MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by noboostforyou | 2026-02-19 20:29:22+00:00
First off, the majority of them were found guilty in court - https://web.archive.org/web/20240108135705/https://www.justi...

Also, for the rest of them that accepted a pardon, that also necessities an admission of guilt - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/#89-90

So yes, they were guilty of insurrection even if they escaped punishment.
by nickpinkston | 2026-02-19 20:29:30+00:00
Requiring people to drive to Nevada to buy a real 3DP?

I'm a long time shooter of all kinds of firearms (bolt actions to full-autos).

What people don't realize is that gun control works, but only when it's very controlled - i.e. full registration, deep checks, mandatory training, strict storage, no handguns, etc.

You need to do it across the whole country, as a real customs border can cut guns significantly, but in the US you can do still do a private party (person to person with no dealer) transfer in many states, making gun running pretty trivial.

None of this will happen anytime soon in the US, and the ghost guns, etc. thing will keep happening.
by Spivak | 2026-02-19 20:29:40+00:00
You're right it's a very obvious thing that you should have to show your government issued ID to verify who you are to a civic function, and that relying on the honor system is something that seems like it could never work because elections are serious and people have vested interest in particular outcomes and so would obviously look to cheat.

But this is what I'm talking about it being a theoretical problem. It's so obvious that this could be an issue but it's not an actual issue and the USA stands as an example that, counterintuitively, you actually can rely on the honor system. And so because the system currently works as it is and there's no real problem to point to I think it is reasonable to be inherently suspicious of the motives of a government that wants to make a thing harder without being able to point to a concrete problem.

A less controversial example on hacker news would be having to show your government ID to access porn. We are all rightfully suspicious of the motives of a government that wants that when to most Americans it is plainly obvious that there is not a real problem being solved. It's so obvious that you should have to show proof that you're 18 in order to access 18 and up material but we have more than two decades of proof that just asking them if they're 18 and up works well enough.
by zahlman | 2026-02-19 20:30:31+00:00
There are a lot of important points of difference. Whether functions are introduced with an explicit keyword; how return types are marked; whether semicolons can be omitted at end of line; how types are named (and the overall system for describing algebraic types). Not to mention semantics around type inference (and whether it must be explicitly invoked with a `var` or `auto` etc.) and, again, algebraic types (what means of combination are possible?). And specifically with Rust you have the syntax required to make the borrow checker work. Oh, and then there are the implicit returns. Rust certainly didn't invent that (I seem to recall BASIC variants where you could assign to the current function name and then that value would be returned implicitly if control flow reached the end), but it reflects a major difference in philosophy.

... Which is really all to say: different people are focused on different details, at different levels.
by enduser | 2026-02-19 20:30:35+00:00
I've worked as both an IC and EM over the course of 25 years. The best part of being an IC is crafting solutions to single-human-sized problems—without needing to deal much with people. The best part of being an EM is directing the creation of larger solutions, sometimes vastly larger solutions, at the cost of dealing with people stuff.

AI takes the craft out of being an IC. IMO less enjoyable.

AI takes the human management out of being an EM. IMO way more enjoyable.

Now I can direct large-scope endeavors and 100% of my time is spent on product vision and making executive decisions. No sob stories. No performance reviews. Just pure creative execution.
by sigbottle | 2026-02-19 20:30:47+00:00
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/seth-juarez/anders-h...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11685317

https://lobste.rs/s/dwf2yn/sixten_s_query_based_compiler

https://ericlippert.com/2012/06/08/red-green-trees/

Rust's salsa, etc.

Related search terms are incremental compilation and red-green trees. It's primarily an ide driven workflow (well, the original use case was driven by ides), but the principles behind it are very interesting.

