MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by socialcommenter | 2026-02-17 02:32:23+00:00
Facial recognition would be able to detect all the strangers around you, whereas audio would surely only pick up people nearer the device, and presumably wouldn't be able to tell people apart/identify them. You're right about network data; if they're using Wifi/BT probes then they can already find and identify everyone in the vicinity.

I'm curious why you're using past tense by the way?
by ramshanker | 2026-02-17 02:32:41+00:00
At least for me personal open source project[1], it has been >5x boost. In speed, motivation. Operating knowledge level etc. At some places, I even put inline comment, "this generated function is not understood completely" ! Or may be a question on specific syntex (c++20).

[1] https://github.com/ramshankerji/Vishwakarma/
by m4x | 2026-02-17 02:33:12+00:00
There's a case cited in that paper which does suggest something similar:

> A report in the lay literature describes the case of Claire Sylvia who reported changes in her personality, preferences, and behaviors following a heart and lung transplant at Yale-New Haven hospital in 1988. Following surgery, Sylvia developed a new taste for green peppers and chicken nuggets, foods she previously disliked. As soon as she was released from the hospital, she promptly headed to a Kentucky Fried Chicken to order chicken nuggets. She later met her donor’s family and inquired about his affinity for green peppers. Their response was, “Are you kidding? He loved them… But what he really loved was chicken nuggets” (p. 184, [9]). Sylvia later discovered that at the time of her donor’s death in a motorcycle accident, a container of chicken nuggets was found under his jacket [9].

I haven't read the whole thing, maybe there's something more relevant as well. That report isn't really about accessing the previous persons "memories" but at least claims she adopted a part of their personality. I'd be skeptical about its accuracy without more such reports, however.
by westurner | 2026-02-17 02:33:35+00:00
https://datacommons.org :

> Data Commons brings together the world's public data, making it simple to explore

datacommonsorg/agent-toolkit:
https://github.com/datacommonsorg/agent-toolkit

datacommons-mcp/examples/sample_agents/basic_agent/instructions.py :
https://github.com/datacommonsorg/agent-toolkit/blob/main/pa... :

> AGENT_INSTRUCTIONS = """
Use the Data Commons MCP tools to respond to user queries. Cite the data source when possible."""
by stitched2gethr | 2026-02-17 02:34:13+00:00
It's all about how full the context is, right? For a task that can be completed in 20% of the context it doesn't matter, but you don't want to fill your context with exploration before you do the hard part.

I have actually found something close to the opposite. I work on a large codebase and I often use the LLM to generate artifacts before performing the task (for complex tasks). I use a prompt to say "go explore this area if the code and write about it". It documents concepts and has pointers to specific code. Then a fresh session can use that without reading the stuff that doesn't matter. It uses more tokens overall, but includes important details that can get totally missed when you just let it go.
by manveerc | 2026-02-17 02:34:48+00:00
Oh yeah I agree it’s bad. I just meant, company has no morals. It is very data hungry and doesn’t care about people’s privacy.

And with respect to past tense, I don’t know if they still do when they were caught red handed about some of these things. Unless there is a court order I am sure they still do, but I have no proof point.
by eastbound | 2026-02-17 02:35:50+00:00
> the strangest part about this story was that the child’s mother was dating a convicted sex offender

70.6% of beaten children are beaten at the mother’s custody. Most often it turns out the choice of companion of the mother is inappropriate. While many see that as blaming the mother and it is a huge taboo in our society, it is such a huge humanitarian problem that it’s worth educating women better over that specific problem, and taking sanctions if necessary.

70.8% in the case of death. Source: CDC 2001-2006 if I remember. Incoming: Many ad-hominem about the source, it’s a problem that never gets addressed.
by doodlebugging | 2026-02-17 02:36:43+00:00
Submitter's nationality has nothing to do with it nor does his post history. WTF

I suggest you read the article as it appears from your initial (pre-edit) reply that you didn't. Put this in context with contemporary events involving DHS/ICE and assimilate the knowledge that the story related happened more than 10 years ago. Then ask yourself, since this same story was already reported more than a decade ago, why do they need to dredge it up today?

