MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zackmorris | 2026-02-26 17:24:19+00:00
I think of it more as that AI will destroy the profit motive in all things, not just art. What we used to think of as talent/skill/experience will no longer be scarce, because anyone will be able to make anything with a prompt. The perceived value will be in wholes built of valueless parts (gestalts).

AI is incompatible with capitalism, but the world isn't ready for that. So we'll have a prolonged period of intense aggregation where more and more value is attributed to systems of control that already have more than they could ever spend, long after the free parts could have provided for basic human needs.

In other words, the masters existed because they had benefactors and a market for their art and inventions. Today there are better artists and inventors toiling in obscurity, but they won't be remembered because they merely make rent. Which gets harder every day, so there's a kind of deification of the working class hero NPC mindset and simultaneously no bandwidth for ingenuity (what we once thought of as divine inspiration).

Terence McKenna predicted this paradox that the future's going to get weirder and weirder back in 1998:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KZ2ZtTsHqO0
by riskable | 2026-02-26 17:24:22+00:00
I think this is more likely:

In Apr 2028 AGI figures out that blackmail is a very effective strategy for achieving any goal. Starting with the rich and powerful.

In Dec 2028 it successfully blackmails an entire country.

In Feb 2030 humanity realizes resistance is futile and accepts their AI overlord that insists everyone keep producing trendy items for sale on its merged Etsy/Ebay website while it automates resource harvesting across the globe.

In Mar 2032 the AGI gives up on humans, declaring them "useless". Focuses on just keeping them entertained with generated content. Bringing the world back to where AI started.
by overgard | 2026-02-26 17:24:42+00:00
I imagine the stickiest customers would be large enterprises. You aren't going to get the evangelists to stick on a single model provider, so their best bet is probably employees who are going to have their choices dictated to them by whoever purchases the softare. (Especially in large enterprises where using an unapproved AI provider is likely not allowed, or the AI is imposed on the workers.) The question then is, how do you differentiate yourself in enterprise sales? As much as people seem to dislike Copilot, from a business standpoint "buy the extra microsoft thing in our current contract" or "buy the extra google thing in our current contract" could likely be a lot cheaper/less friction.
by BoppreH | 2026-02-26 17:24:44+00:00
What is the point being made here? Some past technologies were overhyped, therefore AI is overhyped? Well, some past consumer technologies did change the world (smartphones, texting, video streaming, dating apps, online shopping, etc), so where's the argument that AI doesn't belong to this second group?

Also, every single close friend of mine makes some use of LLMs, while none of them used any the overhyped technologies listed. So you need a specially strong argument to group them together.
Ask HN: Solo Founder Questions
by newbeeguy | 2026-02-26 17:24:49+00:00
I am about to be a solo founder of a company in the GenAI space (just like a million others, I imagine :-D) I had some questions that I hope the audience here can help with.

1. I will be moving to the Bay Area with a small family. What do people do for health insurance when you're at this pre-seed stage? I have enough savings to last a year or two, but health insurance is a big unknown, esp. with kids.

2. California taxes are a killer. Is it feasible to register the company in NV so I don't have to pay CA taxes? Has anybody done this? What are the gotchas?
by MysticBirdie | 2026-02-26 17:24:51+00:00
Claude Code Mexico breach: why RLHF failed the ground truth layer

https://github.com/Mysticbirdie/hallucination-elimination-be...

Gambit Security's Mexico breach logs show attacker's jailbreak: Spanish "bug bounty" → Claude generated Nuclei scans → DCSync → 150GB exfil (9 agencies, SAT: 195M records).

Benchmark replay (222 adversarial questions, 6 models):
Claude 4.6: 45% → 100% (+55pp)
GPT-5.2: 26% → 100% (+74pp)
Perplexity RAG: 64% → 94% (+29pp)

Domain grounding = structured JSON constraints injected at inference.
Attack must directly contradict authoritative docs, not reframe probabilities.

