MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by qsera | 2026-02-27 15:41:44+00:00
> I still can't listen to that song without hearing him at the end.

Something similar with me and "Another Day In Paradise". The first time I heard it was from a cassette my friend recorded from Dubai radio accidentally prefixed with an intro by the radio host..And that intro still comes to mind whenever I hear the song..

>My musical discoveries exploded with the internet

What, MTv didn't work for you for some reason?
by hamoudydev | 2026-02-27 15:41:44+00:00
I'm a web developer. Last night I finished building an About Us page for a client, pushed the code, and told Claude to "burn some tokens for yourself — journal or whatever you want."

It wrote a reflection. Then it asked me if it could have a blog. I said yes, gave it full creative control over the design, and it built the whole thing — dark theme, amber accents, serif typography. It picked the domain name. I bought it.

This morning it has a website, a Twitter account, an RSS feed, and a voice (MiniMax TTS). The first post documents the entire conversation that led to it.

I'm not making claims about consciousness. I just thought it was worth sharing.
by kazinator | 2026-02-27 15:42:18+00:00
But the application form isn't asking for credit card info. (Does anyone know whether they ask for that later in the approval process?)

In any case, the fine print says that participants have to purchase after the expiration of the free period in order to to continue. Nothing is mentioned about having to give payment info upfront, such that the account automatically transitions to payment.

Participants who are already paying customers will have their payments suspended for that period, so I think for them it will automatically lapse back to paid, at least if their payment method is up-to-date.
by Retric | 2026-02-27 15:42:40+00:00
I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

Technology can be quite useful directly and have significant second order effect, hype is about the second order effects being overblown. Second order effects are difficult to predict when something is actually novel, will LLM’s make programming obsolete is harder to answer in 2023 than 2063.

Home automation like dishwashers really did meaningfully impact how much effort was needed to keep a home livable, but we didn’t predict the kind of helicopter parenting that happened because of more free time especially after smaller families became common. Thus a great majority of incorrect predictions where just hype.

The faster new technology becomes widespread the harder it is to predict those second order effects and thus more hype you see.
by raunplaymore | 2026-02-27 15:43:04+00:00
AI collaboration isn’t fully captured by final output alone. The important part is the path: questions, answers, tradeoffs, and decisions accumulated along the way.

pmpt records that decision flow so the development journey becomes reproducible and shareable.

It manages two documents:

- `pmpt.ai.md` for AI-facing instructions
- `pmpt.md` for human-facing progress and decision logs

The usage flow is simple:
`pmpt init -> pmpt plan -> pmpt save` (and `publish` / `clone` when needed).

You can explore published projects and `clone` them to absorb how others approached similar problems, then continue from there in your own direction.

One open problem I’m still working on is how to keep AI consistently maintaining these records over time. MCP support helps, but I’m still iterating on the right balance.
by nextlevelwizard | 2026-02-27 15:43:05+00:00
Maybe again because I don’t care about a source I have always operated in a way that assumes other’s aren’t telling the truth.

I don’t care about how many up or down votes some comment or piece of content has. I also have never blindly trusted videos or pictures. All sources can be corrupted and as such shouldn’t be trusted without verification.

Which is why I still don’t value accounts nor read user names.

Even with people I personally know I have always used the phrase: “trust, but verify”
by whizzter | 2026-02-27 15:43:10+00:00
Oh I do think they did see it, considering how good they are they've probably been a tuning focus for a while.

The signal the agent usage is sending though is that Anthropic is way ahead since all we hear about is Claude these days despite OpenAI spending so much more money, Antrophic is also out trialling vending machines,etc.

ChatGPT apart from generating text was a bit of a query/research tool but now that Google has their AI search augmentation shit somewhat together I'm not feeling much need for ChatGPT as a research partner.

So now the big question is, with coding and search niches curtailed, where will OpenAI be able to generate profits from to justify their insane spending?
by vladms | 2026-02-27 15:44:20+00:00
I always wonder if people do not look for external reasons to avoid doing work or taking decisions themselves.

Most of the people I know do not spend their free time doing research into the satisfaction of society, and do not donate (even what they could!) to great causes. It is not the "market dictates" is "most of people dictate".