You can grok the difference by thinking through, for example, the difference between invoking `g++` on the command line - include all headers, then compile object files via includes, re-do all template deduction, etc. and one where editing a single line in a single file doesn't change the entire data structure much and force entire recompilation (this doesn't need full ownership of editing either by hooking UI events or keylogging: have a directory watcher treat the file diff as a patch, and then send it to the server in patch form; the observation being that compiling an O(n) size file is often way more expensive than a program that goes through the entire file a few times and generates a patch)

AST's are similar to these kinds of trees only insofar as the underlying data structure to understand programming languages are syntax trees.

I've always wanted to get into this stuff but it's hard!
by HardCodedBias | 2026-02-19 20:30:49+00:00
"These models are so powerful."

Careful.

Gemini simply, as of 3.0, isn't in the same class for work.

We'll see in a week or two if it really is any good.

Bravo to those who are willing to give up their time to test for Google to see if the model is really there.

(history says it won't be. Ant and OAI really are the only two in this race ATM).
by cranberryturkey | 2026-02-19 20:31:12+00:00
The definition carve-out for "additive manufacturing" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. CNC mills, laser cutters, and waterjet cutters can all produce the same end result but fall outside the statutory language. So the bill doesn't regulate the capability — it regulates the specific manufacturing process. Which means it's trivially circumvented by anyone who actually wants to make something prohibited, while imposing DOJ-reporting requirements on every hobbyist, educator, and small manufacturer running a $200 Ender 3.

This is the pattern with most hardware regulation attempts: the compliance burden falls on the people already operating in the open, while the actual threat model (someone with intent) routes around it by switching tools or buying across state lines.
by raphman | 2026-02-19 20:31:13+00:00
Yes, that's how I'd interpret it, too.

According to the article, onboarding speed is measured as “time to the 10th Pull Request (PR).”

As we have seen on public GitHub projects, LLMs have made it really easy to submit a large number of low-effort pull requests without having any understanding of a project.

Obviously, such a kind of higher onboarding speed is not necessarily good for an organization.
by pear01 | 2026-02-19 20:31:15+00:00
It is hard to police guns when there is free travel between the US states, yet only individual states can be relied upon to pass any reform. A broken federal government means guns are easily exported from red states with practically zero gun laws to blue states where they are used to commit crimes. States are often forced to recognize rights granted by other states because such an interstate jurisdictional question naturally bubbles up to the aforementioned dysfunctional federal system.

Similarly to how many (most?) guns used criminally in Mexico actually come from the United States.

Edit: I'm not surprised by the downvotes, but I am amused. These are objective facts. Any basic research will yield many studies (including from the American government) showing that the majority of guns used in crimes in Mexico are traced back to the States. Americans love the boogeyman of dangerous Mexican cartels so much they never seem to ask themselves where these guns come from in the first place. Hint: look in the mirror.
by cranberryturkey | 2026-02-19 20:31:25+00:00
Half-joking but this is genuinely the trajectory. The problem is that tax analysis requires understanding intent behind complex structures — is this a legitimate trust or a shell game? That's adversarial reasoning, not pattern matching.

The real risk isn't that AI can't find anomalies — it's great at that. The risk is that the people creating complex avoidance structures will use AI too, and they'll iterate faster than a government system updated on procurement cycles. You end up with AI vs AI where one side has a 3-year upgrade timeline and the other ships weekly.
by kotaKat | 2026-02-19 20:31:40+00:00
“Last year, video watchers using them were greeted by longer video loading times and increased buffering on YouTube.”

Ah yes, the Five Second Gaslight. “Experiencing interruptions? Find out more!” when it’s the site intentionally shoving a 5 second delay in and getting people to blame their ISPs for connectivity issues when YouTube was the one dicking around.
by plagiarist | 2026-02-19 20:31:43+00:00
Yeah! Like if we all just agree to pretend the one statement in isolation was the entire event he looks pretty reasonable!

Why do people keep pointing out that months of lying about electoral fraud may have encouraged people to take some extreme actions? SMH, that's not what he said on the day! Well, at least not on that day within the few second window of what I'd like you to consider!
by ben_w | 2026-02-19 20:31:45+00:00
> (Testing is the one thing you would never outsource to AI.)

