MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jacquesm | 2026-02-26 16:32:33+00:00
What a great thing this didn't exist in the past. We likely wouldn't have had any of the amazing artworks that we have now. Imagine an AI generated Mona Lisa, Nightwatch or Sistine Chapel ceiling because prompting would have been so much cheaper than paying Leonardo, Rembrandt or Michelangelo...

Now extrapolate to all other artforms. Sculpture seems safe, for now, but only barely so.
by riffraff | 2026-02-26 16:34:15+00:00
FWIW, the online application only allows you to apply for a single person at a time, so for a family of four you need to repeat the whole process (including payment) four times. And the automatic identification of passport and picture does not work very well. And some payments randomly fail.

It is not a very good system. They do seem to respond fast tho!
by SecretDreams | 2026-02-26 16:34:17+00:00
> If their AI creates a world where human intelligence, labor, and money are worthless, or where their creations take control of those things instead of them having control, that's not a very good outcome for them.

You would think that, but a lot of kings and people in power have been able to achieve something similar over our humanity's history. The trick is to not make things "completely worthless". Just to increase the gap as much as (in)humanly possible while marching us towards a deeper sense of forced servitude.
by 5o1ecist | 2026-02-26 16:34:20+00:00
> Just to be clear -- we aren't "forcing" anyone to behave. We are trying to "nudge" and "educate".

Sure! I could believe that, but there's no reason to do so. Promises and stated intentions mean nothing. You can easily change your mind, or eventually be replaced by someone who thinks differently. Or, you know, as indicated by your questionable usage of quotation marks ... simply not be honest about it.

> I also believe that if I have a blog with comments, it's perfectly fine for me to set the rules about discourse on my blog. Right?

"False equivalency is a logical fallacy where two subjects are incorrectly considered equivalent based on flawed reasoning, often oversimplifying their differences. It typically occurs when a shared trait is assumed to indicate equality, despite significant differences in context or magnitude."

Of course! A blog is definitively absolutely comparable to a social website visited by tens of thousands of people every day. Right?

You are not being honest. You hide the true meaning of the words behind quotation marks. If you actually meant what you're writing, then you would not need to use the quotation marks.

Instead it's "nudging" and "educating", because you know exactly that what that thing is going to do is NOT nudging and educating, it's whatever meaning you hide behind these quotation marks.
by amiga386 | 2026-02-26 16:34:33+00:00
Lovely video, going into almost everything...

...and yet, zero mention of systemd's recommendation for programs to link in the libsystemd kitchen sink just to call sd_notify() (which should really be its own library)

...and no mention of why systemd felt the need to preemptively load compression libraries, which it only needs to read/write compressed log files, even if you don't read/write log files at all? Again, it's a whole independent subsystem that could be its own library.

The video showed that xz was a dependency of OpenSSH. It showed on screen, but never said aloud, that this was only because of systemd. Debian/Redhat's sshd was started with systemd and they added in a call to the sd_notify() helper function (which simply sends a message to the $NOTIFY_SOCKET socket), just to inform systemd of the exact moment sshd is ready. This loads the whole of libsystemd. That loads the whole of liblzma. Since the xz backdoor, OpenSSH no longer uses the sd_notify() function directly, it writes its own code to connect to $NOTIFY_SOCKET. And the sd_notify manpage begrudgingly gives a listing of code you can use to avoid calling it, so if you're an independent program with no connection to systemd, you just want to notify it you've started... you don't need to pull in the libsystemd kitchen sink. As it should've been in the first place.

Is the real master hacker Lennart Poettering, for making sure his architectural choices didn't appear in this video?
by loeg | 2026-02-26 16:35:05+00:00
My understanding is that mitragynine is an mu-opioid partial agonist which limits its impact even in high doses. This is sort of in the same realm as Buprenorphine. Google claims it also doesn't recruit beta-arrestin but admittedly I'm out of my depth here. Presumably this proposed fentanyl replacement is still a full mu-opioid agonist for efficacy.
by antimaterial | 2026-02-26 16:35:26+00:00
Nice work on this. The token reduction side effect alone makes it worth dropping in.