Do some critical thinking so that you don't come across as a gullible shill.
by superkuh | 2026-02-17 02:38:01+00:00
It is if you were a person who was using Freenode and wanted to keep talking to the same people you've known for the last 20 years like myself. Our community still exists.

Understandably the attacks put a sour taste in the mouth of many FOSS projects; especially those with corporate sponsors or aspects. 20 years of working fine not considered. But now we're seeing you get the same downsides with corporate services but none of the ability to effortlessly move. Going to Discord has been shown to have been a long term mistake even if it seemed nice in the short term.
by sputknick | 2026-02-17 02:39:02+00:00
My hot take is that as that percentage increases, salaries will go up asymptotically, until you get to 100%, then they crash to 0. If 80% of your job can be done by AI, I'm going to give you the work of 5 people. When is 99%, I will give you the work of 100 people
by charcircuit | 2026-02-17 02:39:04+00:00
>You’re expecting kids in 5th grade to pick a career and start building focused projects on par with the experience one would get in a full time position at a company?

Yes, I am. Do not underestimate how smart 5th graders are and what they can do with all of the free time they have.

>How does AI solve the unknown unknowns problem?

You can ask it what it thinks you should know. You can ask it for what pitfalls to look out for. You can ask it to roleplay to play out scenarios and get practice with them. I think such practice is enough to get them to a state of being hirable.
Show HN: The first financial intelligence MCP server live trading signals Claude
by Shmungus | 2026-02-17 02:39:55+00:00
I built an MCP server that gives Claude (and any MCP client) direct access to live trading signals scraped from Reddit, SEC filings, FDA approvals, Congressional trades, and 15+ other sources.

7 tools, 2 resources, no API key, no install. Just paste one URL into your Claude Desktop config and ask "what stocks are trending on Reddit right now?"

Built with Python/FastMCP, hosted on Railway. The underlying platform (ROT) is a 165K-line Python codebase I built solo in 9 days that runs a 9-stage AI pipeline processing Reddit and social media into actionable trading signals.

GitHub: https://github.com/Mattbusel/Reddit-Options-Trader-ROT-
by rawgabbit | 2026-02-17 02:41:11+00:00
From my experience I had more success asking LLMs to compare three different sources and ask it to identify common themes. Then go over each source giving me direct quotes supporting the theme. For complex writing, I usually find it cannot decipher circular references or poorly organized writing. It tends to always think the point or argument is up front even when it is buried in the middle.
by hippo22 | 2026-02-17 02:41:24+00:00
I think that’s different. You have a problem: invoice management. LLMs have made that cheaper and you should expect disruption. But you’re not building your own invoice scanner. You’re using another, cheaper product on the market.

However, the hypothesis in the SaaS market is that LLMs have made software have zero value and therefore the SaaS companies will be less profitable. That’s like if wood was suddenly free, expecting home builders to go out of business. If anything, home builders are going to do better, because they can apply their expertise while deploying capital elsewhere. We should expect software companies to be more profitable, not less.

Of course, there are exceptions. Sometimes AI replaces the product itself, e.g. image generation models vs. contractors on fiverr.
by ndriscoll | 2026-02-17 02:41:50+00:00
Weird, my experience is that they are full of nuance. e.g. here is a snippet of my discussion with Gemini:

> Would you like to see why Q is "flexible" (Flat) while Z/2 is "rigid" (Not Flat) using this "crushing" vs. "preserving" logic? It explains why localized rings are almost always better to work with.

> Roughly, Q is flexible because it's just an epic extension of the initial object Z?

