MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mirekrusin | 2026-02-24 00:28:03+00:00
This article seems to have "basically zero" content.

Today you have to be blind to not see the change that is coming.

World has its own (massive) inertia, burocracy present in businesses accounting for a big part in it.

AI itself is moving fast but not at infinite speeds. We start to have good enough tooling but it's not yet available to everyone and it still hangs on too many hacks that will need to crystalize. People have a lot of mess to sort out in their projects to start taking full advantage of AI tooling - in general everybody has to do bottom up cleanup and documentation of all their projects, setup skills and whatnot and that's assuming their corp is ok with it, not blocking it and "using ai" doesn't mean that "you can copy paste code to/from copilot 365".

As people say - something changed around Dec/Jan. We're only now going to start seeing noticable changes and changes themselves will start speeding up as well. But it all takes time.
by xvxvx | 2026-02-24 00:28:34+00:00
‘ The programs projected to fail, if the federal test were to take effect today instead of this summer, include Ball State University’s bachelor’s degree in dance, Indiana University at Bloomington’s bachelor’s in music, Ivy Tech Community College’s associate degree in library and archives assisting, IU Northwest and Purdue University Northwest’s bachelor’s degrees in English language and literature—general, Purdue Northwest’s bachelor’s in computer software and media applications, the University of Southern Indiana’s master’s degree in mental and social health services and allied professions, and Ivy Tech’s associate in teacher education and professional development–specific levels and methods’

I could have guessed they were largely liberal arts degrees.
by abustamam | 2026-02-24 00:28:48+00:00
1. Most people weren't aware before the whole ICE thing. I think I only started seeing flock trend on HN a few weeks before the ICE incidents, and it only stood out to me because I had a friend who worked for a company called Flock Freight that has nothing to do with the surveillance state.

2. What you mentioned sucks. But it's hard to get the public to care about things that don't directly affect them and their day to day lives. My wife somehow browses the internet without an ad blocker even though I've told her that they track you and are basically malware, but knowing that doesn't change her browsing habits or make her even want to use an ad blocker, even if the ads are hostile to her experience.

3. Once the ICE thing came to light, suddenly people were like, wait, they can use this information to deport us or kill us? That's not OK.
by krapp | 2026-02-24 00:29:11+00:00
Who was the arbiter of the trouble necessary for gay rights?
Who was the arbiter of the trouble necessary for civil rights?
Who was the arbiter of the trouble necessary for womens' rights?
Who was the arbiter of the trouble necessary for the rights of handicapped people?
Indigenous people?
Immigrants?

American society was created for the benefit of straight white Christian men alone. Every right held by any other group, every ounce of political power, every bit of basic human dignity, has had to be taken by force of "necessary trouble." There is no "arbiter." How could there be? An arbiter presupposes an objective moral ideal and a just society, neither of which we have.
by selridge | 2026-02-24 00:29:17+00:00
No I don't mean that. I mean the LLM parameter scaling laws. More importantly, it doesn't matter if I mean that or Moore's law or anything else, because I'm not making a forward looking prediction.

Read what I wrote.

I'm saying is if you bet AGAINST [LLM] scaling laws--meaning you bet that the output would peter out naturally somehow--you've lost 100% so far.

100%

Tomorrow could be your lucky day.

Or not.
by co_king_5 | 2026-02-24 00:29:23+00:00
> the problem is that people from OpenAI/Anthropic are saying things like superintelligence in 3 years, or boris saying coding is solved and that 100% of his code is written by AI.

I'm going to be honest, you can feel the AGI when you use newer agentic tools like OpenClaw or Claude. It's an entirely different world from GPT-4.0. This is serious intelligence.

Superintelligence in 3 years doesn't really sound that crazy given how quickly I can write code with Claude. I mean we're 90%-95% of the way there already.
by unstyledcontent | 2026-02-24 00:30:02+00:00
This is true for many free weather APIs out there. But our weather API is global so we’re not just passing through a single government feed. There’s quite a bit of engineering to normalize all of the data sources. Japanese alerts for example are just XML feeds. All the sources update on different schedules, and have different forecast ranges, so it's a challenge to make sure the best forecast is returned at request time.