I'm sure you are already thinking about other attack vectors, web fetch is one way injection gets in but agents have a lot more surfaces. User input, tool responses, memory, other agents in a chain.

I've been poking at handling this sanitization at the api call level and filtering everything. Definitely more latency w this approach, but essentially denying all.
by drcongo | 2026-02-26 16:35:53+00:00
No problem, I wasn't very clear either! I remember someone I know looking into this in the early 2000s as part of a wider collective thing. It's long enough ago that I can't remember the details but it was definitely less about a poor reference and more about the individuals' being on a list somewhere without having even applied for a job. And come to think of it, it's probably even more illegal now because of GDPR.
by toss1 | 2026-02-26 16:36:09+00:00
And for a regime claiming to support jobs, sustainable energy provides/requires orders of magnitude more workers than the obsolete, expensive, and dirty coal they are pushing again for no reason.

Moreover, no semi-smart coal miner would wish a coal mining career on their sons. They'd want them to have honest work that is clean and won't likely kill them either quickly in a disaster or slowly by breathing in coal and rock dust all day.
by pinkmuffinere | 2026-02-26 16:36:11+00:00
> Half their agentic usage is coding. When that's your reality, you train for it. You optimize the tool use, the file editing, the multi-step workflows - because that's what your paying users are actually doing. Google doesn't have that same pressure.

I wonder if this is a strategic choice — anthropic has decided to go after the developers, a motivated but limited market. Whereas the general populace might be more attracted to improved search tools, allowing Google/openai/etc to capture that larger market
by trevordilley | 2026-02-26 16:36:12+00:00
CTO Here!

Definitely lots of parallels with Conductor, here's where I think we differentiate specifically.

* The interface to interact with your AI is a full IDE (our minimal fork of vscode) with a focus on the CLI AI

* Further, each workspace gets their own IDE with all the functionality that implies

* We support a bunch of different CLI AI

* Since it's a vscode fork, you have access to the open source extension marketplace so you can even use the extension AI's like Roo Code in parallel (or your favorite CLI AI's extension like the Claude Code extension which you can see in our video!)

* I believe our take on running your app in parallel is a bit different (I may be wrong though!). We provide a means to name variables that will bind to ports so your parallel runs of your app don't fight over ports

* Github PR review right in DevSwarm, leave comments and approvals!
We are definitely in the same space for sure, our aim with DevSwarm 2.0 was to make the transition to multi-task/parallel development less of a sheer cliff.

For many folks diving into AI First development multi-tasking with worktrees was really intuitive, but taking a step back it's a pretty huge ask to make that pivot. DevSwarm 2.0 we think really helps bridge that gap.
by DauntingPear7 | 2026-02-26 16:36:20+00:00
IMO it’s like that Reddit post from a while back with the subway to nowhere in china. You need the infrastructure to encourage usage and buildout. It’s a chicken and egg problem. I personally don’t bike at my uni bc the state DOT decided it’s fine to have a bike lane between a right turn lane/bus lane and 3/4 lanes of traffic. On a state highway (truck route). Safe to say I don’t feel safe biking there, despite it being at the heart of the university. Plenty of people bike on the other side, where there’s a protected separated bike lane going the other direction.
by quantum_magpie | 2026-02-26 16:36:42+00:00
In the German site I get free shipping over 60 Eur, but only by stuff shipped by amazon. And other vendors somehow manage to always screw up shipping, so now I have had all orders for used books that had no/invalid tracking number, not arrive and I have/had to negotiate a refund for all of these refunds with the vendors themselves instead of amazon. So all-in-all, amazon is actually good, makes stuff available that’s impossible to find locally (books in English), and does shipping well.
by aleph_minus_one | 2026-02-26 16:36:58+00:00
> Step 1: Solve the entire mathematical field of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology

There exists an insane amount of questions in topology that have (by our current understanding) nothing to do with CAD or even computational geometry.

> These are genuinely hard problems that mathematicians have been working on for decades.

The hard problems that mathematicians in topology work on are nearly always very different from what you think modern topology is about.
by coldtea | 2026-02-26 16:37:21+00:00
>But other missions would require rare high end high performance high salary specialists who are in demand - and thus expensive. You can't rely on being able to source enough altruists that will put up with being paid half their market worth for the sake of the mission.'

