MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 1necornbuilder | 2026-02-18 22:11:27+00:00
Real-world CGNAT use case that might be relevant here: I'm running an industrial AI monitoring system (computer vision on live RTSP camera feeds) deployed on Google Cloud Run. The cameras are behind an ISP that blocks port forwarding entirely — a common apartment/SMB situation.
Tailscale solved this completely. The Cloud Run container joins the tailnet, the camera's RTSP server gets a 100.x.x.x address via MediaMTX, and the container reads the stream over the private mesh as if everything were on the same LAN. No public exposure, no ISP negotiation, no port forwarding rules.
The Peer Relay announcement matters for this setup specifically: my Cloud Run instance spins up fresh containers under load, and DERP relay fallback was occasionally adding latency during the NAT traversal handshake on cold starts. Peer Relays distributing that relay burden to edge nodes should reduce that.

One question for the Tailscale folks: for ephemeral compute (Cloud Run, Lambda, Fly.io), where containers may spin up/down frequently, how does peer relay selection work when the relaying node itself might be transient?
by Windchaser | 2026-02-18 22:11:34+00:00
I know you're getting dogpiled, but global warming has been validated, not debunked.

The science behind it really got going in the 1890s, with Arrhenius' paper predicting climate sensitivity to CO2. That was bounced back and forth with rebuttals and counter-rebuttals until about 1950. Major debate points were how much role water vapor played, how this varied with temperature/altitude/pressure. (You can trace each part of the argument if you're so inclined; there's lots of neat science in there. The concept of "pressure broadening" was my favorite; it explores how spectral bands change with pressure).

Around 1950, the science started settling out. Spectrometers had improved, we had clearer view that CO2 and H2O don't fully overlap in their spectra bands through the atmosphere, and we had the computing to do better calculations. By the 1970s, we were getting ice core data showing that the world had gone through huge temperature swings, and how this changed with CO2. Enough data had accumulated that a consensus was forming. In the 1980s, scientists were now concerned enough to form a large body to inform policymakers on this issue (IPCC; 1988). And in the 40 years since then, we've mostly sat on our hands, even as the science just gets clearer and clearer.

I share all this long history to explain that the science went through nearly a century of rigorous debate even before politicians got involved. This a scientific issue, not a political one. And I'm glossing over 99.9999% of the detail here. There was an extensive literature debate between the scientists, hashing out any point you can think of. You just have to go to your local uni library and start reading.

TL;DR: saying that global warming is debunked is about as incorrect as saying that the Earth is flat. We have extensive evidence showing otherwise.
Show HN: Deploy HuggingFace models to Spaces with one command
by Facingsouth | 2026-02-18 22:11:47+00:00
A BYOAPI Terraform wrapper for GPU provisioning.

Developers overpay by only accessing single-cloud workflows or using sequential provisioning with inefficient egress + rate-limiting.

Terradev is a cross-cloud compute-provisioning CLI that compresses + stages datasets, provisions optimal instances + nodes, and deploys 3-5x faster than sequential provisioning.

Terradev is integrated with Kubernetes and Karpenter: We generate Helm templates.

Other integrations: Grafana/Prometheus, OpenPolicyAgent, Weights&Biases, Kserve, Ray, vLLM, Ollama...
by ToucanLoucan | 2026-02-18 22:12:04+00:00
Can confirm the utter hell it is to shop for women's clothing. I started transitioning at the ripe old age of 36, and up until that point, have obviously bought clothes for men. My entire fucking life I have bought XL shirts and jeans with a 38-44 inch waist, shorter legs. Never had an issue.

Womens sizes... like Jesus Christ, I don't know how ANY women tolerate this shit. It's completely made up. A size 0 in one brand feels similar to a size 3 in another, feels similar to Large in another, feels similar to -1 in another. Anything you buy and like, you effectively have to pray they keep making forever, and always buy from that brand or you risk getting something else that doesn't fit correctly.

I've never shopped a product category that feels so utterly hostile to consumer comprehension, except MAYBE microtransactions in videogames. And I'm not meaning to be dramatic, that's the only other type of market I've experienced in life where it feels like my attempts to understand what I'm buying are being deliberately frustrated like this.
by yason | 2026-02-18 22:12:22+00:00
Art has two facets. First is if you like it. If you do, you don't need to care where it came from. Second is the art as cultured and defined by the artistic elites. They don't care if art is liked or likable, they care about the pedigree, i.e. where it came from, and that it fits what they consider worthy art. Between these two is what I call filler art: stuff that's rather indifferent and not very notable, but often crosses over some minimum bar that it's accepted by, and maybe popular among average people who aren't that seriously interested in art.