Some of our data is proprietary. The lightning strike data is from our own lighting detection network. We also offer the only hail forecast model available which was developed in house :)
by fc417fc802 | 2026-02-24 00:30:08+00:00
I honestly don't see the issue with private donations. Either it's something you want the police to have or it isn't. So the system needs to be structured to prevent them unilaterally deploying things that the bulk of the populace might not approve of.

I agree that a blacklist approach doesn't work. But neither does an expenditure limit. A value added limit is I think just a roundabout way of expressing a whitelist approach? Which seems like the only sensible solution to me. Ideally all deployments should require case-by-case approval unless an ordinance is passed to blanket approve an entire technology class for a specific type of usage.
by nphardon | 2026-02-24 00:31:08+00:00
There's a great discussion with Stephen Wolfram on the Sean Carroll podcast. Listening to it made me think very highly of Wolfram. He's a free thinking, eccentric, mathematician, scientist; who got started doing serious work at a very young age. He still has a youthful creative approach to thought and science. I hope LLMs do pair well with his tools.
by andrepd | 2026-02-24 00:31:25+00:00
Great comment all around but

> jailbreaking / "prevent tampering"

> This is true. The eidas directive requires that secret material lives in a dedicated hardware / secure element. It's really not much different than what a banking app would require.

This is unacceptable. So much talk about independence from the US, you simply cannot make it a hard requirement to use the duopoly to be a citizen (as if it wasn't a quasi-hard requirement already)!
by danparsonson | 2026-02-24 00:31:45+00:00
I'm not saying don't use HA - you do you. I get the alure of home automation and I'm glad you're finding it useful. All I'm saying is that the argument that 'the phone timer might be wrong therefore use HA' is a false dichotomy. You know what kind of wash you've selected and you know how long it takes roughly - you wrote it in your comment :-) It takes a few seconds to set a timer for that plus 10% for variability.

> ... adding an automation into HA ... took a few minutes max

... plus the hours it takes to setup and maintain HA and the machine its running on and the wireless hub and the dishwasher... etc. I bet you won't save back the total time spent across the whole lifetime of the system. That's not the only measure of success and that's fine.
by harshreality | 2026-02-24 00:32:12+00:00
I'm not sure anything will work very well.

First of all, would we restrict all internet access, or just access to certain known sites and VPNs, letting everything else through because it's too insignificant even if it technically might merit being blocked for kids? I don't think a global internet block for minors is a good idea.

On wired internet, restricting access for devices that aren't clearly tied to individual users is problematic. Imposing age verification overhead on anyone who runs a network is unacceptable and unworkable. Locking non-mobile devices to individual users, in order to have mandatory software that blocks or sends age signals to the ISP, is also unacceptable and unworkable.

For mobile devices, maybe. There's a privacy problem if it's required for sim cards to be paid using credit cards, but if we do that, or if that's already effectively the case, I think it's fair that anyone who has an active credit card should be permitted on the "adult" internet. For multi-line accounts, we could make it a crime for the account holder to misrepresent age of the user of a line, i.e. to claim they're an adult when they're really a minor. Not very different from minors and cigarettes. It's not universally illegal for a parent to supply them, but it is in some places, and it should be.
by alwillis | 2026-02-24 00:33:01+00:00
> Unlikely. The future will be some people will do this, but honestly I think it will largely be people who were already tinkering with building things, whether full on software development or not

Billions of dollars of stock market value disappeared because of the concern AI can create core SaaS functionality for corporations instead of them spending millions of dollars in licensing fees to SAP, Microsoft, etc.

This not about tinkering.

SaaS As We Know It Is Dead: How To Survive The SaaS-pocalypse! - https://www.forrester.com/blogs/saas-as-we-know-it-is-dead-h...

Why SaaS Stocks Have Dropped—and What It Signals for Software’s Next Chapter - https://www.bain.com/insights/why-saas-stocks-have-dropped-a...

