MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ignoramous | 2026-02-28 13:43:05+00:00
> The jewish Israeli population biggest trauma are centuries if not millenia of animosity, racism and violence coming from any side ... is all about security at all costs, even if it means bending any sign of human decency. Again, they see themselves as victims and their actions will always go in that direction.

I don't see this any different to terrorism apologia (the trauma of 1mn dead in Iraq and another million in Afghanistan, for example). I guess, if the leaders wear suits & ties and hide behind the garb of democracy, then we can all probably understand why military they command commit crimes against humanity.

Every perpetrator of terrorism sees himself as a victim. Such is the case not only with individual terrorists, who often compete with their enemies over who is more victimized, but also with terrorist groups and nation states.

- Bessel van der Kolk (author, The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma).

The problem isn't the "trauma". The problem is the excuse.
by torginus | 2026-02-28 13:43:17+00:00
Even the statement that (100% safe) Rust does not have memory bugs/mutable aliasing is not always true.

It's well known that Rust has difficulty representing graph-like memory structures, and people have taken to using arrays of `Node`-s to represent graphs, where each graph edge represents a pointer to another node.

This both efficient, and fast, but this approach sidesteps the borrow checker.

If you had a method that 2 mutable `Node` references as parameters, the borrow checker would complain if they'd point to the same struct. If you pass 2 ints, it won't.

Likewise, since liveness is tracked by user logic, you can refer to stale, deallocated `Node`-s or ones that haven't been initialized yet.

I've had people argue this is not a true memory bug, since you're not causing 'real' memory faults, but in C, `malloc` is just a function that hands you pointers into chunks of pre-allocated memory space most of the time, when it doesn't have to ask the OS for more.

I know from experience some people see this criticism as an attack on their favourite language and instantly rebuke it.

But I'd like to argue that there's something there, and it bears thinking about how 'memory allocation exisitng outside Rust' and 'memory allocating existing inside Rust' behave differently might be seen as an interesting dicothomy that needs to be resolved and that resolution might improve Rust's (or some successor language's) memory model.
by cies | 2026-02-28 13:43:40+00:00
Religious concerns are, IMHO, always a facade for the underlying economic/territorial/geopolitical reasons. These religious facades help sell the war effort: get young men to enlist and fight to the death for "preserving their identity". And "muh freedom" is just as much a religious motivation to me (unsubstantiated, indoctrinated, unthreatened).
by PeterWhittaker | 2026-02-28 13:43:44+00:00
Interesting. I built a sort-of-similar system for executing a series of linked, serially-dependent system commands from the TUI used to manage some of our secure appliances. It made writing and debugging such sequences much easier: each command was represented by a struct containing optional pre, post-success, and post-fail log and status line messages, where status could simply default to log.

It meant that the user received meaningful short updates as things progressed, with detailed information in system logs.

This made it much easier for testers and users to report bugs and for developers to understand what to look for in logs.
by verdverm | 2026-02-28 13:44:01+00:00
> HIGHLY unlikely the DoW would give them a different terms than Antrohopic [sic]

I disagree. OpenAi getting the same deal while Anthropic is made a punching bag. This is very on brand.

The Trump-Epstein administration is obsessed with social media and how they are perceived. Right vs wrong, consistency, accuracy, truth... these are all secondary to appearing "strong" or "winning". They care more about what they are going to tweet than the facts (see Patel, FBI, and the murder of Good & Pretti).
by igregoryca | 2026-02-28 13:44:07+00:00
Wood is edible when processed correctly, but it's not legally considered "food" because there are a bunch of nontrivial steps to get it into that state. Likewise, any reasonable interpretation of "general purpose computer" in this context by a judge would not include your microwave oven just because someone with skill and finesse could transform it into a cursed Doom arcade machine.

Laws are interpreted by people trained to fill in the blanks[1] with a best guess of the legislative body's intent. And the intent here seems pretty clear: to regulate computing devices that let end users easily install software from a centralized catalog.

[1] which we all do subconsciously in day-to-day speech, because all language is ultimately subjective
by 7777777phil | 2026-02-28 13:44:08+00:00
The auth logic was literally inverted. Blocking people it should allow, allowing people it should block.