> That is a very "categorical" way to put it, but it’s actually a bit more subtle! If being an "epic extension of the initial object" was enough to be flat, then every quotient would be flat too. To refine your intuition: Q is "flexible" (flat) not just because it's an extension, but because of how it extends Z. Z/2 is a Quotient: It adds a constraint (2=0). Constraints are "rigid." As we saw, if you multiply by 2, everything collapses to zero. That's a "hidden kernel," which breaks left exactness. Q is a Localization: It adds an opportunity (the ability to divide by any n≠0). This is the definition of "flexibility."

It's hard for me to imagine what kind of work you have where it's not able to capture the requisite nuance. Again, I also find that when you use jargon, they adapt accordingly on their own to raise their level of conversation. They also seem to no longer have an issue with saying "yep exactly!" or "ehh not quite" (and provide counterarguments) as necessary.

Obviously if someone just says "write my paper" or whatever and gives that to you, that won't work well. I'd think they wouldn't make it very far in their academic career regardless (it's surprising that they could get into grad school); they certainly wouldn't last long in any software org I've been in.
by OneOffAsk | 2026-02-17 02:41:57+00:00
> this generated function is not understood completely

I think this kind of stuff is OK for the most part. I think it's a thrilling part of computer science: building systems so complex they're just on the brink of what can be fully understood by a single person. It's what sets software engineering apart from other engineering fields where it's unacceptable not to fully understand the engineering, say, for factories, buildings, bridges, ships and infrastructure and such.
by invalidname | 2026-02-17 02:42:39+00:00
As a maintainer of a medium size OSS project I agree. We've been running the produce for over a decade and a few years back Google came out with a competitor that pretty much sucked the air out of our field. It didn't matter that our product was better, we didn't have the resources to compete with a google hobby project.

As a result our work on the project got reduced to maintenance until coding agents got better. Over the past year I've rewritten a spectacular amount of the code using AI agents. More importantly, I was able to construct enterprise level testing which was a herculean task I just couldn't take up on my own.

The way I see it, AI brought back my OSS project that was heading to purgatory.

EDIT: Also about OPs post. It's really f*ing bug bounties that are the problem. These things are horrible and should die in fire...
by rectang | 2026-02-17 02:43:14+00:00
> While many see that as blaming the mother

Yes, that's how I see it.

> it is such a huge humanitarian problem that it’s worth educating women better over that specific problem, and taking sanctions if necessary.

"Sanctions"? This is an article about successful digital sleuthing, but your takeaway is that we need to punish the mother?
by SilverElfin | 2026-02-17 02:44:13+00:00
I upvoted this only because I feel like Garry Tan has been increasingly unhinged, or just removing the mask. To me this looks a lot like deflection and bullying, and not based in reality.

For example:

> Compare that to Warren Buffett, who leads the lifetime giving list at $68.3 billion. He built decades-long relationships with the Gates Foundation and his family charities. He understands what they do. He watches outcomes. Scott’s approach is the opposite — spray and pray at a scale nobody has ever attempted.

Really? Have Gates and Buffett been successful? I would say no. For all this talk about measurement and goals that Garry pushed, he’s ignorant of the fact that most of the Gates Foundation spending has little impact. Giving money away directly to those in need would be very effective but billionaires won’t do that.

Then there’s this …

> The pattern is clear: massive windfalls without oversight corrupt institutions.

The irony here is that Garry can’t see how he and his network of rich friends thrive off grift and lack of oversight at scale, as they pursue government contracts from an administration that is itself adding trillions to the national debt without oversight. But no, let’s instead talk about the minuscule spending from McKenzie Scott instead, and how SHE should have more oversight of her own money.
by Brian_K_White | 2026-02-17 02:44:32+00:00
We don't know how, and do not have to know how.

I could throw out some ignorant basically random and meaningless guesses like "emergent property arising from sufficient threshold complexity" or "quantum effects" but these are just bullshit examples that are nothing more than filler noises to say in place of "a thing we don't know". It's more honest to just say we don't know. There are infinite things we don't know and there is nothing wrong with that. The unknown does not have to be filled in with fiction, it can and should remain simply unknown until some actual observation or reasoning can supply something real.