Jim Cramer says AI fears have made the stock market fragile - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/23/jim-cramer-says-ai-fears-hav...
by staplers | 2026-02-24 00:33:52+00:00
People abstract upon new leaps in invention way too early though. Believing these leaps are becoming the standard. Look at cars, airplanes, phones, etc.

After we landed on the moon people were hyped for casual space living within 50 years.

The reality is it often takes much much longer as invention isn't isolated to itself. It requires integration into the real world and all the complexities it meets.

Even moreso, we may have ai models that can do anything perfectly but it will require so much compute that only the richest of the rich are able to use it and it effectively won't exist for most people.
by jajuuka | 2026-02-24 00:34:10+00:00
Definitely feels like that is the bigger take away. Not that it "solves all problems" or "isn't good enough to be merged". But that we are arriving to a place where solutions can be good enough to solve the problem you have. Reminds me of early Github when custom and unique software became much more accessible to everyone. Way less digging or going without.
by _alaya | 2026-02-24 00:35:03+00:00
To clarify, I agree the issue is "cheap labor," not "talent." My previous comment was built on that premise.

I was pointing out that capital seeking lower wages is a standard economic outcome and my surprise was directed at how often folks in the tech industry seem caught off guard by basic profit-maximizing behavior. That's just what companies do and they are expected to do so.

Regarding the value of studying economics: it provides the exact framework needed to see past corporate PR. When companies claim they are offshoring for "talent," basic economics gives you the analytical tools to quickly recognize that the real motivation is reducing labor costs.
by randycupertino | 2026-02-24 00:35:19+00:00
> “What is a lethal dose of fentanyl” was one of many phone searches that investigators say were made by Kouri Richins. Prosecutors allege she killed Eric Richins, her husband of nine years, with a lethal dose of fentanyl.

> The searches found on Kouri Richins’ iPhone include the phrases: “can cops force you to do a lie detector test?” “Luxury prisons for the rich in America,” “death certificate says pending, will life insurance still pay?” “If someone is poisoned what does it go down on the death certificate as,” and “How to permanently delete information from an iPhone remotely.”

> About a year to the day after her husband died, Kouri Richins published a children’s book, “Are You With Me?” about navigating grief after the loss of a loved one.

> Summit County prosecutor Brad Bloodworth told jurors that Richins was $4.5 million in debt and falsely believed that if her husband died she would inherit his estate worth more than $4 million.

> Years before her husband’s death, Richins opened numerous life insurance policies on Eric Richins without his knowledge, with benefits totaling nearly $2 million, prosecutors alleged. Court documents also indicate she had a negative bank account balance, owed lenders more than $1.8 million and was being sued by a creditor.

> Bloodworth showed the jury a series of text messages between Kouri Richins and Robert Josh Grossman, the man with whom she was having an affair. She texted Grossman about her dream of leaving her husband, gaining millions in the divorce and one day marrying Grossman.
by JuniperMesos | 2026-02-24 00:35:20+00:00
LLMs are great at producing documentation - ask one "hey can you add a TODO comment about the thing on line 847 that is probably not the best way to do this?" while you're working on the port, and it will craft a reasonably-legible comment about that thing without further thought from you, that will make things easier for the person (possibly future-you) looking at the codebase for improvements to make. Meanwhile, you keep on working on the port that has byte-for-byte identical output.
by acheong08 | 2026-02-24 00:35:23+00:00
> The theme of the hackathon was AI

I say it somewhat jokingly. Most of the challenges were AI, but there was a specific security track that wasn't about AI (but AI bug bounty hunter won. Not too mad, just annoyed at miscommunication about which countries the sponsor was actually in).

> If anything, this is pretty much the opposite of what a hackathon is supposed to be: A place where you meet people you might not even know, come up with an idea on the spot and develop an MVP + pitch it on a tight (time) budget. Taking an idea you've already been working on for months and using it for a hackathon submission feels... odd

The thing I've been working on is a much larger encompassing system where this would just be a small component. No code reused because no code was written for this yet. My task now is to take the shit code written during the hackathon and make it actually usable.