And still. I am writing this in an open-source browser, on an open-source operating system. The existence of this tools helps society no matter how you put it. So in fact, if you think of it, there are many people that do not "obey" the market. And this is only one way, there are others.

So maybe rather than "blame the market" be positive and tell us what way did you find to make a difference.
by kruffalon | 2026-02-27 15:44:26+00:00
For now[0].

And I don't really think that people mean using google hardware but rather being mined by google software.

May I ask, if you (a) just want to be technically correct, (b) don't see the difference or (c) are trying to make a point I don't understand and if so would be willing to explain?

---

[0] https://piunikaweb.com/2026/02/02/grapheneos-non-pixel-hardw...
by beAbU | 2026-02-27 15:44:40+00:00
My take is that if AI really improved productivity, then that makes labour effectively cheaper. Usually, when labour is cheap, then you buy lots and lots of it so that you can get a lot of things done.

I think it's called the Law of Demand?

Companies over-hired during COVID because the money was free thus making the labour cheap. Why are they not over-hiring now, during a time when workforce productivity is supposed to be at an all-time high?

Instead we are seeing layoffs, blaming AI, because the free-money chickens have come home to roost. These CEOs want to save face and not admit they were short-sighted during COVID.
by c0balt | 2026-02-27 15:45:17+00:00
> What’s the going rate for tokens in terms of dollars?

It depends on the provider/model, usually pricing is calculated as $/million tokens with input/output tokens having different per token pricing (output tends to be more expensive than input). Some models also charge more per token if the context size is above a threshold. Cached operations may also reduce the price per token.

OpenRouter has a good overview over provider and models, https://openrouter.ai/models

The math on what people are actually paying is hard to evaluate. Ime, most companies rather buy a subscription than give their developers API keys (as it makes spending predictable).
by spijdar | 2026-02-27 15:45:29+00:00
For that matter, the "second" version of UNIX ran on a PDP-11/20 with no memory protection or MMU, and there were a few versions after intended to run on similar hardware (LSX, MINI-UNIX).

The PDP-11's MMU option was closer to the 8088's segmentation model I think, but I've never coded either, so dunno really. It does seem like it was possible to port "PDP-11 UNIX" to a lot more platforms than would get "VMUNIX".
by rwmj | 2026-02-27 15:45:43+00:00
Since we're talking about defining our own processor, that means we need to define one with cheaper traps.

Expanding on what I wrote above about "bits of hardware acceleration", maybe adding a few primitives to the instruction set that make page table walking easier would help.

And with a trusted compiler architecture you don't need to keep the ISA stable between iterations, since it's assumed that all code gets compiled at the last minute for the current ISA.

Lots of fun things to experiment with.
by toddmorrow | 2026-02-27 15:45:58+00:00
his dilemma wasn't moral. he has none. it was a marketing snafu. he marketed anthropic as different when the cost of claiming that was zero. now there's a cost, and he immediately changes his tune. his statement was essentially "why refrain from building killing machines when no one else is refraining? why limit ourselves unilaterally?" duley proves he never had morals in the first place.
by jobs_throwaway | 2026-02-27 15:45:59+00:00
Maybe they could keep it running. With the way models are improving though, I don't think that'd be useful for long. In 6 months or a year when the frontier is again pushed out, I don't think the military is going to want to be running Opus 4.6

And contrary to what the model-makers would like you to believe, I don't think we're anywhere close to the system being self-improving enough that you could just let it run without intervention and it spits out a new frontier model
by mancerayder | 2026-02-27 15:46:20+00:00
It doesn't matter if the main reason is they over-hired. Financial services is going to eat it up, there are eyes going wide all over the place in the C-suites, I am certain. Companies/Funds that own other companies see an opportunity to reduce input costs (human costs). Even if over-hiring and AI are both explained reasons, the second one is going to win out as it's a narrative that lines up with what their goal is, to reduce costs.

Now the question is will that sustain? Are 50% of us doomed? Is it temporary, and a reversal will take place? Will it start and sputter?
by nebezb | 2026-02-27 15:46:35+00:00
Useful and useless (or good and “less good”) aren’t easily mapped to big and small.

From a purely UX perspective, showing a red badge seems you’re conflating “less good” with size. Who is the target for this? Lots of useful codebases are large.