That's exactly what a non-profit should be able to rely on. And not just "half their market worth", but even many times less.

Else we can just say "we can't really have non-profits, because everybody is a greedy pig who doesn't care about public benefit enough to make a sacrifice of profits - but still a perfectly livable salary" - and be done with it.
by goodmythical | 2026-02-26 16:37:34+00:00
Isn't curing cancer just as dangerous as a nuclear bomb? Especially considering some of the gene-therapies under consideration? Because you can bet that a non-negligable portion of research in this space is being funded by governments and groups interested in application beyond curing cancer. (Autism? Whiteness? Jewishness? Race in general? Faith in general? Could china finally cure western greed? Maybe we can slip some extra compliancy in there so that the plebia- ah- population is easier to contr- ah- protect.)

Curing all cancers would increase population growth by more than 10% (9.7-10m cancer related deaths vs current 70-80m growth rate), and cause an average aging of the population as curing cancer would increase general life expectancy and a majority of the lives just saved would be older people.

We'd even see a jobs and resources shock (though likely dissimilar in scale) as billions of funding is shifted away from oncologists, oncology departments, oncology wards, etc. Billions of dollars, millions of hospital beds, countless specialized professionals all suddenly re-assigned just as in AI.

Honestly the cancer/nuclear/tech comparison is rather apt. All either are or could be disruptive and either are or could be a net negative to society while posing the possibility of the greatest revolution we've seen in generations.
by magicalhippo | 2026-02-26 16:37:42+00:00
> instrumenting micro-level events (like ZGC's load barriers or G1's write barriers) directly inside application threads without destroying throughput (or creating observer effects invalidating the measurements) is incredibly difficult

I've used a sampling profiler with success to find lock contention in heavily multithreaded code, but I guess there are some details that makes it not viable for this?
by mullingitover | 2026-02-26 16:37:42+00:00
> Those of us who are capitalists see surplus value as a compromise to ensure good economic growth.

I think the problem is that every system of economics requires ignoring human nature in order to believe it possibly can work. In order to believe that capitalism doesn't lead to despotic rule you have to ignore the fact that civilizations love a good hierarchy far more than they love justice and fairness.

You can make any system of economics work if you figure out how to deal, head on, with the particular human nature factor that it tries to ignore.
by yakattak | 2026-02-26 16:37:42+00:00
All things traditionally done by artists or artist adjacent roles. I can understand at an individual level, say for a solo gamedev who wasn’t going to pay an artist anyway. That’s not at scale though.

Larian Studios most recently was under fire for this [1]. Like I can see a director going “what would X look like?” and then speeding over to the concept artists for a proper rendition if they liked it. I don’t think this is at scale though. Any large business is just going to get rid of the concept artists.

[1]: https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/baldurs-gate-3-developer-l...
by tialaramex | 2026-02-26 16:37:54+00:00
The attacker doesn't need to be connected to the victim's network, only to the same hardware, the hardware's loss of isolation is the unexpected problem.

Their University example is pertinent. The victim is an Eduroam user, and the attacker never has any Eduroam credentials, but the same WiFi hardware is serving both eduroam and the local guest provision which will be pretty bare bones, so the attacker uses the means described to start getting packets meant for that Eduroam user.

If you only have a single appropriately authenticated WiFi network then the loss of isolation doesn't matter, in the same way that a Sandbox escape in your web browser doesn't matter if you only visit a single trusted web site...
by MarsIronPI | 2026-02-26 16:38:45+00:00
Honestly, I haven't followed the progress of space telescopes in recent years so I'm not sure how much value Hubble still provides. (I'm guessing it's still a lot though.) As someone who grew up loving Hubble, I would be very sad to see it de-orbit. It would be quite the loss of a piece of my childhood.
Ask HN: Is LLM training infra still broken enough to build a company around?
by harsh020 | 2026-02-26 16:38:56+00:00
We recently ran into something frustrating while training and fine-tuning open-weight TTS models.