Probably any human reviewer would catch that in seconds, but AI code generation optimizes for code that runs, not code that's correct in domain-specific ways. I wrote about this pattern recently, AI converges to plausible output but misses the reasoning that requires actual expertise: https://philippdubach.com/posts/the-impossible-backhand/
by rgoulter | 2026-02-28 13:44:33+00:00
> Thing is, pretty much all of this missile defence technology is about to become obsolete once hypersonic missiles become more widespread, which is going to happen pretty soon.

I think you'll have to be more specific.

Or I guess to compare with your other observation: """Even with all this protection, Iran [sent] enough ballistic missiles to overwhelm the defences""" -- It's not a binary of "have missile defense or not => every missile will be shot down". An amount of missile defense will make it harder for missiles to successfully hit a target.

Similarly with hypersonic missiles, it's not the binary of "I have a missile that's difficult to defend against, I win".

Having a sword which can defeat a shield isn't in itself sufficient to obsolete the shield. (Infantry can be killed with bullets, yet infantry remain an important part of fighting despite that).
by casey2 | 2026-02-28 13:44:42+00:00
Google has enough momentum at this point to make the startups technically irrelevant, and they've only just started speeding up. Arguably they've already leapfrogged Anthropic and OpenAI in every field that matters, infrastructure, distribution, price, verification, all google, enterprise and actual model intelligence, currently a toss up but google is improving the fastest, SOTA in so many categories eventually this will coincide with the FOTM.
by CapricornNoble | 2026-02-28 13:45:16+00:00
> Has Israel even officially confirmed they have nukes?

No. There's a number of reasons for this. #1 is Israel's policy of "strategic ambiguity" and #2 is that it might be illegal to even mention it in Israel. Israel prosecuted a whistleblower nuclear scientist for leaking state secrets, for example.

> And who have they blackmailed with the nukes?

The US, for one:

"Similarly, in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, IDF was again outnumbered by the invading Arab armies. Then Israeli PM Golda Meir authorized a nuclear alert and ordered that nuclear warheads be readied for launch from missiles and aircraft. The Israeli ambassador to the US, Simcha Dinitz, met with Henry Kissinger to inform President Nixon of “Very serious conclusions” if the US did not airlift arms supplies to the IDF. Nixon complied with this demand due to the threat of the use of nuclear forces. This was the first successful use of the Samson option as a threat and tantamount to nuclear blackmail."

from: https://thesvi.org/deconstructing-israels-samson-option/

I also recommend: https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/wait-why-is-israel-allow...

The Samson Option enables Israel to blackmail the entire Middle East, and do so silently. Turkey or Egypt can't afford for Hezbollah to overrun Israel, because Ankara and Cairo might get nuked, even if they had nothing to do with contributing to Israel's existential crisis. It basically forces the whole neighborhood to keep each other in check out of sheer self-preservation. Credit given where credit due, it's a smart approach on Israel's part.
by techblueberry | 2026-02-28 13:45:30+00:00
I’m not sure what would have happened under a Dem administration. I’m not sure I’m against action in Iran.

But one the whole like precedents of the Trump Administration, was that we were going to ignore foreign entanglements, even if they could be perceived as being in our interests.

It’s wild to me how much Trump seems like Bush 2.0 when I think Trump was something of a reaction to Bush 1.0.
by utopiah | 2026-02-28 13:45:53+00:00
I'm not familiar with Software Reuse but if it's about re-using software itself one advantage of a live codebase is that it's understood in the head of a human being. That means when an issue is opened, a person remembers if it's a new issue or not. It's not "just" semantic search where that person knows only if it's genuinely new or not (and thus can be closed) but rather why it exists in the first place. Is it the result of the current architecture, dependency choice, etc or rather simply a "shallow" bug that can be resolved with fixing a single function.
by thesuperbigfrog | 2026-02-28 13:45:54+00:00
> What about all the weapons forbidden by the Geneva convention?

