MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by DavidYoussef | 2026-02-06 16:41:29+00:00
A kill switch is treating symptoms. The disease is that maintainers have no
way to distinguish "AI-generated typo fix from a new contributor" from
"AI-generated rewrite of my auth system by someone who doesn't understand it."

Both show up as PRs. Both require manual triage. The kill switch treats them
identically by blocking both.

What maintainers actually need is automated risk classification at the gate.
We built a GitHub Action (codeguard-action, MIT) that does this:

- Parses the diff, identifies what zones are touched
- Classifies risk L0 through L4 based on what changed (not who submitted)
- Runs proportional AI review (1-3 models depending on risk tier)
- Posts structured findings to the PR
- Seals everything into a hash-chained evidence bundle

The "1 in 10 AI PRs is legitimate" stat from the GitHub discussion tells me
9 out of 10 could be auto-filtered before a maintainer ever sees them. That's
not a ban - it's triage.

Daniel Stenberg shouldn't have had to kill curl's bug bounty. He needed a
filter that could tell the difference between a real vulnerability report and
AI-generated noise. Risk classification solves this without shutting down the
program.
by Quarrelsome | 2026-02-06 16:41:30+00:00
That's a type of capitalism. Quakers built plenty of capitalistic entities that were primarily interested in profit but cared more for the long term with more of an eye on social and spiritual purpose. Extractive capitalism doesn't get to pretend its all of capitalism, we just assume that because its been active throughout our entire lifespan.

US hegemony has permitted and encouraged shareholder primacy, hostile takeovers and leveraged buyouts in order to facilitate the growth of its markets. However we'd be blinkered to assume that this is the only way capitalism can be. Its a choice we make and we deserve this outcome where we've enslaved a generation of children to be eye-balls for ad impressions for silicon valley startups.

We could make other choices but then we'd be personally less rich and see less growth. Do we really think those extra zeros in very few people's portfolio's are worth this macabre world we've created?
by alphazard | 2026-02-06 16:41:52+00:00
> That's not true at all. I make a good salary as a software engineer, I absolutely think I ought to be taxed a little more than I am, and would gladly pay that money to live in the better society I believe that would create.

This confusion is precisely why the middle class has less power than ever before.
You and many others have been sold a meme that your tax dollars are in service to a greater good, and you are a bad person if you recognize this to be a scam.

At an individual level, for each person in the middle class, 90% of the social programs they pay for are negative EV for them personally.
It would be better for each of them if they just kept what they earned, and didn't expect to get it back "later" or "when they really need it" whenever that is.
This is an empirical, testable claim, and the math will be slightly different for each person. You should check for yourself.

If everyone turned off the news, and totally ignored the messaging around taxes and government programs and just looked at their own cash inflows and outflows to/from the government, the middle class would retain far more power than they do.
by teekert | 2026-02-06 16:42:07+00:00
Me in the App Store:

Install this app that lets you fake wash cars and all sorts of things! (Instead of actually taking care of something).

Install Temu, shop like a millionaire (who gives a F about the planet! Just buys clothes you don’t even have to wash, just throw them away!)

Oh you’ve searched for Microsoft Authenticator? Here have some scam app that has been downloaded 541 times!

Steve would turn around in his grave, and I? I have lost all respect for this once great company and hope I never succumb to such temptation if my company gets successful.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2026-02-06 16:42:32+00:00
> The only way a wealth imbalance can occur is that someone sits on wealth and that it continues to compound. The top 1% have wealth greater than the bottom 95% of the population combined. I don't see why its more moral for someone to sit on investments than to have the money distributed to others to spend.