Instead of working on the model itself, we spent days dealing with:
- CUDA version mismatches
- Driver / PyTorch conflicts
- OOM crashes when scaling to multi-GPU
- Broken or outdated open-source training scripts
- Gluing together tracking + eval + deployment manually

It felt like we were rebuilding the same orchestration layer every team probably rebuilds.
- Cloud providers give raw GPUs.
- MLOps tools give experiment tracking.
- Open-source gives training scripts.

But the end-to-end workflow (dataset → fine-tune → monitor → evaluate → deploy → retrain) still feels stitched together.

We’re exploring building an opinionated platform that:

Lets you select a base model (e.g. Llama/Mistral-style open models)
1. Upload or connect datasets
2. Choose infra tier
3. Launch LoRA/full fine-tuning
4. Monitor loss + cost in real time
5. Run built-in eval
6. Deploy with one click

Basically: abstract away the CUDA + orchestration layer.

Before we go too deep, I’d love honest feedback:
- Is this still a painful problem at your company?
- Would serious AI teams use this, or do larger companies just build infra in-house?
- Is this doomed to be a hobbyist tool?
- Where would the real wedge be — training, evaluation, or continuous retraining?

We’ve launched a simple landing page and started building, but we’re still early and trying to validate whether this is a real infra gap or just our own frustration.

Would appreciate blunt feedback.
by eqvinox | 2026-02-26 16:39:03+00:00
It's not a big deal because the Ars Technica summarisation is wrong. You can (and enterprise controllers do in fact) tie IPs and MACs to association IDs (8bit number per BSS) and thus prevent this kind of spoofing. I haven't had time to read the paper yet to check what it says on this.

Also client isolation is not considered "needed" in home/SOHO networks because this kind of attack is kinda assumed out of scope; it's not even tried to address this. "If you give people access to your wifi, they can fuck with your wifi devices." This should probably be communicated more clearly, but any claims on this attack re. home networks are junk.
by jll29 | 2026-02-26 16:39:23+00:00
Why the Web doesn't have a Scottish Accent

I once asked for funding from a Scottish business angel.

He confided to me that his biggest mistake in life was saying no on a phone call by a certain Tim Berners-Lee, who was looking for someone to help implement a browser for the "World Wide Web".

"Why did you reject him?" I asked. "'World Wide Web' sounded pretentious." said the man who got independently wealthy by selling a company that produced hypertext software (incl. browsers) for technical documentation running on Sun workstations...

...TBL turned to the NCSA team in the U.S. instead, and the rest is history.
by nicodjimenez | 2026-02-26 16:39:23+00:00
Part of what makes Hendrix's live performances so great is how completely unreproducible they are. Even Jimi himself could never recreate that one note sustain when he begins the solo on Machine Gun. To re-create it, you'd have to set the room up exactly the same, tune the guitar exactly the same, position the guitar relative to amps exactly the same, etc. So Hendrix being very sensitive and connected to the room was able to harness that energy into something unique that stands the test of time. Machine Gun is well known, but his Red House performance at Randall's Island also stands out to me as exceptional, those are the 2 key Hendrix performances. I read somewhere that Miles Davis was really impressed by Machine Gun and you can see why.

One thing I learned after buying some gear at home to try to record electric guitar at low volume is how important the physics of the speakers are. You can plug a tube amp into a cabinet simulator and you'll lose a lot more than using solid state electronics on a good but not great Fender amp, especially if you use fuzz / distortion pedals.

I'm not sure Hendrix was a systems engineer, but he was a transcendent blues artist, that's for sure.
by coldtea | 2026-02-26 16:39:54+00:00
Aside from a few select product categories, recycling IS a scam.

E.g.: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/17/plastic-...

Recycling mostly means "sent to landfills in the third world":

https://earth.org/waste-colonialism-a-brief-history-of-dumpi...

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2023/03/rich-countri...