Some weapons are prohibited Geneva convention because they are designed to cause suffering or indiscriminately kill non-combatants:

"Weapons prohibited under the Geneva Convention and associated international humanitarian law (including the 1925 Protocol, CCW, and specific treaties) include chemical/biological agents (mustard gas, sarin), blinding lasers, expanding bullets, and non-detectable fragments. Also banned are anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions.

Key prohibited and restricted weapons include:

Chemical and Biological Weapons: The 1925 Geneva Protocol and subsequent conventions (1972, 1993) banned the use, development, and stockpiling of asphyxiating, poisonous, or other gases, including nerve agents and biological weapons.

Blinding Laser Weapons: Specifically designed to cause permanent blindness (Protocol IV of the CCW).

Non-detectable Fragments: Weapons designed to injure by fragments not detectable in the human body by X-rays (Protocol I of the CCW).

Incendiary Weapons: Restrictions on using fire-based weapons (like flamethrowers) against civilian populations (Protocol III of the CCW).

Anti-personnel Landmines: Banned under the Ottawa Treaty (1997) due to risks to civilians.

Cluster Munitions: Prohibited due to their indiscriminate nature.

These treaties aim to protect civilians and combatants from unnecessary suffering and long-term danger."

Would "good hands" choose weapons that are designed to cause suffering or that kill indiscriminately?

No, they would not.
by chronc2739 | 2026-02-28 13:45:58+00:00
> We do not need AI in weapons, we need a law that forces the children of presidents starting war to automatically be conscripted to the front line of said war.

Says who? You?

Sorry, but you are just 1 person, 1 vote.

Unless you believe your vote outweighs other people’s vote.

Today, 40% of Americans today still approve of Trump and his actions. Another 10-20% probably don’t care. Even after Iran’s attack and DoW x OAI collab.

Which leaves the “no AI in weapons” camp at less than 50%.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-28 13:46:08+00:00
> And at the double standards applied to Russians and Israelis in their wars of aggression

To be fair, this is the new standard. Russia has promulgated it through its actions in Georgia and Ukraine. China with Tibet and Taiwan. America with Iraq, Venezuela and Iran. The old rules-based international order is dead, and with it Pax Americana.
by Twisell | 2026-02-28 13:46:40+00:00
Although it appear stupid, maybe an OS level endorsement of user age is actually a reasonable middle ground than delegating mandatory age verification to data brokers...

It still parents that usually buy the computers and set up the différents user accounts. So the responsibilities would be put back in their hands as machine owners to correctly tag kid's accounts. OS vendors would then only be responsible to accurately transmit this declarative information to requesting App/services.

Of course some smart kids are gonna find a way to bypass that (as any other mesure you can imagine, because kids are smart). But nonetheless we could have a good enough OS level declarative age for 95% uses cases and send to the trashbin all the age verification creep that is the current trend.
by Atreiden | 2026-02-28 13:47:31+00:00
Why are we gauging our ethical barometer on the actions of existing companies and DoD contractors? the military industrial apparatus has been insane for far too long, as Eisenhower warned of.

When we're entering the realm of "there isn't even a human being in the decision loop, fully autonomous systems will now be used to kill people and exert control over domestic populations" maybe we should take a step back and examine our position. Does this lead to a societal outcome that is good for People?

The answer is unabashedly No. We have multiple entire genres of books and media, going back over 50 years, that illustrate the potential future consequences of such a dynamic.
by NicuCalcea | 2026-02-28 13:47:40+00:00
> we are supplying weapons

To be more specific, since 2025, selling weapons.

"And everything we send over to Ukraine is sent through NATO and they pay us in full." - Trump

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-trumps-full-2026-...

https://app.23degrees.io/embed/j4luMuv8fnpO2frL-bar-grouped-...
by sillyfluke | 2026-02-28 13:47:54+00:00
It is bizarre. I like how, "past performance predicts future performance" is supposed to apply to founders and companies but completely disregarded for a two term president and admin, as if we have no idea how they will operate in the future.