I would rephrase that as "all LLMs, no matter how many you use, are only as good as one single pair of eyes".

If you're a one-person team and have no capital to spend on a proper test team, set the AI at it. If you're a megacorp with 10k full time QA testers, the AI probably isn't going to catch anything novel that the rest of them didn't, but it's cheap enough you can have it work through everything to make sure you have, actually, worked through everything.
by NeuroVexon | 2026-02-19 20:32:15+00:00
Great question. You're right that pure human gates don't scale to 24/7 operations.
AXON already handles this partially: you can set auto-approve per tool and per agent. Low-risk actions like web search run without asking, while high-risk actions like shell commands always require approval. There's also session-level approval — trust the agent for a specific task, then revoke.
For the overnight scenario: scheduled tasks in AXON run at defined times and queue approvals if needed. You approve in the morning or via Telegram/Discord on your phone.
But you're pointing at exactly where we're headed. Hybrid controls — rate limits, budget caps, automatic rollback on anomalies — are on the roadmap. The audit trail already captures everything, so adding automated rules on top of that data is the natural next step.
The philosophy stays the same: default to human control, earn autonomy gradually.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-02-19 20:32:45+00:00
Again like I have been saying, good insurance is predicated on the open market and ACA being around and not being killed by Republicans. Even if they don’t outright kill it, they are trying to put in a “death spiral” where only sick people use it and insurance companies don’t want to participate.

LTC not discriminating against pre-existing conditions is also post ACA.
by rocho | 2026-02-19 20:32:48+00:00
I find Gemini is outstanding at reasoning (all topics) and architecture (software/system design). On the other hand, Gemini CLI sucks and so I end up using Claude Code and Codex CLI for agentic work.

However, I heavily use Gemini in my daily work and I think it has its own place. Ultimately, I don't see the point of choosing the one "best" model for everything, but I'd rather use what's best for any given task.
by rbartelme | 2026-02-19 20:33:24+00:00
I wonder if the same thing happened with--or is happening at--NSF? I know researchers that did not get funding for quantitative ecology fellowships or grants. After back channeling with program managers, it seems that using "diversity"--as in the quantitative ecological measures, metrics, or derived functional values--may have flagged proposals to be rejected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_diversity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_diversity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_diversity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeta_diversity
by oceanplexian | 2026-02-19 20:33:39+00:00
It's not the most "permissive gun laws in the world". In Norway you can buy a suppressor off the shelf with little to no paperwork.

If you live in CA and don't want to experience permanent hearing damage from shooting, you'll catch a Felony for simply possessing one. It's a big middle finger like the rest of California's gun laws.
by _3u10 | 2026-02-19 20:33:52+00:00
i don't live there anymore, but BC or, Dubai as another example although Dubai is oddly more lax about liquor than most of the US or Canada. It's also about liquor stores which have to close at midnight, so its not just about neighborhoods with bars.

Where I live 5 grams of coke, 10 grams of weed, is legal, you can buy and drink alcohol 24/7, and bars can be open as late as they want even with outdoor patios, even in front of the Presdiential Palace. And you can drink outside on the street. Its also the happiest country on earth. (As measured by happiness, not some lame proxy like public healthcare)

I would never again live in the global north, or a country that lacked western values.
by jayofdoom | 2026-02-19 20:34:39+00:00
I used to go to a members-only bar in Apex, NC (in NC, at least at the time, if >50% of your sales was alcohol, you had to be a "club"). The last time I ever went there was when someone called the bartender and "reported" a DUI checkpoint down the road and they announced it in the bar.

Why do some folks think it's OK to put other people at risk to this level?
by eli | 2026-02-19 20:35:40+00:00
This does not seem to reckon with the many, MANY times this has been tried and failed. (The LinkedIn post at least acknowledges attempts that "did fail in the 90s and 2000s" and quickly waves them away.) There have been at least a dozen serious attempts in the last 20 years that I'm aware of.