The critical insight is that this doesn't actually work. When we say Jeff Bezos is worth $200B, we don't mean that he has $200B of money that's locked up in a vault when it could be redistributed. We mean that there are a variety of productive businesses in the world - for Bezos, mostly Amazon - which he holds ownership claims to. The vast majority of wealth in the modern US isn't money, and can only be converted to money by finding people with lots of money and selling them the right to sit on the investments instead.
by KevinChasse | 2026-02-06 16:42:41+00:00
Nice work. One thing I've noticed with locally checking extensions against threat lists is that the verification process itself can become a target. Stateless, deterministic verification — where hashes or IDs are derived on-device and never stored centrally — reduces risk of supply chain or server-side compromise. It’s a subtle design point, but it can prevent a malicious actor from using the verification system itself to exfiltrate data.
by greatgib | 2026-02-06 16:42:44+00:00
My understanding of this is that it is a sandbox. Providing a common interface like if it was an OS for the program to run inside, but avoiding the program to use the OS directly.

What is unclear is if it uses its own common ABI or if you use the one of the host os.
I don't know why but from the project description I have a little bit of feeling that this is another vibe coded project.
by tcgv | 2026-02-06 16:42:44+00:00
> Then my mom wrote the following: “be careful not to get sucked up in the slime-machine going on here! Since you don’t care that much about money, they can’t buy you at least.”

I'm lucky to have parents with strong values. My whole life they've given me advice, on the small stuff and the big decisions. I didn't always want to hear it when I was younger, but now in my late thirties, I'm really glad they kept sharing it. In hidhsight I can see the life-experience / wisdom in it, and how it's helped and shaped me.
by surgical_fire | 2026-02-06 16:43:14+00:00
https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-the-taoiseach/collection...

According to official stats, 16% of Irish residents are citizens of other countries. Keep in mind that this number will exclude foreign nationals that got Irish citizenship through naturalization (and therefore became Irish citizens).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the...

Most recent numbers from the UK list 16% of the population being "foreign-born". While this number may be similar to Ireland, it still counts someone as foreign born even if they became UK citizens by naturalization.

Also, consider that one of the most prominent migration sources for the UK is of Irish nationals (that can live and work in the UK even after brexit). Irish culture is not too dissimilar to UK culture (especially considering that Northern Ireland is currently part of the UK).

If anything, Ireland experienced more foreign culture immigration than the UK, not less.

Your point is invalid.
by shevy-java | 2026-02-06 16:43:20+00:00
So, I think many will reach the conclusion that TikTok's design is
addictive. No problem here.

But, when I go to Youtube - owned by Google - and use those shorts (video shorts), I kind of "swipe down". Even on my desktop computer. This is also
addictive until I eventually stop.

Why isn't Google also fined? Where does the fine approach stop? I
am all for punishing corporations exploiting humans, so that is all
fine by me. But I don't quite understand the rationale. It is not
addictive like a drug, right? The behaviour solely origins via
visual feedback. That's different to e. g. taking LSD. It's a bit
strange to me. When is something addictive? Where is the boundary?
One could also say this is simply good design that gets people's
attention. Ads are also like that. Why are ads not made illegal?
I would be in favour of that. So why aren't ads made illegal? They
can contain addictive elements. They manipulate the viewer. They
try to sell an image. Why is that not forbidden?
by iamnothere | 2026-02-06 16:43:47+00:00
Are these out of town people, who surely can’t vote in local elections, somehow forcing the town to sell the forest to developers? If so then that is the problem. Local zoning shouldn’t have an impact on whether or not a city-owned forest (or a park, or vacant land) is forcibly sold and developed. That’s a different problem.

If someone already owns the forest, then they should get to build on their land.
by mihirbhagat15 | 2026-02-06 16:43:54+00:00
Location: North Wales, PA, USA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: MS Office, Python (numpy, matplotlib, scikit-learn, pandas), basic CAD (Siemens NX), basic C++

Resume/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zwtG3e_c7Lnv8nvs1B9x9c_kOFk...