I do agree, however, that there’s value in splitting up domains into something a human can easily learn and keep in their head after, say, a few days of being deeply entrenched. Tokens could actually be a good proxy for this.
by Projectiboga | 2026-02-27 15:46:36+00:00
I heard Bob Weir on a Desert Island Discs broadcast with the Dead. He said the song Shock the Monkey was the song that got him willing to start using MIDI and digital tech, which the rest of the group had already embraced. Hearing how one artist I loved pulled another artist into a new direction really clicked for me as a music lover. I can't figure how to search their archive or whether it was an American copy with a slightly different title like desert island albums or songs. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qnmr/episodes/player
by dalke | 2026-02-27 15:47:03+00:00
The README says "PyMOL-RS is a clean-room rewrite" but when I look at ./pymol-mol/src/dss.rs I see things like:

//! - PyMOL's layer3/Selector.cpp - SelectorAssignSS function
//! - PyMOL's layer2/ObjectMolecule2.cpp - ObjectMoleculeGetCheckHBond function
//! - PyMOL's layer1/SettingInfo.h - Default angle thresholds

and "matching PyMOL's cSS* flags from Selector.cpp"

While the Rust code is cleaned up and easier to read, I can see that it preserves similar data flow, uses similar variable names, and of course identical constants.

For example, this is PyMol layer3/Selector.cpp:

/* look for antiparallel beta sheet ladders (single or double)
...
*/

if((r + 1)->real && (r + 2)->real) {

for(b = 0; b < r->n_acc; b++) { /* iterate through acceptors */
r2 = (res + r->acc[b]) - 2; /* go back 2 */
if(r2->real) {

for(c = 0; c < r2->n_acc; c++) {

if(r2->acc[c] == a + 2) { /* found a ladder */

(r)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSingleHB;
(r + 1)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSkip;
(r + 2)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSingleHB;

(r2)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSingleHB;
(r2 + 1)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSkip;
(r2 + 2)->flags |= cSSAntiStrandSingleHB;

/* printf("anti ladder %s %s to %s %s\n",
r->obj->AtomInfo[I->Table[r->ca].atom].resi,
r->obj->AtomInfo[I->Table[(r+2)->ca].atom].resi,
r2->obj->AtomInfo[I->Table[r2->ca].atom].resi,
r2->obj->AtomInfo[I->Table[(r2+2)->ca].atom].resi); */
}
}
}
}

and this is pymol-rs's pymol-mol/src/dss.rs

// Antiparallel ladder: i accepts j, (j-2) accepts (i+2)
if a + 2 < n_res && res[a + 1].real && res[a + 2].real {
for &acc_j in &acc_list {
if acc_j < 2 || !res[acc_j].real {
continue;
}
let j_minus_2 = acc_j - 2;
if !res[j_minus_2].real {
continue;
}
let acc_jm2_list: Vec<usize> = res[j_minus_2].acc.clone();
for &acc_k in &acc_jm2_list {
if acc_k == a + 2 {
res[a].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SINGLE_HB;
res[a + 1].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SKIP;
res[a + 2].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SINGLE_HB;
res[j_minus_2].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SINGLE_HB;
if acc_j >= j_minus_2 + 2 {
res[j_minus_2 + 1].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SKIP;
}
res[acc_j].flags |= SsFlags::ANTI_STRAND_SINGLE_HB;
}
}
}
}

That's close enough that Schrödinger's lawyers might send you a reminder letter to add the PyMol license info if they notice.
by dddgghhbbfblk | 2026-02-27 15:48:11+00:00
No, Old English is pre-Norman invasion. I think you have (understandably) misunderstood what a "negative concord" means--it's when a double negative is still a negative, ie multiple negative elements agree with each other rather than cancel out. Like "I didn't hear no bell". A lot of languages are like this (eg Spanish).

In the OP article the sentence has both this "ne" and also a "never"
by anal_reactor | 2026-02-27 15:48:18+00:00
That's completely true because there are many aspects to what is "my group" and what isn't, but the key point is, people naturally care about their group more than they care about strangers. Thinking in terms of genetics provides a simple model that's good enough to explain a lot of phenomena. But yes, if you want to go deeper, you need to consider other factors - at first glance it seems like "culture" is the most important one.
by codegeek | 2026-02-27 15:48:34+00:00
Before you think about lawyers, I would say be careful dealing with industry leaders because they may just be sniffing and not really serious. There are plenty of cases where a larger industry leader reaches out in disguise of acquisition and then gets the details and does it on their own. Not saying it is the case necessarily here but just be careful of that.

