course you fall back on a display of offense when you get it back in kind.

Enjoy tilting at windmills for eternity.
by renato_shira | 2026-02-12 22:26:04+00:00
the "agent per row" framing is what makes this click for me too. most agent frameworks think in terms of orchestration graphs or message queues, but modeling it as "each row has a little worker that can act on its own state" is a surprisingly intuitive primitive.

it also maps well to how a lot of real world problems actually work: you have N entities, each with their own context, and you want something watching each one independently. the traditional way to do that is a job queue polling the database, but if the database is the compute layer, you skip a whole class of sync/consistency problems.

probably not production ready for anything serious, but i've seen this pattern before where "weird" database experiments end up influencing real tools later. json columns were an antipattern until jsonb became a legitimate design choice. triggers were considered dangerous until supabase made realtime features out of them. the boundary keeps shifting.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2026-02-12 22:26:39+00:00
I don't know where you've gotten the idea that wealthy Americans spending $3M on their homes can't have sidewalks or live near major city centers. It's a big country, so there's lots of places that don't have sidewalks or aren't near a city. But any wealthy American who wants those things can easily get them without making compromises.

(The school thing I'll grant you, although in a car-centric country a school 2 miles away often takes like 5 minutes to get to.)
by tl | 2026-02-12 22:27:33+00:00
Per BalatroBench, gemini-3-pro-preview makes it to round (not ante) 19.3 ± 6.8 on the lowest difficulty on the deck aimed at new players. Round 24 is ante 8's final round. Per BalatroBench, this includes giving the LLM a strategy guide, which first-time players do not have. Gemini isn't even emitting legal moves 100% of the time.
by therobots927 | 2026-02-12 22:27:37+00:00
I wonder when it will sink in for the average (especially non-white) American citizen that you are one false positive in an algorithm away from being arrested and detained / deported. If you’re lucky there will be a public outcry large enough that you’re released (like 5 year old Liam Ramos). Given expectations built into the constitution, this is should be disturbing. As a white, upper middle class, multigenerational citizen of the US, I find ICE’s actions disturbing at a fundamental level. Probably because I can extrapolate to the logical conclusion of this. Other people are extrapolating as well and it wouldn’t surprise me if continued ICE actions spur a public rebellion against surveillance of all forms, after seeing how it can be combined with a lawless federal government to subvert basic rights. I also think it will result in a backlash against private prisons in general as people then extrapolate from the ICE situation to the daily reality faced by primarily black men when interacting with the police. With a simple head nod, the cops can plant evidence and present a narrative to a judge and jury that puts you away for 20 years over nothing more than a dirty look at a cop.

If you think carrying a form of ID or passport will save you from ICE, I just want you to imagine a scenario where you are alone with several federal agents who, when provided with your proof of citizenship, light it on fire with a match and throw you in a van. Papers are just physical objects and unless ICE is wearing 24/7 streaming body cams, the above scenario could happen to literally anyone.