Email: mihirbhagat15@gmail.com
Google has every advantage in AI. So why doesn't it lead?
by HardCodedBias | 2026-02-06 16:44:51+00:00
Google has an enormous number of advantages:

1. Unreal profit stream from previous businesses
2. A large collection of distinguished researchers
3. Their own accelerator hardware giving them a cost advantage for serving
4. More data than any other lab
5. Best distribution on the planet

Google’s advantages are real, but their research/model + product execution hasn’t consistently cleared the market test that matters: developer and power-user preference for getting real work done. Aggressive pricing, bundling and distribution keep them “in the conversation,” but it increasingly feels like they’re buying relevance rather than earning it.

timeline:

1. Bard -- laughable compared to the competition at the time
2. Gemini 1.0 -- an actual punchline, hard to recall a launch that hurt Google's brand more
3. Gemini 1.5 -- large context, no doubt. But not used for productivity menaifully
4. Gemini 2 -- flash was cheap which opened up ... OCR?
5. Gemini 2.5 -- close to frontier .. maybe.
6. Gemini 3.0 -- maybe frontier for some reasoning tasks, but doesn't really stay on task and isn't in the "agentic" discussion.
7. Post Gemini 3.0 -- OAI and Claude release at a breakneck speed claiming just about all of the "agentic" space, Gemini simply isn't in the conversation.
by KevinChasse | 2026-02-06 16:44:52+00:00
Nice catalog. One subtle thing I’ve found in building deterministic, stateless systems is that atomic filesystem and memory operations are the only way to safely compute or persist secrets without locks. Combining rename/link/O_EXCL patterns with ephemeral in-memory buffers ensures that sensitive data is never partially written to disk, which reduces race conditions and side-channel exposure in multi-process workflows.
by ndesaulniers | 2026-02-06 16:44:52+00:00
> extensions

Some were necessary (asm goto), some were not (nested functions, flexible array members not at the end of structs).

> UDB, bugs and all

Luckily, the kernel didn't intentionally rely on GCC specifics this way. Where it did unintentionally, we fixed the kernel sources properly with detailed commit messages explaining why.

> or were there any issues that might be considered as specific to the linux kernel?

Yes, https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues is our issue tracker. We use tags extensively to mark if we triage the issue to be kernel-side vs toolchain-side.

> Did you end up building a gcc compatability test suite as a part of this?

No, but some tricky cases LLVM got wrong were distilled from kernel sources using either:

- creduce
- cvise (my favorite)
- bugpoint
- llvm-reduce

and then added to LLVM's existing test suite. Many such tests were also simply manually written.

> Did the gcc project themselves have a regression/test suite that you were able to use as a starting point?

GCC and binutils have their own test suites. Folks in the LLVM community have worked on being able to test clang against GCC's test suite. I personally have never run GCC's test suite or looked at its sources.
by myrmidon | 2026-02-06 16:45:09+00:00
What exact vaccine are you talking about, first? Gardasil is actually approved for use not only in India itself, but also the US (and Europe), FYI.

Trials where also done both in the US, Europe and a bunch of other countries (see https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?quer...).

> So WHY did BMGF and PATH not take INFORMED CONSENT before giving a dangerous experimental drug? Why were the minor patients MISLED on what they were being given? Why was no medical insurance provided to the patients unsuspectingly undergoing this risky experiment?

First: Your only source that you keep citing found no harm in trial patients linked to the drug. What they did found was a shoddy consent process, with high likelihood driven by efforts to keep costs low.

What your own source primarily blames are local regulators allowing this.

> 6. Is it okay to avoid doing clinical trial in home country with consent, but ethical to do it in another nation on poor unsuspecting minors without consent?

First: absolutely yes. If it is ethical to do a trial in one country, it is ethical to do it elsewhere. Why wouldn't it?

Secondly, clinical trials on Gardasil were done in both the US and Europe before 2008 (see source above).

> I can throw more and more facts and links here. But you already know the game is up, don't you?

I just explained how the sources you cited so far are insufficient to sustain your conclusions and accusations.

But this sentence alone makes me highly suspicious that you have your view set in stone, and that you are cherrypicking and misreading facts to fit it.

This is foolish. You should always ask yourself what information would be necessary to change your view-- my personal conclusion is that nothing really could, because you want to sustain your witchhunt more than you want to know the truth.