What about Blendle? They had NYT, WaPo and WSJ as launch partners in 2014 but give up on micropayments in 2023 citing "very low demand"

Or Flattr. Or Invisibly. Or Pico. Or Brave's goofy crypto token. Or Coil. The Washington Post themselves experimented with cheap "day passes" a few years ago but I guess they didn't work well enough to keep. Arguably Medium's rev share program was another failed attempt. Heck no less a content middleman powerhouse than Apple tried and mostly failed to do a rev share / micropayments scheme with Apple News.
by 0x500x79 | 2026-02-19 20:37:05+00:00
I think it's a well balanced article.

The Anthropic Marketing here has... not been. I think that it's a great signal of agent orchestration, logevity of tasks, etc, but the messaging is "Software is Over we built a C compiler that can build linux, doom, sqlite, etc".

The oracle and existing test suites were a big chunk of why this got as far as it did IMO (well besides the training data in which there have been hundreds of c compilers). I also don't see a reference to the studies that call out that they could get copyrighted works with high percentages out of models, which would should also be included.

I am currently deciding what I do with future projects with regards to open sourcing because of the world this has been creating with regards to IP.
by akerl_ | 2026-02-19 20:37:13+00:00
I'm not sure why you're trying to build up what CIA means by inventing scenarios.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_security#CIA_triad

> For any information system to serve its purpose, the information must be available when it is needed.[78] This means the computing systems used to store and process the information, the security controls used to protect it, and the communication channels used to access it must be functioning correctly.[79] High availability systems aim to remain available at all times, preventing service disruptions due to power outages, hardware failures, and system upgrades.[80] Ensuring availability also involves preventing denial-of-service attacks, such as a flood of incoming messages to the target system, essentially forcing it to shut down.[81]

https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/cia-triad

> If, for example, there is a power outage and there is no disaster recovery system in place to help users regain access to critical systems, availability will be compromised. Also, a natural disaster like a flood or even a severe snowstorm may prevent users from getting to the office, which can interrupt the availability of their workstations and other devices that provide business-critical information or applications. Availability can also be compromised through deliberate acts of sabotage, such as the use of denial-of-service (DoS) attacks or ransomware.

https://online.utulsa.edu/blog/what-is-the-cia-triad/

> Software bugs or misconfigurations. Incorrect software configurations or glitches can cause system outages.
by yongjik | 2026-02-19 20:37:15+00:00
> Two Korean presidents were sentenced to death and were pardoned in the 90s.

The important context is that these two presidents were Chun Doo-hwan and his successor Roh Tae-Woo, who led the military coup of December 12th (1979), seizing power, and then sending paratroopers to murder hundreds of civilians to quash public protest in the uprising of Gwangju (1980).

They weren't your garden variety corrupt politicians. They were mass murderers, and by 1995 when they were arrested, they and their military cabals were still posing a credible threat to Korea's democracy. Their arrest and subsequent death sentences, accompanied with a sweeping purge of their military cabal by president Kim Young-Sam, marked an important inflection point in Korea's decades-long struggle toward democracy: before that the threat of a military coup was a constant factor in politics. After that the threat was gone, and since then, the Korean military never even pretended they had any political ambitions.

So mock their later pardons if you want to, but you can't deny it marked an important and necessary step in Korea's history. It also shows sending your ex-presidents to prison only to pardon them later is still better than not bothering with it at all.

* Also, the "obvious reason" that American politics sent zero ex-presidents to prison is that Biden chickened out. So, there's that.
by nritchie | 2026-02-19 20:37:20+00:00
And yet all countries with socialized systems pay less per capita for healthcare than we do and pretty much all have better health outcomes. Further privatizing our system will only make it more dis-functional. Healthcare isn't a normal marketplace. * When you really need it, you can't shop around. * There is a knowledge asymmetry built in. * A civilized society can't just let poor children die of preventable causes.
by kjksf | 2026-02-19 20:37:32+00:00
As far as I can tell, even in US, the most litigious nation in the world, you can't SUCCESSFULLY sue e.g. a cigarette maker or alcohol maker for making you addicted.