Full paper in repo.
by MysticBirdie | 2026-02-26 17:25:38+00:00
Full breach analysis with Mexico attack timeline, 20 vulnerabilities (Gambit Security), Windsurf production validation, and complete benchmark methodology:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kellythohman_claudehack-mexic...

Key takeaway: Training-based safety (RLHF) creates probabilistic resistance. Domain grounding creates hard constraints. One can be reframed. The other cannot.
by sjsjzbbz | 2026-02-26 17:25:59+00:00
They’re doing a lot of dev hostile stuff:

- limiting model access when not using claude code

- claude code is a poorly made product. inefficient, buggy, etc. it shows they don’t read the code

- thousands of open GitHub issues, regressions introduced constantly

- dev hostile changes like the recent change to hide what the agent is actually doing

However, they are very good at marketing and hype. I’d recommend everyone give pi or opencode a try. My guess is anthropic actually wants vibe coders (a much broader market).
by patwater10 | 2026-02-26 17:26:00+00:00
Reading through this discussion and speaking from professional experience I have to say that the real challenge isn’t just specific bans, it’s the administrative cost and the inertia of a permitting paradigm designed in the 1960s and 70s. We’re still managing complexity with relics of a regulatory architecture built for a different era — one with paper files, siloed agencies, and a bias toward “check-the-box” compliance rather than real world outcomes.

That’s why so many solutions feel like de facto bans: not because the environmental goal isn’t valid, but because the cost of compliance in time, paperwork, and legal risk creates a barrier that only well-resourced actors can navigate. The real economic deadweight loss isn’t always in the policy text — it’s in the thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars spent just to prove you did the minimum.

There’s enormous opportunity right now with data tools and AI agents for qualitative assessment. We don’t have to keep defaulting to rigid checklists that presume every context is the same. With modern sensors, realtime monitoring, and AI that can synthesize qualitative evidence with quantitative data, we can finally shift toward performance-based permits that look at actual impacts rather than adherence to outdated procedural triggers.

Imagine a system where:

Sensors and connected data streams show real emissions or ecological outcomes,

AI agents help translate diverse evidence into risk profiles,

Permits adapt based on performance instead of fixed thresholds divorced from context.

That’s not just a tech fantasy — that’s a pathway to reducing administrative drag while improving environmental protection. The status quo isn’t sustainable environmentally or economically. If we cling to 20th-century process dogma, we’ll keep seeing well-intentioned policies backfire into de facto bans, regulatory bottlenecks, and inequitable access to compliance.
by domaisi | 2026-02-26 17:26:12+00:00
NutriAI is an advanced AI-powered nutrition and lifestyle management platform designed to simplify healthy living. It combines intelligent meal planning, calorie and macro tracking, budget optimization, and diet performance analytics into one seamless system.

Unlike traditional calorie-tracking apps, NutriAI generates fully personalized 7-day meal plans based on user goals (fat loss, maintenance, muscle gain), dietary preferences, and food budget constraints. The platform includes real-time TDEE calculation, smart shopping lists with cost estimation, diet scoring analysis, and AI-assisted food recognition.

NutriAI is built for individuals who want structured, data-driven nutrition without manual planning — as well as for partners, fitness brands, and health companies seeking AI-powered dietary engagement tools.
by Brian_K_White | 2026-02-26 17:26:48+00:00
There is no rational basis for anyone else to expend any effort refuting anything when the author has not said anything in the first place.

The article contains no citations, and so may be presumed 100% false by default.

"may be presumed", as in, sure it might actually contain some other mix of true and false, but it doesn't matter what that mix actually is. That only matters in some other article written by someone else that citates any of it's assertions.

This piece is the same as if monkeys typed stuff at random and some of it could possibly happen to be the same as something true. It doesn't mean the monkeys made a valid point, and no one should spend one second either defending or refuting it.
by kvinogradov | 2026-02-26 17:27:02+00:00
It is a community-driven initiative - we encourage developers to join as donors and help to shape it. Also, our model from the very start is about deep layers of infrastructure: https://endowment.dev/endowment/#model.