Personally, I came into this somewhat curious if there truly was some hushed up medical disaster in India caused by the Gates foundation, but by now my answer is a pretty conclusive no.
by antonvs | 2026-02-06 16:45:25+00:00
There's still a benefit in terms of infrastructure reliability. Recovery times are faster, backups more reliable, etc. Basically, vendor managed is better than customer managed in most situations, assuming a competent vendor.

Also, if the cloud systems are architected properly before IT gets hold of them, then they tend to retain their good properties for a long time, especially if others are paying attention to e.g. gitops pull requests.

My current company ended up replacing its (small) operations team in order to get people with cloud expertise. We hired the new team for the skills we needed. It's worked out well.
by Revolution1120 | 2026-02-06 16:46:04+00:00
Since the Warring States period, China has been a purely Machiavellian ideological state. The United States has clearly been influenced by the Chinese. The US has received many Chinese immigrants, and Europe has also received a significant number. What's the difference? Those who choose the US are often driven by a desire to "make a name for themselves" and "build strong power," while those who choose Europe tend to be more inclined to "enjoy a comfortable life." Before I developed a deep-seated hatred for the Illuminati and Satanism, I never intended to endorse the former; I preferred the latter.
by itissid | 2026-02-06 16:47:30+00:00
When Claude does WebSearch it can delegate it to a sub agent which of it ran in the background will write the entire prompt on a local file and the results. If that happened, I would like to know what it gave you for that. It is always very interesting to know the underlying "recall" of such things. Because often it's garbage in garbage out.

The location might still be on your disk if you can pull up the original Claude JSOn and put it through some `jq` and see what pages it went through to give you and what it did.
by Jensson | 2026-02-06 16:47:55+00:00
> So you are saying I am not an average person because I have the willpower to simply not install the TikTok app or watch short form video on any platform?

Yes, since more people use Tiktok than not. The average person is also fat today, so this shouldn't come as a surprise to you.

People didn't grow fat and addicted to screens due to changes to themselves, its due to companies learning how to get people to eat more and watch more since the they make more money.
by D-Machine | 2026-02-06 16:48:01+00:00
It's not hard to scroll to the bottom of a page, IMO, but regardless, sites like you are mentioning have trash recipes in most cases.

I only go with resources where the text is actual documentation of their testing and/or the steps they've made, or other important details (e.g. SeriousEats, Whats Cooking America / America's Test Kitchen, AmazingRibs, Maangchi for Korean, vegrecipesofindia, Modernist series, etc) or look for someone with some credibility (e.g. Kenji Lopez, other chef on YouTube). In this case the text or surrounding content is valuable and should not be skipped. A plain recipe with no other details is generally only something an amateur would trust.

If you need a recipe, you don't know how to make it by definition, so you need more information to verify that the recipe is done soundly. There is also no reason to assume / trust that the LLMs summary / condensation of various recipes is good, because cooking isn't something where you can semantically condense or even mathematically combine various recipes together to get one good one. It just doesn't work like that, there is just one secret recipe that produces the best dish, and LLMs don't know how to judge quality of recipes, mostly.

I've never had an LLM produce something better or more trustworthy than any of those sites I mentioned, and have had it just make shit up when dealing with anything complicated (i.e. when trying to find the optimal ratio of starch to flour for Korean fried chicken, it just confidently claimed 50/50 is best, when this is obviously total trash to anyone who has done this).

The only time I've ever found LLMs useful for cooking is when I need to cook something obscure that only has information in a foreign language (e.g. icefish / noodlefish), or when I need to use it for search about something involving chemistry or technique (it once quickly found me a paper proving that baking soda can indeed be used to tenderize squid - but only after I prompted it further to get sources and go beyond its training data, because it first hallucinated some bullshit about baking soda only working on collagen or something, which is just not true at all).