In the first category, AI is no problem. If you enjoy what you see or hear, it doesn't make a difference if it was created by which kind of artist or AI. In the second category, for the elite, AI art is no less unacceptable than current popular art or, for that matter, anything at all that doesn't fit their own definition of real art. Makes no difference. Then the filler art.. the bar there is not very high but it will likely improve with AI. It's nothing that's been seriously invested in so far, and it's cheaper to let AI create it rather than poorly paid people.
by mithr | 2026-02-18 22:12:29+00:00
It doesn't; that's kind of a first-glance reading of the phrase without really thinking about it.

Something can said to change from a certain standard even if it wasn't perfectly constant to begin with. For example, if I always kept my house at 65-75 degrees for the past year, and now it's 85 degrees inside, I could certainly say that the temperature in my house recently changed and gotten warmer. That might lead me to check whether my AC's working, rather than say "well I guess the temperature has never really been constant, and 85 is within the range of possible non-constant temperatures, so everything's perfectly normal and nothing has changed."
by Aloha | 2026-02-18 22:13:17+00:00
This so much.

We just got code complete on porting a 30 year old Delphi app to C#, because of all of this.

Even now, our pure Delphi components are performant and wonderful, but hiring people who want to learn or know Delphi is hard, so off to C# we trundle forward.
by SpaceManNabs | 2026-02-18 22:13:17+00:00
a lot of artists don't mind use AI for art outside their field

I was in a fashion show in tokyo in 2024.

i noticed their fashion was all human designed. but they had a lot of posters, video, and music that was AI generated.

I point blank asked the curator why he used AI for some stuff but didn't enhance the fashion with AI. I was a bit naive because I was actually curious to see if AI wasn't ready for fashion or maybe they were going for an aesthetic. I genuinely was trying to learn and not point out a hypocrisy.

he got mad and didn't answer. i guess it is because they didn't want to pay for everything else. big lesson learned in what to ask lol.
by kittikitti | 2026-02-18 22:13:32+00:00
I think people hate AI generated writing more than they like human curated writing. At the same time, I find that people like AI content more than my writing. I write, comment, and blog in many different places and I notice that my AI generated content does much better in terms of engagement. I'm not a writer, I code, so it might be that my writing is not professional. Whereas my code-by-hand still edges out against AI.

We need to value human content more. I find that many real people eventually get banned while the bots are always forced to follow rules. The Dead Internet hypothesis sounds more inevitable under these conditions.

Indeed we all now have a neuron that fires every time we sense AI content. However, maybe we need to train another neuron that activates when content is genuine.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2026-02-18 22:13:56+00:00
> I took stacks upon stacks of jeans with me to the dressing room, searching in vain for that one pair that fit perfectly. Over 20 years later, my hunt for the ideal pair of jeans continues. But now as an adult, I’m stuck with the countless ways that women’s apparel is not made for the average person, like me.

I'm a 5'6 145lbs adult male. Y'know how many clothes are made that fit me? T-shirts, size S, fitted; and dress shirts by Express. That's basically it. Pants don't fit me because the legs aren't short enough, the crotch isn't long enough, and I don't have a butt/thighs. Basically no jacket fits me. Shoes? One of my feet is a different size than the other.

I, too, have to try on literally every garment I see that sort-of-looks-like it might fit. I have tried hundreds of pairs of jeans, dress shirts, jackets. When I find one that fits, I buy two of them (or every one in a different color). And then I gain or lose weight... and the cycle repeats. I probably own 30 pairs of jeans, and a closet full of shirts that I almost never wear, but one day might want, and will never be able to find anywhere else.

Human bodies are diverse. Standard sizes don't work. But you know what will give you the perfect fit? Tailoring. Buy something too big, take it to a neighborhood drycleaner & tailor, and have them alter it to fit you. It's that simple. If you're worried about not having "enough" clothes and want to save money, it's not hard to use a sewing machine (if I learned, you can). In retrospect, I should've used tailoring rather than constantly hunt for fitting clothes. But I suspect I hunt the racks for the same reason women do: the idea that, somewhere out there, there's a better item I don't have.

I don't think there's a way to reform the fashion industry, as it produces what the market bears. You could also - and I know this is crazy, but bear with me - wear ill-fitting clothes. Your gender doesn't have to constantly strive to be attractive. We will be into you regardless. And if you're just trying to live up to your own gender's expectations... maybe it's not a great expectation.
by treetalker | 2026-02-18 22:14:23+00:00
Here's what this says between the lines / in a roundabout fashion:

---

LLM tools were sold to firms as game-changers. The truth is that they work, but by saving bits of time and mental energy here and there. Those savings are meaningful in the aggregate and compound over time.

But there are a few catches.

First, most of the savings is realized by integrating the tools into workflows that are personal and often sui generis. That takes, on the one hand, know-how (but firms deployed the tools without clear direction and without training workers); and, on the other hand, time and effort (but many of the largely untrained workers aren't investing time and effort to do so, even if they have the know-how).