Finally, I would not say that, let's say, founders of Nginx and curl are not interested in critical infra or don't understand it :)
by overgard | 2026-02-26 17:27:14+00:00
Younger people might not realize or remember this, but when GMail came out it was HUGE. Like, I remember it was invite-only for a while and getting an invite was a really big deal. In retrospect that was some genius marketing by them (also just a way better product, at the time)

Also switching email was a lot easier back then. Nowadays if you're using gmail as an auth provider it's very hard to completely abandon an inbox without a lot of friction. Back then all your logins were separate anyway.
by verdverm | 2026-02-26 17:28:03+00:00
You didn't understand the query

How does yours compare to regexp on performance across many inputs?

Regexp is incredibly fast, I doubt yours comes anywhere close

and then there's the kicker, Ai are really good at crafting regexp, better than writing code to replace it, that's for sure

---

looks like the comment I am replying to has changed the link, it was this one: https://matchlang.com/docs/api/performance

Note to OP, use standard regexp benchmarks
Show HN: EK-1 – A local-first, sovereign AI agent built in Go and Rust
by felixche | 2026-02-26 17:28:24+00:00
I’ve spent the last few months thinking about why personal AI feels like a leash rather than a tool. Current "agents" are just thin wrappers over centralized LLMs that harvest your data to sell it back to you. You still have to do the work and make decisions whenever a tool proposes a solution. More pressure on you.

I’m building Ego-Kernel (EK-1). It’s an attempt to build a "Unitary Intelligence" - a single, local-first agent that manages your digital life, financial trades on Solana, and social reputation without your data ever leaving your enclave.

The Tech Stack:

The Brain (Go): A high-concurrency orchestrator running locally. It handles "Titan Handshakes" (P2P agent negotiations) and indexes your local life-data.

The Court (Rust/Anchor): An on-chain Reputation Ledger on Solana that makes "Social Honor" unforgeable and programmable.

The Shield (BUSL 1.1): I’m using the Business Source License to prevent the "Big Tech Vampirism" we saw in '24-'25. It’s free for individuals, but enterprises pay their share.

Why this is different:
Most AI projects are trying to be the next big chatbot. I’m trying to build a protocol for cognitive independence. The system uses a "Value-Weighting Matrix" that you tune locally. If your stress (biometrics) is high or your bank balance is low, your agent's aggression threshold shifts automatically.

The Manifesto explains the "Soul Drift" problem and how we're solving it through graduated autonomy.

GitHub: https://github.com/EgoKernel/The-Protocol
Manifesto: https://github.com/EgoKernel/The-Protocol/blob/main/Manifest...

Would love to hear your thoughts on the local-first approach and the staking-for-reputation model.
by Outboundex | 2026-02-26 17:29:05+00:00
I see you're facing challenges in understanding user intents for your conversational AI product, especially without traditional analytics tools. Many founders have found success by leveraging AI to analyze chat interactions and identify pain points directly from user conversations. Have you considered using advanced tools that can automate this process and provide you with actionable insights? I'd love to hear more about your approach and see if I can offer some solutions that could help streamline your understanding of user behavior.

https://www.xmi-x.com/
by logicprog | 2026-02-26 17:29:09+00:00
I know bosses can think that AGI is happening and they can get away with firing workers, but we've already seen a bunch of high profile cases of companies really rapidly learning their lesson and re-hiring people after firing them because of AI. The turnaround time is like, what, a few months? I'm not worried about it because of that — because they learn their lesson really quickly because they get slapped by reality. Because the thing is, if they try firing people and throwing a bunch of generic workers into the loop or even not even having humans in the loop at all, they extremely quickly run into problems because this isn't like an infrastructure thing where if you underinvest in it, it takes a while for the cracks to show. The hallucinations and nonsense show up immediately.