So I would still never trust or use the quantities it gives me for any kind of cooking / dish without checking or having the sources, instead I would rely on my own knowledge and intuitions. This makes LLMs useless for cooking in about 99% of cases.
by T3OU-736 | 2026-02-06 16:48:10+00:00
Not quite filesystem navigation, but SGI IRIX's Performance CoPilot software had an IrixGL (OpenGL's precursor) UI for monitoring things like memory state, CPU/storage loads, etc.

The PCP is absolutely nowhere _near_ the graphical wizardry of the state of this app, and the overlay of executing code atop a given directory structure is quite beautiful (practicality be damned), but I can see the inspiration.

I do wonder if, on a modern Linux system with SELinix, this model (code accessing a directory) is actually closer to viable? SELinux's contexts/labels for subjects overlaying with the same for objects can, I imagine, be visualized. The normal access patterns would be way too overwhelming, I think - but exceptions/policy violations? :ponder:
by rvz | 2026-02-06 16:48:22+00:00
> Determinism is about producing the same output given the same input. In this sense, LLMs are fundamentally deterministic.

You cannot formally verifiy prose or the text that LLMs generates when attempting to compare what a compiler does. So even in this sense that is completely false.

No-one can guarrantee that the outputs will be 100% to what the instructions you are giving to the LLM, which is why you do not trust it. As long as it is made up of artificial neurons that predict the next token, it is fundamentally a stochastic model and unpredictable.

One can maliciously craft an input to mess up the network to get the LLM to produce a different output or outright garbage.

Compilers have reproducable builds and formal verification of their functionality. No such thing with LLMs exist. Thus, comparing LLMs to a compiler and suggesting that LLMs are 'fundamentally deterministic' or is even more than a compiler is completely absurd.
by latexr | 2026-02-06 16:48:40+00:00
> The end result isn't useful

Then, as your parent comment asked, is there value in it? $20K, which is more than the yearly minimum wage in several countries in Europe, was spent recreating a worse version of something we already have, just to see if it was possible, using a system which increases inequality and makes climate change—which is causing people to die—worse.
by norbert515 | 2026-02-06 16:48:40+00:00
Compiling to WASM is a huge reduction in size (as we don't need to ship a runtime etc. ourselfes anymore), but that requires some browser runtime. Dart specifically doesn't support standalone WASM (outside of the JS/browser context) yet.

I was able to get a WASM binary as small as ~234 KiB!
by PlatoIsADisease | 2026-02-06 16:48:50+00:00
Lets remove the word 'Jews' and say the government of Israel.

Israel LOVES when people mix up the two. I believe they even intentionally do it and promote it.

It forces non Israeli Jews to identify with the government of Israel, expanding their power beyond their boarders.

I genuinely feel bad for Jewish people. The government of Israel is happy to conflate the two at their expense.
by mrpandas | 2026-02-06 16:48:50+00:00
You're suggesting that it doesn't matter what children are exposed to / become addicted to because companies should be able to sell what children want? So there's no limits to that in your mind? Should every child be given cocaine because they ask for it? They're certainly given candy, right? You must believe there's no difference between cocaine and candy, I can assure you there is a difference and show you evidence to the contrary, if you're that dense.
by bri3d | 2026-02-06 16:49:03+00:00
It's a library that is linked to in place of an operating system - so whatever interface the OS provided (syscalls+ioctls, SMC methods, etc.) ends up linked / compiled into the application directly, and the "external interface" of the application becomes something different.

This is how most unikernels work; the "OS" is linked directly into the application's address space and the "external interface" becomes either hardware access or hypercalls.

Wine is also arguably a form of "library OS," for example (although it goes deeper than the most strict definition by also re-implementing a lot of the userland libraries).

So for example with this project, you could take a Linux application's codebase, recompile it linked to LiteBox, and run it on SEV-SNP. Or take an OP-TEE TA, link it to LiteBox, and run it on Linux.

The notable thing here is that it tries to cut the interface in the middle down to an intermediate representation that's supposed to be sandbox-able - ie, instead of auditing and limiting hundreds of POSIX syscalls like you might with a traditional kernel capabilities system, you're supposed to be able to control access to just a few primitives that they're condensed down to in the middle.