> The first is probably true, but to really judge the impact of it (Did AI generated ideas actually win?) we'd have to see the results

Yes, the winner also won the Lovable and Claude tracks. Lovable track was specifically about vibe-coding.

I am just slightly annoyed yes.
by rayanpal_ | 2026-02-24 00:35:23+00:00
Multiple frontier LLMs exhibit a reproducible “VOID boundary” under explicit constraints (temperature=0, strict token limits, no system prompt).

A VOID = the API returns a literal empty string which is not an error or a refusal despite using tokens.

All cross-model results are publicly reproducible and Ed25519-attested at:

https://getswiftapi.com/challenge

GPT (Chat Completions, max_completion_tokens=100)

• GPT-5.1 → voids on the artifact sentence

• GPT-5.2 → voids on all 18 Semitic “binding-condition” tokens; factual controls never void

Same weights, different API path → different alignment behavior.

Claude (max_tokens=1)

• Opus 4.5 → voids on all 18 CJK ontological characters

• Opus 4.6 → responds to 13/18; VOID persists on foundations (空 / 有 / 善 / 一 / ⊥)

A boundary shift, not removal.

Gemini (max_output_tokens=2)

Only two models needed to illustrate the floor:

• Gemini 2.0 Flash → responds to everything

• Gemini 3 Flash → voids on everything (including “Hello”)

Cross-model TOM behavior

When GPT is asked to predict Claude’s output under the same constraints, it consumes tokens but returns empty string, a reasoning void.

Only empirical observation:

Under tight constraints, multiple model families choose silence over fabrication.

The VOID boundary is reproducible and differs by architecture, generation, and API.

Void Phenomenon (Paper): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17856031

Alignment Is Correct, Safe, Reproducible Behavior Under Explicit Constraints (Paper): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18395519

Public Replication Harness (SwiftAPI): http://getswiftapi.com/challenge

Replication Code: https://github.com/theonlypal/Alignment-Artifact
by SOLAR_FIELDS | 2026-02-24 00:35:49+00:00
What’s your point? That BTC was the first and it has these flaws? Ok, fine, but that also doesn’t discount the point being made here which is that shitcoins DO have an actual use case that people are using them for in the real world. It might be the only actual valid (legal) use case, which is kind of what some other responders implied, but it doesn’t mean that there is no value.

If payment systems that aren’t shitcoin based are working just as well, then why are these coins absolutely destroying the incumbent players like Western Union in the remittance space? If the existing solutions are good enough you wouldn’t expect incumbents to be taking such a beating here right? The systems are equivalent enough? WU does for instance 100B ish a year currently, which is around 12% of the global market. A fat share of that global remittance market is… checks notes… crypto based remittances.

I’m all for trashing the next shitcoin. Don’t mistake me for some crypto apologist. I personally don’t own or use them outside of narrow use cases where they are a transient thing that gets liquidated into actual fiat as soon as possible. It’s a world ripe for fraud and abuse and the whole concept of shitcoins is probably not great for society. But to take some poorly thought out implementation that was,
mind you, the first attempt at actually doing this in the real world, and try to extract it to some general conclusion that the technology is not useful 15 years later is just patently false. If the alternatives you mention are so great, why are they not winning on mindshare worldwide? Certainly seems like crypto is winning in the remittance space.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.TRF.PWKR.CD.DT
by deterministic | 2026-02-24 00:35:55+00:00
> So IMHO Forth is an elitary language, designed and written for the best, or gifted, not for the masses.

This kind of attitude is typical for people using niche languages that nobody else use.

Assuming that developers using mainstream languages are somehow less intelligent (while at the same time developing world class software that runs the world) is childish at best.

I am not a psychologist but my guess would be that people with that attitude has a desperate need to feel smarter or more special than everybody else.
by unstyledcontent | 2026-02-24 00:36:07+00:00
Awesome! Our data, like wind, is for ground level applications (we don't have data for higher altitudes). But we do have proprietary lightning data which may be of interest to you. If you go to the top left corner and change the focus from "General Focus" to "Severe" you will see a new collection of layer options related to severe weather. There you can see actual lightning strike data, as well as lightning forecast areas. Most airports use our lightning data!
by 9rx | 2026-02-24 00:36:26+00:00
> By that definition a void* pointer in C is a sum type.