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/opinion/trash-recycling-g...
by bottlepalm | 2026-02-26 16:41:12+00:00
I don't think vibe coders know the difference, but often when I ask AI to add a feature to a large code base, I already know how I'd do it myself, and the answer that Claude comes up with is more often the one I would have done. Codex and Gemini have burned me too many times, and I keep going back to Claude. I trust it's judgement. Anthropic models have always been a step above OpenAI and Google, even 2 years ago it was like that so it must be something fundamental.
by lizmat | 2026-02-26 16:41:12+00:00
It also goes from source code to AST:

$ raku -e 'say Q|say "Hello World!"|.AST'
RakuAST::StatementList.new(
RakuAST::Statement::Expression.new(
expression => RakuAST::Call::Name::WithoutParentheses.new(
name => RakuAST::Name.from-identifier("say"),
args => RakuAST::ArgList.new(
RakuAST::QuotedString.new(
segments => (
RakuAST::StrLiteral.new("Hello World!"),
)
)
)
)
)
)
by bonoboTP | 2026-02-26 16:41:17+00:00
They are heavily dogfooding. Coding is needed to orchestrate the training of the next Claude model, data processing, RL environments, evals, scaffolding, UI, APIs, automated experiments, cluster management, etc etc. This allows them to get the next model faster and then get the next one etc.

Making a model that's great at other kinds of knowledge/office work is coincidental, it doesn't feed back directly into improving the model.
by aleph_minus_one | 2026-02-26 16:41:24+00:00
>
So why is it that every 3D CAD program other than FreeCAD seems to have something that solves this problem "well enough" that most people doing simple designs (aka everything you could possibly print on a 3D printer) don't seem to bump into it?

Read the article:

> https://wiki.freecad.org/Topological_naming_problem

"This problem is not unique to FreeCAD. It is generally present in CAD software, but most other CAD software has heuristics to reduce the impact of the problem on users."

So, the problem exists in (nearly?) all CAD systems, but in the big expensive commercial CAD programs, a huge amount of manpower was invested to hide the problem better to the user ("heuristics to reduce the impact of the problem on users") so that the users will see much more rarely see such a problem, and thus often won't be aware of the existence of the topological naming problem.
by genxy | 2026-02-26 16:41:28+00:00
> CUDA version mismatches - Driver / PyTorch conflicts - OOM crashes when scaling to multi-GPU - Broken or outdated open-source training scripts - Gluing together tracking + eval + deployment manually

This shouldn't take days and CC can already setup all of this using whatever level of rigor you need.

Your business will get replaced with a prompt.
by pgm8705 | 2026-02-26 16:42:10+00:00
I also have always gone back to Claude after trying new models... until GPT-5.3-Codex, specifically with the new Codex Mac app. I've been pretty much full time with it for a few weeks now and have not missed Claude Code. It can over complicate things at times, but for the most part, it is providing working solutions on first go and following coding patterns that already exist in my app. With Claude, it would frequently knock out a feature with acceptable code quality, but be completely broken and require a round of debugging.

I'm even getting by without hitting limits on the $20/month plan, whereas I needed to be on the $100/month one with Claude.
by tayo42 | 2026-02-26 16:42:13+00:00
Could be both?

I've been leaning more towards claude. A lot of the LLM tropes seem to be ChatGPT really? I feel like claude doesn't do as much of the overly intense "its this -- not that" pattern and isn't constantly acting like my hype man. Claude code has been nice 90% of the time. I haven't tried to many competitors though.
by mindslight | 2026-02-26 16:42:38+00:00
You're oversimplifying the problem in the other direction. Fine-grained scriptability of hard limits would bump up against all of the thorny distributed systems problems. But I do agree that fixing the simple cases is straightforward - maximum spend rates per instant and per unit of time (eg per minute, hour, day, month). Providers would shoulder the small costs from the slightly-leaky assumptions they have to make to implement those limits, and users can then operate within that framework to optimize what they want on a best-effort basis (eg a script that responds within a minute to explicitly scale resources, or a human-in-the-loop notification cycle over the course of hours so that you have the possibility to say "actually this is popularity traffic that I really do want to pay for, etc).
by gruez | 2026-02-26 16:42:39+00:00
>Just FYI: LittleSnitch pre-resolves DNS entries BEFORE you click `Accept/Deny`, if you care & understand this potential security issue. Your upstream provider still knows whether you denied a query. Easily verifiable with a PiHole (&c).

This also feels like an exfil route? Are DNS queries (no tcp connect) logged/blocked?