(I emphasize successfully because of course you can sue anyone for anything. The question is what lawsuits are winnable based on empirical data of what lawsuits were won).

If you could, that would be the end of those businesses. The addiction is beyond dispute and if every alcoholic could win a lawsuits against a winemaker, there would be no winemakers left.

In that context it seems patently absurd that you could sue Facebook for making you addicted.

It would be absurd to create a law that makes it possible without first making such laws for alcohol and cigarettes.

It's also patently absurd that we (where "we" here is leftist politicians) are allowing open drug dealing in populated areas of San Francisco and yet this is what we discuss today and not politician's systemic failure to fix easily fixable problems for which we already have laws making them illegal.
by svilen_dobrev | 2026-02-19 20:37:44+00:00
two/3 things of my own (experience):

- Find a friend to be your senses.

- With time, places change people. Other way happens noticeably only while coming in - or switching on.

- People should feel good when writing the software, otherwise it does not come out. And respectively, on the other side - when using the software.

in a way, i have moved these on a meta level too.. doing stuff (software or hardware or soulware) so *others* have fun. Or better, take others learn howto do this. Esp. if they do not notice my participation. Now that's meta-fun :)

walk me site. See if u wanna connect. Beware, you can step on a change..
by rdtsc | 2026-02-19 20:37:46+00:00
> The irony isn't lost on me that it's the USA, the country with some of the most permissive gun laws in the world, that's imposing these draconian rules on 3D printed guns - or is this pressure from the gun manufacturing lobby?

It's like saying "I am baffled by Europe, look at what Hungary is doing ..."

For example, some states don't need any permit to open or conceal carry, some have no minimum age requirements to buy guns, and the majority don't have any mention of 3D printed guns.

Federal law applies then about untraceable guns and or arms that cannot be detected by metal detectors. But those predate 3D printers as we know them today.
by iranintoavan | 2026-02-19 20:37:53+00:00
I did no verification on whether that metric is correct or not, but I would suspect the metric would be only measuring the amount of revenue the IRS "generated" from doing manual work like audits. The regular, I owe 1,000 in taxes, and I paid 1,000 in taxes. Wouldn't be considered +1,000 in that case, it would be excluded from the metric altogether. Only the additional "findings" from audits would be counted.
by FireBeyond | 2026-02-19 20:39:16+00:00
> states that already have the most restrictive gun control already, yet to nobody's surprise, hasn't done much to curb violent crime

The "most restrictive gun control" states in the US would still be generally by far the least restrictive gun control states in the rest of the developed world (you know, where gun-related deaths are a small fraction of here?).

Your answer smacks of "well, they tried and surprise surprise it doesn't work so why are we doing it?", i.e. "'No Way to Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens".
by stavros | 2026-02-19 20:39:24+00:00
So basically there's a /chat endpoint that goes to the LLM (a Pi agent), which has access to call specific tools (web search, SQL execution, cron) but doesn't have filesystem access, so the only thing it can do is exfiltrate data it can see (pretty big, but you can't really avoid that, and it doesn't have access to anything on the host system). There's a Signal bridge that runs on another container to connect to Signal, a Telegram webhook, and the other big component is a coding agent and a tool container. The coding agent can write files to a directory that's also mounted in the tool container, and the tool container can run the tools. That way you separate the coder from everything else, and nothing has access to any of your keys.

You can't really avoid the coder exfiltrating your tool secrets, but at least it's separated. I also want to add a secondary container of "trusted" tool that the main LLM can call but no other LLM can change.

This way you're assured that, for example, the agent can't contact anyone that you don't want it contact, or it can read your emails but not send/delete, things like that. It makes it very easy to enforce ACLs for things you don't want LLM-coded, but also enables LLM coding of less-trusted programs.