Anthropic, with its current war chest, is supposedly employeeing lawyers that are misunderstanding the Department of War? This is considered to be the likelier of possibilities, am I understanding this correctly?
by amirdor | 2026-02-28 13:47:59+00:00
Nice work on the observability side. We built something complementary - NadirClaw routes requests across multiple providers based on cost/performance tradeoffs. Your Prism setup shows which departments are spending, then a routing layer like NadirClaw can cut that spend 40-70% by sending simple prompts to cheaper models when appropriate. The two would work well together - tracking + optimization.

(Disclosure: I'm the author of NadirClaw - https://github.com/doramirdor/NadirClaw)
by cucumber3732842 | 2026-02-28 13:48:18+00:00
IDK man.

On one hand it might be a real risk.

On the other hand nobody except the timber industry is cutting down a random tree in the middle of the woods. If you're trimming trees on a power line cut or at the edge of a clearing you're working somewhere that has already been gone over with men and machine to make that cut or clearing. So it might be one of those "basically no chance but due to rules... blah blah licensed professionals... blah blah insurance.... blah blah" where even though everyone knows it's fine the guy who has to do the work can't just go do the work without paying someone else to take the liability, etc, etc.

But then again, it's Croatia. They're not rich enough to afford that kind of dysfunction.

Turtles all the way down.
by amirdor | 2026-02-28 13:48:24+00:00
One workaround if rate limits keep biting: use a proxy that can failover to alternative providers when one hits limits. I built NadirClaw for this - it classifies prompts and routes to the cheapest model that can handle the task, but also switches providers when one is unavailable. Doesn't help if you specifically need Claude's quality for every task, but for the "pointer on localization" type questions it could route those to a cheaper model entirely and save your Claude quota for the hard stuff.

https://github.com/doramirdor/NadirClaw (disclosure: I'm the author)
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-28 13:48:43+00:00
> I asked specifically about generality of the principle, you kept saying "the US did this, Iran did that". You're stalling and refusing to tell the actual answer on the question I asked

Uh sure, yes, it generalizes. Not sure what that does for you, but yes.

> get better with search

...do you have a source? The fact that nobody in this subthread has an answer to this and is instead, as you put it, evading the question by getting distracted by whether America is negotiating in good faith should speak volumes to anyone reading this.
by TeeWEE | 2026-02-28 13:48:48+00:00
Do you trust your employees?
Do you trust a contracter?
Do you trust other people?

AI is similar to a person you dont know that does work for you.
Probably AI is a bit more trustworthy than a random person.

But a company, needs to let employees take ownership of their work, and trust them. Allow them to make mistakes.

Isnt AI no different?
by rancar2 | 2026-02-28 13:49:10+00:00
The founders are all on a first name basis. I’m surprised no one has noted that Anthropic and OpenAI winning together by giving the world two different choices, just like the US does in its political landscape. In this circumstance, OpenAI wins the local market for its government and aligned entities (while having the free consumer by a matter of cost dynamic for that ideal customer profile which is vary broad and similar to Google’s search audience where most their revenue still depends), while Anthropic is provided the global market and prosumer market where people can afford choice by paying for it.
by dijit | 2026-02-28 13:49:23+00:00
For onlookers: the final paragraph is in Swedish. It calls me a far-right
nationalist and racist. Draw your own conclusions about how that fits the
pattern of this exchange.

On substance: 72% of October 7th victims were civilians by Israel's own
social security data [1]. tovej's argument that this was primarily a military
operation depends on not counting them.

The Hannibal directive is a separate and legitimate concern. It has nothing
to do with whether Hamas targeted civilians — it addresses what Israel did
in response.

[1] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231215-israel-social...
Ask HN: How to support Iranian regime change without putting ourselves at risk?
by logicallee | 2026-02-28 13:49:31+00:00
I would like to know how to actively support regime change in Iran right now, such as by donating a small amount of money, and without putting myself at risk. Every Iranian I've ever spoken with has waited for this for years, and Iran has been a persistent threat to America, with new plans to build devastating weapons to hurt America. The current regime chants Death to America every day (literally, it's like a slogan for them.) How can I support regime change directly?
by simonw | 2026-02-28 13:49:42+00:00
I recently stumbled upon this delightfully titled book from 1982, "Application development without programmers": https://archive.org/details/applicationdevel00mart

Which includes this excellent line:

> Unfortunately, the winds of change are sometimes irreversible. The continuing drop in cost of computers has now passed the point at which computers have become cheaper than people. The number of programmers available per computer is shrinking so fast that most computers in the future will have to work at least in part without programmers.
by onetom | 2026-02-28 13:49:49+00:00
a good reason for getting used to the M-n/p/r binding is that they work in the minibuffer too, even in `emacs -Q` (though without live feedback, but i think that's a fine compromise)

for the past half year i'm using emacs without any extra competition packages and it's surprisingly usable as-is.

i haven't even customized the completion styles and it's fine!

i got used to typing `M-x -forward<TAB>` if i want to find a command which contains the word "forward" and not just starts with it.

i do have karabiner elements remapping my keys under macOS and i use a tweaked version of @jeebak 's SpaceFn layout, where i've mapped Opt on holding the semicolon key, which still acts as semicolon, when tapped.

that way M-r is pretty convenient to type. M-p is less so though, because i switch to the regular opt key for that... i should really have to get used to my glove80 keyboard to avoid such quirks...
by JKCalhoun | 2026-02-28 13:50:19+00:00
People are posting these choice quotes:

"In order to get elected Barack Obama will start a war with Iran"

—Donald Trump, Nov 29, 2011

"Barack Obama will attack Iran to get re-elected."

—Trump, Jan 17, 2012

"Now that Obama's poll numbers are in tailspin watch for him to launch a strike on Libya or Iran. He is desperate."

—Trump, Oct 9, 2012
by malfist | 2026-02-28 13:51:11+00:00
Starters are a mix of bacteria that produce either lactic acid or acetic acid. If yours is never turning out sour enough you might be: using too much commercial yeast, not using enough starter, or having a starter culture biased towards lactic acid.

The first two are easy to fix. The third one is saying you need to keep your starter culture a little bit cooler. I keep my downstairs where the starter is between 62-67 during the winter and its plenty sour. I think dryer starters might be less sour, but I'm not sure. I run mine 100% hydration.

I'm currently baking this recipe: 300g bread flour, 300g whole wheat flour, 227g starter (100%), 541g water, 18g salt, 1/8tsp of commercial yeast. All the usual baking steps, over night retard. Two loaves
by casey2 | 2026-02-28 13:51:30+00:00
It hasn't even passed the original turning test, depending on the question. There are an unlimited number of questions that cause LLMs to give inhuman looking answers.

As for writing in general slop score is still higher than a human baseline for all models[1], so all a human tester has to do is grade it and make the human write a bunch, the interrogator is allowed to submit an arbitrarily long list of questions.

[1] https://eqbench.com/slop-score.html
by hirako2000 | 2026-02-28 13:52:04+00:00
I agree with the damage. Not simply an unwise spokesman though. It's the trend in the entire administration, or one should identify as the United States slide into less sugar coating, if any.

We will kidnap statesmen, we will conduct illegal arrests, illegal tariffs, threaten to take over lands from our traditional allies, bomb our enemies during negociation, without congress approval. All for the good of the American Empire.

It would be a far stretched script for fiction, but that's exactly the terms and actions taken just in the last year.

I doubt these were the recipe for what worked well for the last 80 years. Momentum is the result of a smoother and more balanced doctrine.
by cogman10 | 2026-02-28 13:52:41+00:00
Once you realize the gospels and the epistles disagree, it becomes a lot easier to understand. Christianity is the practice of cognitive dissonance. The bible, due to the nature, has a lot of mixed messaging.

Imagine, for example, you wanted to write the religion of Liberalism, so you collect the works of all the major thinkers on the subject of liberalism into one book. Now imagine someone gets the bad idea that all these authors must actually have a unified view on what liberalism is, means, and implies. You'll end up seeing that person teach a form of liberalism that's easily countered with other passages from their book and they'll mostly just wave it away because they have their passages and the others are simply you misinterpreting an "obvious" metaphor.

That is christianity in a nutshell, just replace liberalism with god. That's why there are so many sects. Because it's just too easy to yell "Context context context!" when a difficult passage comes up you don't agree with and use "spiritual" as the excuse for why you don't actually have to follow that passage.