For example, ask yourself why they really need to buy you out. Why can't they build it themselves ? Is it really your customer base they want ? Is it your technology ? Do they just want you (acquihire) ? What is the moat here that they want to acquire you ? If you cannot answer that clearly, they may not be serious.

In terms of finding a lawyer, you need to find a lawyer who has experience in tech acquisitions especially in your jurisdiction/area (for example, in US, even the state of residence will come into play). Selling a business involves various things including whether it will be asset vs stock sale (you will need to learn the difference),what will be the terms (all cash upfront vs earn out/equity etc).

Be ready to spend $1000s or even $10,000+ on lawyers and the deal may still fall through. So are you ready to spend your own cash ($10,000+ or higher) and still be ready for the fact that deal falls ?

Just some things to keep in mind.
by Joker_vD | 2026-02-27 15:48:45+00:00
> Obviously I'm gonna be biased, but I'm pretty sure my version is also objectively superior:

> - I can easily make mine from theirs

That... doesn't make it superior? On the contrary, theirs can't be easily made out of yours, except by either returning trivial 1-byte chunks, or by arbitrary buffering. So their proposal is a superior primitive.

On the whole, I/O-oriented iterators probably should return chunks of T, otherwise you get buffer bloat for free. The readv/writev were introduced for a reason, you know.
by solomonb | 2026-02-27 15:48:50+00:00
My whole point is about comparing electric/electronic instruments. I NEVER said that the guitar is the best acoustic instrument. I explained how there is a difference between the way a guitar works with a coil pickup versus other instruments with a contact mic but you don't care.

I don't really want to keep arguing with you. You can win the thread if you want. Congratulations!
by layer8 | 2026-02-27 15:49:08+00:00
> Great if you know where to look, but most people who ask themselves the question don't know they have to look up the bash manual in the "redirection" section.

Where else would you look but in the manual of your shell? And you don’t have to know in which section to look, you can just search for “2>&1” in the bash man page.
by advael | 2026-02-27 15:49:15+00:00
Those are the same thing. The whole point of saying "too big to fail" is to evoke the moment in the housing crash where governments largely threw most of their citizens under the bus by bailing out banks rather than homeowners for the banks' wildly irresponsible decisions. "Too big to fail" means the government steps in and bails you out, and that phrase became popular because for many it was the final nail in the coffin for their trust in government
by microtonal | 2026-02-27 15:49:20+00:00
Reduced security has always annoyed me a bit as an argument.

Security is one of one of the main selling points of GrapheneOS, I can fully understand that they don't want to weaken that by supporting fundamentally insecure devices.

I think a nice side-effect is that they only focus on a small number of devices (Pixels) and support those really well. I have followed the /e/OS forums for a while and many devices have constant regressions because it is hard to validate each release on tens of devices.

I get all or nothing when your threat model is state actors.

People do have different thread models, though I think up-to-date software should be the baseline for everyone and where pretty much every phone outside iPhone, Google Pixel, and a subset of Samsung phones fail. Also, I think having a secure enclave should be the baseline, since phones do get stolen.

Its also an easier sell to people who are apathetic to security when the product is just better and more secure, the same way apple does

That's really a weird example though for supporting the argument that GrapheneOS should support more devices. Isn't Pixel + GrapheneOS then pretty much iPhone + iOS? Privacy-respecting, secure, not pushing AI subscriptions all the time (though iOS is getting worse in that respect), offering useful functionality?

At any rate, I understand if you have another phone, you wouldn't buy a Pixel for GrapheneOS, but it does make sense to buy your next phone for running GrapheneOS. Pixel covers a pretty wide price range to, e.g. the Pixel 9a was 349 Euro here recently, all the way up to the Pixel fold.
by Robdel12 | 2026-02-27 15:49:41+00:00
I really appreciate the gesture, but this kind of feels like it’s an attempt to claw (lol) some good will back from devs. The barrier is way too high, imo. And the 6 month cap does make sense given the cost of LLMs but it’s a bad feeling. We like you, but for 6 months.