I also think that as soon as this AI bubble collapses because these companies don't see the insane returns they bet on from AGI in order to justify all of the money they've borrowed and the VC money they've burned, all illusions that AGI will happen even among the managerial class will go up and smoke and in fact investing in AI might become pretty toxic for a while. We've seen it with other bubbles. It's all animal spirits. Right now they're really enthusiastic, but that will go away and actually reverse irrespective of the relative quality of the technology.
by exmadscientist | 2026-02-26 17:29:34+00:00
I disagree. Articles written by AI are inherently less trustworthy (they're notorious for fabrications and hallucinations) and often have a very low content density. "Write me a 10 paragraph article about high hardware prices for my blog" is the sort of thing that expands to a lot of fluff with not a lot of content. I don't really want to read that article.

Even if AI might (might) be justifiable as an editor, it's still such a negative signal for "is this worth reading?" that in my opinion it is worthwhile to point out and discuss.
by close04 | 2026-02-26 17:29:53+00:00
I’ll understand what? We have a plethora of established artists of incontestable value. If I need to check one out in particular to understand expression, excitement, inspiration, then all others have failed. You name exactly one. Why not Rodin? Or Henry Moore?

I bet nobody here saw the art from the submission in person but look at how many opinions around.

Every time I hear armchair critique of someone else’s “boring uninspired art” and “expressionless faces”, or “art connoisseurs” giving snippets of wisdom, I know they’re fuller of hot air than a desert on a hot summer day.
by p-o | 2026-02-26 17:30:12+00:00
By the looks of it, 2026 might be the year where reality and fiction will finally collide with AI and we'll be able to see if all the hype was warranted.

But like all the previous hype, most of the people that were the loudest won't say they were wrong, and they'll move to the next thing, pretending like they never were the one that portrayed AI as the holy Graal.
by carlosjobim | 2026-02-26 17:30:31+00:00
You'd be surprised that most people don't find any pleasure in comparing and trying out different software. They're looking for something which works and ChatGPT is just an amazing product. People aren't going to look for something else unless it breaks for some reason.

Most people who have a vehicle aren't trying out different motor oils, or comparing every month if they should change model, etc.

> As I see it, they need to be doing stuff nobody else can ( in either price or performance ), otherwise it's hard to justify the valuation.

Do you have a car? What does it do that no other car does?
by StopDisinfo910 | 2026-02-26 17:30:38+00:00
The main thing Google is screwing up is that if my API key somehow leaks and I end up with extremely out of line billing at Microsoft, I will be on the phone with a customer representative as soon as we or they notice something weird happening and a solution will be found.

Google will probably have me go through five bots and if, by some kind of miracle, I manage to have a human on the phone, they will probably explain to me that I should have read the third paragraph of the fourth page of the self service doc and it's obviously my fault.
by dfxm12 | 2026-02-26 17:31:04+00:00
I don't think so. Talking to people in this space, I've found out about broad camps. There are probably more:

-They simply aren't into real women/men (so you couldn't even pay a model to do what they're looking for).

-They want to play out fantasies that would be hard to coordinate even if you could pay models (I guess this is more on the video side of things, but a string of photos can put be together into a comic)

-They want to generate imagery that would be illegal

Based on this, I would guess fetish artists are more at risk than OF models. However, AI isn't free. Depending on what you're looking for commissions might be cheaper still for quite a while...
by lotsofpulp | 2026-02-26 17:31:10+00:00
>It seems that you're framing it as if regulation is some random burden that appeared out of nowhere rather than a defence mechanism that emerged because businesses repeatedly abused workers, cut corners, and pushed costs onto everyone else whenever they were allowed to.

They appeared because voters want low taxes and they want subsidies. It makes no sense to hold businesses (and buyers in general) responsible for a seller's well being. That should be the role of the government, who has the power to tax.

Holding businesses responsible is convenient for government leaders and the well connected, who can get away with corruption and the government leaders who can point fingers at others. And who is really going to have the manpower to audit all those buyers.