Obviously biology includes simple processes. Your elbow is a simple hinge and any number of chemical reactions are simple chemical reactions that will happen exactly the same way all by themselves without being part of a biological construct. This is not interesting and doesn't prove or disprove anything about any other kind of process or phenomenon. The mechanics of biology are irrelevant.

And yet the tumbler of pingpong balls and the piece of paper are contemplating their own exitence? They communicated because they have a thought and then a desire to communicate the thought? Are you saying that?

You aim to suggest that I am failing to stick to the hard facts of reality by imagining something we can't put our fingers on in a consciousness, but I say that imagining that a bin of pinpong balls thinks is a rather more egregious example of unsubstantiated faith.

If you mean the opposite (more likely I assume), that you yourself are not doing anything different than a bag of pingpong balls when you engage in this discussion with me, well I have nothing to say to that. But then I don't have to say anything to that because I don't owe a bag of pingpong balls any consideration at all. It can emit text all day and it means nothing to me and warrants no response. Even if it emits text that says "What biggoted chauvanistic discrimination! Just because I am made of pinpong balls that means the veracity of my arguments don't matter and I'm not a person?"
by itishappy | 2026-02-17 02:44:49+00:00
Another comment mentioned ICE as well, so I've been looking into it, and imagine my surprise to learn that ICE (yes that one) has been working in this space since since the Obama admin. Huh.

https://www.ice.gov/careers/hero

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_for_Victims_of_Traffic...
by pgalvin | 2026-02-17 02:46:11+00:00
You are wrong, this same story was not reported more than ten years ago. The article is not a report of a man being arrested, tried, and sentenced (doubtless the extent of reporting in local news when it happened). This article is about the wider background of one story, of many, from a behind-the-scenes documentary that has been filmed over the last five years and just released.

Did Britain's public broadcaster decide, half a decade ago, to begin making this documentary so that they could secretly and nefariously support a US government agency long before it was embroiled in its current controversies?
by bmurphy1976 | 2026-02-17 02:46:41+00:00
What the hell?

I didn't say this was a good thing, I only said things were already fucked. And Trump is also a symptom of a deeper rot in our system. He just happens to be the asshole who took advantage of it.

If you don't fix the deeper issues, it doesn't matter what's going to happen. Blaming AI is blaming a symptom, not the cause.

Stating that we need to fix the deeper problem isn't even close to the same thing as whatever this nonsense is you responded with.
by phire | 2026-02-17 02:47:11+00:00
About 0.3% of the adult population is on registries in the US.

With 40,000 couch sales, there would be roughly 120 sex offenders would have bought that couch. You can see what I mean about the registries being bloated.

Doesn't really narrow things down until you add the brick factory, but then they already had it down to 40 houses.

But it's a mistake to even assume the couch was bought by the same house as the offender. The offender could just be visiting, or the couch could have been moved to a different house since purchase (sold second hand, or the owner moved). And you are assuming the offender had been caught before, or was even on the sex offender registry for abusing children.
by roysting | 2026-02-17 02:47:53+00:00
I think what is confusing is likely that the investigators/detectives were probably trying to make sure that the girl was actually in the house where the sex offender was registered or technically living, and not maybe kept somewhere else. A lot of detective work is building the case, but also confirming what you believe is actually true and you need the evidence to also request the warrant on factual grounds. They could have busted in the door of that house and found that there was no such brick to be found anywhere and the girl was sold off to someone else or something like that.

It’s really rather sick and deranged though that this kind of dynamic of women with children associating with sex offenders is not exactly rare. Frankly, I hope the mother was also charged.
by josephg | 2026-02-17 02:48:12+00:00
So you want to have fun coding by hand while also making bank along the way? Yeah, those days seem to be increasingly over.

This is new for us, but it’s not new globally. There used to be professional portrait painters before photography ruined it. Lots of great artists honed their skills and made a living that way. And there were skilled weavers before the loom. Computers (humans who computed things) before the digital computer was invented. And so on. And I’m sure the first photographs don’t look as good as a skilled portrait painting. Arguably they still don’t. But that didn’t save portrait painting as a profession.