Second, even where the training, time, and effort hurdles are cleared, the benefits inure primarily to the workers themselves: less time and mental energy spent doing what appear to be coordination tasks — ones that, so far, have been considered necessary but do not meaningfully represent the firm's actual value creation. For the benefits to inure to the firm (and thus appear on the radar of CEOs like those interviewed for the Fortune survey tangentially mentioned in TFA) the workers would need to "reinvest" the time and mental-energy savings in activities directly causing the value the firm is presumed to produce. They have little incentive to do so and they do not. Hence no increased firm productivity.

And third, even where the "reinvest your new-found ease to benefit the firm" hurdle is overcome — here I'm visualizing Lumbergh's "Is This Good for the COMPANY?" banner — firms often have to trade their private data for those hard-won benefits.

Thus the author arrives at his main conclusion: he will happily use "AI" (read: LLM tools) at work, on the company dime and with company data, to make his life easier, but he won't use the tools in his private life because he's privacy conscious.

The other conclusion is that firms could theoretically derive benefits from LLM tools — but they haven't figured out that, in exchange for their own valuable data, over and above the monetary cost of the LLM tools, they need to train workers to use them; ensure workers use them, and properly; and ensure workers then do even more intensive work to drive the value creation the company is supposedly engaged in, instead of simply making their own lives easier.

---

My personal conclusion is that people are going to start seeing even more clearly than before that most of what they and their colleagues do during most of their time is busy work that creates no actual value.
by kjellsbells | 2026-02-18 22:14:49+00:00
I have a simple lagging indicator for the US economy, and it's this: when the ads you see focus on price not features, and especially of food, the economy is in a hole and no amount of government sunshine (from either party) persuades me otherwise. In those times, head towards essentials. Food, consumer staples, healthcare. Stay out of tech.

We have ads now for discounts at Taco Bell. Not even Pizza Hut. Taco Bell!

The US economy for regular people is not good.
by fishtoaster | 2026-02-18 22:16:14+00:00
This is a great use of data to make a compelling case that sizing sucks for women's clothing!

I do wish it attempted to answer the question at the end, though: "Sizes are all made up anyway — why can’t we make them better?"

Like, why doesn't the market solve for this? If the median woman can't buy clothing that fits in many brands, surely that's a huge marketing opportunity for any of the thousands of other clothing brands?

This is, to be clear, a sincere question - not a veiled argument against OP or anything! It seems like there are probably some structural or psychological or market forces stopping that from happening and I'd love to understand them. Same with the "womens clothes have no pockets" thing!
by rappatic | 2026-02-18 22:16:42+00:00
This reminds me of my undergrad “discrete math” lecture notes, where my professor wrote the following in the unit on sets:

> This brings us to a fun problem for you to think about in your spare time: are there any infinite sets that have cardinality strictly between [the cardinality of the natural numbers] and [the cardinality of the real numbers]?

This is of course the famously undecidable continuum hypothesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_hypothesis).
by fuzzfactor | 2026-02-18 22:17:06+00:00
Good question.

One early approach when starting to build a reputation is to work as a subcontractor to a less-big company who has already gone through everything to be on the approved-vendor list of the massive corporation.

Even better if the less-big company is a private company and the biggie is public.

A private company will be able to figure out the benefit from your work better than most, and hopefully profit from it.

I like it when every time I invoice a client, they are making money at the same time, whether they are making it from me is not always necessary if I am participating in an overall money-making process they are going through. Especially routinely. It's just fine to be a very small participant in lots of activity going on between the big-shots.

Big companies can have so much work and be able to pay so well that your position can be to merely absorb the overflow from the primary contractor, even if you do not yet have a unique offering.

Then it's good to build into your exclusive-but-related niche, which would be intended for a different division of the biggie and expect it to languish unless your already-established client can use that too.

Eventually after you finally get to meet the right person in the target corporate division, it will be after you have already been doing work for that same corporation through the approved primary contractor.

By this point you've already been doing critical work for that corporation exactly like they need, that you can be proud of and point to, and it can be a whole lot more likely to become an approved vendor yourself. From which position you can finally negotiate fees directly with the most well-heeled corporate source, this would be the first time if you were only working for other primary contractors until then.

Ideally you will then be invoicing a different office of the same corporation that you were subcontracting under, there will be no conflict of interest, and you can continue working for the original primary contractor too.

And your most promising niche finally gets to launch with about as much upside as it can get.
by ramblurr | 2026-02-18 22:17:53+00:00
Cut to the chase: This is a marketing post (ad?) for Mesa. https://www.mesa.dev/

A code-first proprietary git-like clone.

They seem to make the mistake many do which is to conflate git and GitHub (though TFA doesn't), because why would you adopt a proprietary hosted VCS (and a startup to boot which could disappear anyway)?