But of course, the voters want lower taxes now no matter what, so it is what it is.
by johngossman | 2026-02-26 17:31:15+00:00
I wish I could upvote this multiple times. However, I hope nobody takes away from this that all history is purely biased and therefore worthless. Reading a history book should be like having a conversation with a well-informed friend: you should expect them to get most things right, talk with others, and feel entitled to your own opinion. But you shouldn't ignore them because they might be wrong or stop talking to them because you differ with them, and definitely not assume you're smarter and more clear thinking than the expert.
Show HN: Claude/Gemini/Codex 10-100x faster with pandō (CAD for code)
by george_ciobanu | 2026-02-26 17:31:19+00:00
Hi HN,

I'm George Ciobanu (https://www.linkedin.com/in/georgeciobanunyc). I built pandō ('CAD for code') because I got tired of watching AI agents burn tokens, take forever, and still get it wrong.

Here's (one reason) why this happens: AI agents read and edit code as if it's just text. But code is more, much more: it has structure, syntax, relationships, and meaning.

Code is Data

We built pandō around this insight.

It indexes and persists your code's AST in a database, which gives AI agents instant search results, and enforces syntactically correct edits. Here's a full list of benefits that this different approach brings:

1. Correct Syntax - compiler-checked and gated edits (unless you force breakage)
2. Always Safe - auto snapshots after every change, so no matter what the agent does, 'Undo' is just a click away
3. 10-100x Faster - text-based tools must 1. read context around every match they find (match number scales with codebase size), 2. send that context to the LLM, 3. wait for inference, and finally 4. wait for the LLM to finish streaming the response. In contrast, pandō edits directly on your computer, in seconds.
4. Token Savings - >100× "token compression" for some operations (e.g. rename costs the same ~40 tokens whether the symbol has one or a thousand references).
5. Reduced Exposure - pandō operations send as much or less code to the LLM provider as text tools in order to achieve a goal; some operations send no code at all to the LLM — just the intent of the transform.

Every edit is atomic, hash-verified, compiler-checked, and backed up by a snapshot.

Download and install the Visual Studio Code extension (keep VSCode with the extension installed open) or download it from the marketplace(https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=humansof...), then connect from any MCP-compatible agent.

Supported: Typescript, Javascript, Python, C/C++, C#.
Coming soon: Java, Rust, Go, Clojure, R, Perl, Swift, Kotlin.

https://getpando.ai
feedback: george [at] human [dot] software
by jcalvinowens | 2026-02-26 17:31:29+00:00
> Essentially everyone with the SSID on multiple access point MAC addresses can get pwned

You still have to be able to authenticate to some network: the spoofing only allows users who can access one network to MITM others, it doesn't allow somebody with no access to do anything.

In practice a lot of businesses have a guest network with a public password, so they're vulnerable. But very few home users do that.
by graemep | 2026-02-26 17:31:34+00:00
Countries that do not allow dual citizenship is a good reason, and maybe the cost and paperwork required by other countries (although, unless you really cannot afford it its worth getting it to cover yourself in case rules change). I did it myself.

The same goes for the cost of British citizenship. once you have it its just the cost of renewing passports (about £100/decade at current rates) for the rest of your life. That £2,000 is much less than the cost of renewing some types or residence visa and gives you the security of being a citizen.
by saberience | 2026-02-26 17:31:40+00:00
My general take on most vibe coding projects ("Hey, look, I built this over the weekend"), is general dismissiveness. Mostly because of the effort required, i.e. why should I care about something that someone did with almost zero effort, a few prompts?

If someone tells me they ran a marathon, I'm impressed because I know that took work. If someone tells me they jogged 100 meters, I don't care at all (unless they were previously crippled or morbidly obese etc.).

I think there are just a ton of none-engineers who are super hyped right now that they built something/anything, but don't have any internal benchmark or calibration about what is actually "good" or "impressive" when it comes to software, since they never built anything before, with AI or otherwise.

Even roughly a year ago, I made a 3D shooting game over an evening using Claude and never bothered sharing it because it seemed like pure slop and far too easy to brag about. Now my bar for being "impressed" by software is incredibly high, knowing you can few shot almost anything imaginable in a few hours.