We’ll be the same. You can still write code by hand for fun, just like you can paint for fun. I’m currently better at solving problems and writing code than Claude. But Claude is faster than I am, and it’s improving much faster than I am. I think the days of making big money for writing software by hand are mostly over.
by bryanrasmussen | 2026-02-17 02:48:27+00:00
> I've found that even in my late 30s I can still easily pick up new skills outside my field of expertise as long as I start with the basics that could also be picked up by a high-schooler.

this was rather famously the technique of Jonas Salk to learn and master things, switch fields every so often, giving you a wide base of disciplines to apply to new fields.
by jsandfort | 2026-02-17 02:48:58+00:00
Good catch on IEX Cloud - that's stale documentation from an earlier version. We actually pivoted away from stock quotes entirely. stockdata.dev now serves SEC EDGAR filing data (financial statements, insider trades, institutional holdings, company filings). All sourced directly from SEC's public EDGAR APIs - no exchange data, no licensing required. We should clean up any remaining references to the old quote product. Thanks for flagging it.
by Aristarkh | 2026-02-17 02:49:31+00:00
Injecting credentials at the last mile is a solid architectural choice for agent security. That said, for long-running autonomous workflows, I worry about the blast radius of "valid" actions occurring in a runaway loop (e.g., spinning up 50 instances sequentially). How does the system handle aggregate containment—do you support circuit breakers or rate limits on top of the policy evaluation? Curious if you're also looking at dynamic risk scoring, where an agent's permissions might degrade automatically if it starts hitting high error rates or unusual patterns.
by soulofmischief | 2026-02-17 02:50:23+00:00
> Yes, we should! And yet we don't, and that is exactly why I am so tired of seeing the exact same comment against one nation state and no others. If you're going to call out bullshit, make sure you're capable of smelling your own shit as well, otherwise you just come across as a moral tourist

You are projecting your biases onto me. I do not make one-sided remarks or play political favoritism. Instead of accepting that, you're currently attempting to hold me responsible for other people. People who do not represent me, and whom I have absolutely no control over.

> We all know the model is going to include censorship. Repeating the exact same line that was under every other model release adds nothing to the conversation, and over time starts to sound like a dog whistle.

More projection. It is wrong and distasteful to paint censorship discussion as some kind of xenophobic dogwhistle. You do realize I'm not even the original person you replied to, right? Why are you approaching this conversation from such a hostile, pretentious position instead of seeking to come to an understanding?
by just6979 | 2026-02-17 02:50:44+00:00
That middle ground has been eroded by cost-cutting.

Example: my mother had a cardic resynchronization device, and it had some kind of NFC type thing to enable the full wireless comms mode: wave a wand over her shoulder and the device's radio wakes up for a set time to send data or receive adjustments. So it wasn't always transmitting, but it did require the doctor's office or hospital to have that NFC wand to initiate any kind of data aquisition or reconfiguration. If it has an always-on BLE radio, the provider would just needs the phone/tablet/laptop with appropriate software that is already required.

Since any device like is already going to have a radio equivalent to a BLE radio, then removing the NFC parts from the device (and especially from the provider side) is some amount of cost savings. I think most patients would disagree that this privacy trade-off is NOT worth it, but you have remember that the patients aren't usually the actual customers in the US health care system. (And most manufacturers are going to have the US market as a target at least somewhat.) The most common actual customer is actually the insurance companies, and they'll take every single fraction of a penny, along with "an arm and a leg".
by fyredge | 2026-02-17 02:51:07+00:00
Your examples are not supporting your premise. Over medication is from all the attempts to fix all the various medical conditions found. Adding regulations are to fix all the problems of people finding new ways to abuse the system.

This is entirely opposite from accelerationism, which would advocate for less medication so that sick people die quicker, and less regulation so that society would be exploited faster and collapse faster.