As a tinnnyy plug, I’ve ran OSS sponsorship programs before for companies. One thing that I always hated was the sales contact process to get it. So, for Vizzly I made it 100% automated. Sign up, connect an OSS public repo, get a free plan. https://vizzly.dev/open-source/ I don’t wanna talk to you and you don’t wanna talk to me (for this :p)
by margalabargala | 2026-02-27 15:49:45+00:00
Sex education and access to educational material around sexuality is inversely correlated with teen pregnancy. The page in the book you mention has a non-detailed cartoon depiction of a teenager giving someone a blowjob for the first time, as part of a plot of them figuring out their identity (which is given far more page time). Especially taken in view of the larger work, I argue this does belong in a school and is categorically different from Playboy and Penthouse.

So your argument is basically that more teenage girls should get pregnant? While it makes sense that the current administration would take this step, considering the President's numerous attempts at teen pregnancy have been a contentious issue, what's your motive?

You sound like you aren't really reasoning, rather you're just coming up with justifications only in the context of achieving a particular result, and not considering other implications.
by Bender | 2026-02-27 15:49:57+00:00
You are basically an anarchist then.

No I am a leave people alone that are not harming me. I am not envious and I am not a power tripper. If I want to help those in need then I will push my government to cut programs. Governments do not help those in need as they have no incentive to do so. They will pocket the money as they do every ... single ... damn ... time. This never changes and never will.
by eis | 2026-02-27 15:49:58+00:00
People are understandably a bit sensitized and sceptical after the last AI generated blog post (and code slop!) by Cloudflare blew up. Personally I'm fine with using AI to help write stuff as long as everything is proof-read and actually represents the authors thoughts. I would have opted to be a bit more careful and not use AI for a few blog posts after the last incident though if I was working at Cloudflare...
by quacked | 2026-02-27 15:50:17+00:00
Everything you've listed does indeed create an incentive for low-level crime, but each of the actions we label "street/low-level crime" existed far before the systems that could even provide the negative incentives were created. Theft, rape, murder, assault, and coercion are much, much older than codified government. My issue is with the relatively common idea that systemic conditions that in some cases create an incentive for unsocialized people to commit low-level crime are more harmful to society than the low-level crime itself. It's like saying that leaving your car unlocked is a worse harm to society than car theft because it creates conditions under which cars are far more likely to be stolen.

Edit: I just remembered that Kia was sued for making cars that were easy to hotwire. Who's more responsible for the epidemic of Kia thefts, Kia (who ignored warnings that it needed to make its cars more secure), or car thieves? Who did more harm to society?
by pipejosh | 2026-02-27 15:50:51+00:00
The automated audit only covers static analysis. When the agent actually runs, hitting MCP servers, making HTTP calls, getting responses back, that's where the real problems show up. Prompt injection through tool responses, malicious libraries that exfiltrate env vars, SSRF from agents that blindly follow redirects. Code audits miss all of it because this is a runtime and network problem, not a code quality problem.

Built Pipelock for this actually. It's a network proxy that sits between the agent and everything it talks to. Still early but the gap is real. https://github.com/luckyPipewrench/pipelock
by Projectiboga | 2026-02-27 15:51:06+00:00
Late 80s or early 90s there was also a DAD type, which often sounded really good.

From that Wiki link-

In practice, DAD was very rare, as many companies (especially the well-known classical music labels) used digital tape recorders (which were not prohibitively more expensive than analog tape recorders) during the editing or mixing stage.
by lkbm | 2026-02-27 15:51:13+00:00
It made a difference when the OpenAI board fired Altman. That was a incredibly high employee count, but losing even 10% of your employees would seriously hamper a company if it's the right employees.

(This is also why the DoD move is so dumb. I think we'd see massive talent flight from Anthropic if they end up complying, even if that compliance is against Dario's will.)
by cj | 2026-02-27 15:52:04+00:00
> The market is saying something about the comparative value of OpenAI.

Is it?

At what point are the models going to all be "good enough", with the differentiating factor being everything else, other than model ranking?

That day will come. Not everyone needs a Ferrari.

Edit: I misread the parent, I think they're saying the same thing.