At least with GitHub you can pack up your repos and move elsewhere.

GitHub is certainly in trouble for many reasons. Git...maybe? But is the answer really a proprietary vc-funded ($5M seed) startup?
by cryptonector | 2026-02-18 22:18:24+00:00
The only real mote was and is mindshare. Build mindshare, don't screw your users, and your competition will have a hard time dethroning you. LLMs will probably force SaaS and software prices to come down, which will be a great opportunity for dethroning reigning champions.

PostgreSQL, for example, has a ton of mindshare. It will be hard to dethrone it.

OpenSolaris was Sun's attempt to recover from the loss of mindshare to Linux. The a company that had become dominant in databases due to mindshare acquired Sun then failed to understand the mindshare play, and it killed OpenSolaris. Explain that one to me.

Even mindshare might not be such a moat now.
by mindslight | 2026-02-18 22:18:27+00:00
> I think this idea that social media companies are free speech platforms or should be treated as such, is incorrect and it's leading to bad outcomes. They are product companies selling you an experience of "being connected" and engaging with them is a matter of terms of service

Yes I wholeheartedly agree with Macron's quote, and basically agree with your interpretation of it. Maybe you can see we have some common ground here and re-read what I wrote before? My critique isn't trying to reject that there is a problem. Rather I'd say my critique is that your proposed solution is specious and will enable worse things

> not exercising a constitutional right

Except individual users are also exercising a constitutional right. That's the problem - users' main modern ways of partaking in their constitutional rights are being modulated by corporations!

(Just to be clear though, I think the legal system's current framing of the owners/workers of Facebook having a "constitutional right" to control users' speech is utterly disingenuous)

> if you think Sec 230 was a mistake what would social media companies do in response? Verify you

Now that the situation has been set up, maybe, and maybe users would stand for this. But verification wouldn't actually resolve their problem when Joe Judgementproof posts fascist hate, they'd become jointly responsible for publishing it. The point is that the moral hazard created by sec 230 is precisely what has allowed the centralized social media industry to grow to the point it has.
by jedberg | 2026-02-18 22:19:26+00:00
Women's sizing is so dumb. They could just provide inches or cm like they do for the men, but for some reason (well for marketing reasons, as discussed extensively in the article), they use these random sizes and numbers that aren't consistent and change over time.

I think this is why stretchy materials are getting more and more popular. The women in my house use stretchy pants almost exclusively, because they are much more forgiving with body shape. As long as the waist fits, the rest will fit well enough.
by docmars | 2026-02-18 22:20:50+00:00
I think if you were to scale that kind of usage across a reasonable team size, costs would start to add up fast — and possibly beyond the cost of paying another engineer every year, especially if a lot of your teammates are new to AI, or aren't using it efficiently. Of course, it all depends on the appetite of the company.

The other constraint is, for those who are being laid off (maybe because of cost reduction to support an AI budget for a smaller team to use), engineers wanting to expand their skill set and practice these levels of usage + efficiency are effectively unable to with their own funding, making it more difficult to find employment as expectations heighten.

Prior to AI entering the fray, software development was largely free for everyone, allowing anyone with enough time and motivation to build the skills towards gainful employment. As AI becomes more prevalent and expectations around how it's used become higher, fewer and fewer applicants will be able to claim they have the experience necessary because it was out of reach due to costs.
by ChadNauseam | 2026-02-18 22:20:50+00:00
The only known explanation of what's going on in quantum mechanics is a multiversal one^[1]. Using radioactive decay of an atom as an example: there are an uncountably infinite number of universes that are initially "fungible" (identical in every way), and over time the universes gradually differentiate themselves with the atom going from a non-decayed to decayed state, at different times in each universe. But you will be in all of those universes. So if you thought the atom would decay in, let's say 5 seconds, there would be some universes where you were right and some where you were wrong. That makes it impossible to ever make reliable specific predictions about when the atom will decay. So, in practice that just looks like perfect randomness.

^[1]: There are other interpretations, of course. And those other interpretations are equally explanatory. But they do not claim to be explanations of what is actually happening to unobserved quantum particles. There is also Bohmian mechanics, but I don't know how many people take it seriously.
by notatoad | 2026-02-18 22:21:10+00:00
i'm surprised to see this suggestion highly upvoted, because this is the solution that usually makes hacker news the angriest.

in reality this cannot be just a simple plain text header. that's way too easily forged and will not satisfy any of the parties pushing for age verification. the "device verifies your age" model means hardware attestation, so the source of that age verification can sign a cryptographically secure promise that the device software has not been modified in a way that would allow this header to be forged.

the app stores might be a less than ideal place to implement age verification, but it lets regulators sidestep all the messy issues around a distinction between device owner and device user.