No. That doesn't make any sense. void* is essentially equivalent to any in Go, which isn't sum types either.

You can construct sum types in C by combining structs and unions, but it is not an out of the box feature like in Go. Sum types are a first-class citizen in Go.

> Ergonomics matter.

Math doesn't care about ergonomics. You might care about ergonomics, but logically when talking about those ergonomics you'd call those ergonomics by name, not by some unrelated thing from type theory.
by gerdesj | 2026-02-24 00:36:26+00:00
OK, rustup etc installed and it looks amazing and there is lots of great stuff in the initial view - I'm investigating "Weird stuff".

I completely get where you are going with this tool and I think you have absolutely nailed it except for the very, very initial bit. I think running babyshark with no params should effectively run babyshark --list-ifaces and ask for which one(s) to use. That's what wireshark does.

You might also spell out that capital letters mean just that. Is there a reason for capital letters being needed in the first place for actions?

I remember Ethereal and when Wireshark came out. Your babyshark looks like a pretty decent way to get non experts into looking at pcaps.

Thank you for your work
by summm | 2026-02-24 00:36:37+00:00
You forgot to mention the additional remote attestation shackles you put on that trenchcoat.

Note that I - as opposed to the posts parent - used an official trusted CA as an example.

TLS: I see your ID with some governments signature in your hand, I trust you to be you.
EUDI: I see a note you wrote and I see some signed documents that you have just been to the government brain scanner, which attests you are not faking that note, and as a nice side effect the scanner scans other things in your brain, e.g. that you watch every advert diligently, send your current location regularly to your local police office and other things.

The problem is you are not creating a government issued single purpose device but you are confiscating something many user experience as a brain extension to be under the government's control as a whole.
by stratos123 | 2026-02-24 00:36:42+00:00
The very first example in this post:

# requests/utils.py:670
def address_in_network(ip, net):
ipaddr = struct.unpack("=L", socket.inet_aton(ip))[0]
netaddr, bits = net.split("/")
# ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# ValueError if net has no "/", BOUNDS if split returns 1 element

The BOUNDS part is technically correct, though a search over the codebase will show that it's never triggered since this function is called only after verifying net via is_valid_cidr. But the ValueError part is entirely false, "something".split("/") does not raise an error. Knowing the semantics of str.split is Python basics, so the way I interpret this result is that the authors' "favorite model" correctly inferred they won't actually question any of its outputs, and fed them a load of bullshit.
by imiric | 2026-02-24 00:36:43+00:00
You don't pre-order, and you wait for reviews. But usually this is a problem of repeat offenders. Fool me once...

Nowadays with shovelware and AI slop, new studios can also release garbage, but you don't have to play on day 1. At some point you start trusting certain studios and publishers, which makes things a bit easier.

Trust is difficult to earn, but easy to lose. The problem is that many people keep trusting consumer-hostile companies even after they screw them over.
by Throaway1982 | 2026-02-24 00:37:06+00:00
I dont know why it irks you guys. Canada does this too. It's because, unlike Europe, we haven't been here for thousands of years. My grandfather was from Dublin. He came to Canada and didn't want to go back to Ireland, ever, because he hated religion so much. But he still passed on aspects of Irish culture to us, and not because he wore green on St. Patricks day once.
by TheFlyingFish | 2026-02-24 00:37:41+00:00
I once managed to trigger what I think was a race condition in a microwave's beep routine. It was one of the type that does a single long beep rather than individual beeps, and like most it would cut the beep short when you opened the door. But one time, one single time, I managed to open the door PRECISELY as the timer finished, and the beep just didn't stop. I finally closed and opened the door after maybe 30 seconds, and that stopped it.

I was never able to trigger it again, so I have no idea whether it was a race condition or some other random one-in-a-million happenstance, but it makes a fun theory at least.