MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ActorNightly | 2026-02-05 20:25:48+00:00
>At scale (like comma.ai), it's probably cheaper. But until then it's a long term cost optimization with really high upfront capital expenditure and risk.

The issue with comma.ai is that the company is HEAVILY burdened with Geohotz ideals, despite him no longer even being on the board. I used to be very much into his streams and he rants about it plenty. A large reason of why they run their own datacenter is that they ideologically refuse to give money to AWS or Google (but I guess Microsoft passes their non woke test).

Which is quite hilarious to me because they live in a very "woke" state and complain about power costs in the blog post. They could easily move to Wyoming or Montana and with low humidity and colder air in the winter run their servers more optimally.
by forrestthewoods | 2026-02-05 20:26:02+00:00
I don’t think this is even remotely true in practice.

I honestly I have no idea what benchmarks are benchmarking. I don’t write JavaScript or do anything remotely webdev related.

The idea that all models have very close performance across all domains is a moderately insane take.

At any given moment the best model for my actual projects and my actual work varies.

Quite honestly Opus 4.5 is proof that benchmarks are dumb. When Opus 4.5 released no one was particularly excited. It was better with some slightly large numbers but whatever. It took about a month before everyone realized “holy shit this is a step function improvement in usefulness”. Benchmarks being +15% better on SWE bench didn’t mean a damn thing.
by MagicMoonlight | 2026-02-05 20:27:01+00:00
Right, but is that a like for like comparison?

AWS has redundant data centres across the world and within each region. A file in S3 will never be lost, even if you store it for a thousand years.

What happens if your city has a tornado and your data centre gets hit? Is your company now dead?

And how much do you spend on all these sysadmins? 200k each? If you’re saving 20k/month by paying 100k/month in salaries, you aren’t saving anything.
by xphos | 2026-02-05 20:27:15+00:00
I think its Copyright rules make people feel this way. US copyright last for author life + 70 years. That makes no sense, not only will the author be dead but there children are likely to be dead before the those terms end. Corp duration is 95 years since publication. Why? Are they saying they will be so unable to innovate and generate new content that unless that last 95 years they cannot make profit. I think there revenue positions beg to differ.

Could you not make enough money in the first 15 years to justify? We don't let other professions profit for 15 years after they do the work (except landlords). People can touch there pipes after there installed. They can read and lend a book after they read it. Digital stroage is essentially free but makes air tight copyright and that is problematic.

It's weird that we give such board lasting complete ownership of the collective stories of society. Maybe the correct timeline is 15 years or 30 years but Life + 70 seems like it way overvalues the creative works and I think steals money from new creative works by making consumers choice between the "classics" and the new. This is not to say you cannot charge for TV service where you store and distribute but that is a service rendered. If you want to do it yourself why is the law so protective here? To me it feels like society is selling out its rights for higher marginal returns for a very small segment of people.
by nickstinemates | 2026-02-05 20:27:49+00:00
You write a generic architecture document on how you want your code base to be organized, when to use pattern x vs pattern y, examples of what that looks like in your code base, and you encode this as a skill.

Then, in your prompt you tell it the task you want, then you say, supervise the implementation with a sub agent that follows the architecture skill. Evaluate any proposed changes.

There are people who maximize this, and this is how you get things like teams. You make agents for planning, design, qa, product, engineering, review, release management, etc. and you get them to operate and coordinate to produce an outcome.

That's what this is supposed to be, encoded as a feature instead of a best practice.
by commandlinefan | 2026-02-05 20:27:53+00:00
This is just normal par-for-the-course business chasing an expanding market. Entertainment companies, in particular, _always_ focus on the youth market. When I was a teenager, record companies were obsessed with what teenagers liked: that's just the nature of the business. Headline is deliberately misleading. The (few) references in here to "addiction" are negative; suggesting ways to reach the youth market _without_ risking addictive behavior.
by ghosty141 | 2026-02-05 20:28:45+00:00
I'm personally 100% convinced (assuming prices stay reasonable) that the Codex approach is here to stay.

Having a human in the loop eliminates all the problems that LLMs have and continously reviewing small'ish chunks of code works really well from my experience.

It saves so much time having Codex do all the plumbing so you can focus on the actual "core" part of a feature.

LLMs still (and I doubt that changes) can't think and generalize. If I tell Codex to implement 3 features he won't stop and find a general solution that unifies them unless explicitly told to. This makes it kinda pointless for the "full autonomy" approach since effecitly code quality and abstractions completely go down the drain over time. That's fine if it's just prototyping or "throwaway" scripts but for bigger codebases where longevity matters it's a dealbreaker.
by jsnell | 2026-02-05 20:29:01+00:00
Did you actually look at these?

> https://github.com/jyn514/saltwater

This is just a frontend. It uses Cranelift as the backend. It's missing some fairly basic language features like bitfields and variadic functions. And if I'm reading the documentation right, it requires all the source code to be in a single file...

> https://github.com/ClementTsang/rustcc

This will compile basically no real-world code. The only supported data type is "int".

> https://github.com/maekawatoshiki/rucc

This is just a frontend. It uses LLVM as the backend.
by nostrademons | 2026-02-05 20:29:01+00:00
FWIW both of these books were written about western societies. 1984 was about Orwell’s experience writing propaganda for the BBC during WW2. Oceania is explicitly modeled on the U.S. + Britain; “air strip one” is his tongue-in-cheek name for the British isles. Fahrenheit 451 is based on the second red scare and McCarthyism in the U.S. It’s explicitly set in America, and the inspiration for it was actual calls to ban books in the U.S.

They not only could happen here, they did happen here. It’s a testament to the power of propaganda that people view them as a hypothetical rather than as a lightly fictionalized documentary where the countries were changed to prevent the authors from going to jail.
by mikkupikku | 2026-02-05 20:29:46+00:00
Much if not all of Europe already has ISP level bans. If they can use those bans against football streaming sites, why not Facebook?

And actually I think just banning them from conducting any business, accepting payments/etc, would be mostly sufficient. They could continue to operate at a loss, but it would put American corps at such a disadvantage that domestic social media might be able to compete, and enforcing regulations against domestic companies should be far more feasible.
by loudouncodes | 2026-02-05 20:29:47+00:00
I don't expect amazon to have my best interests at heart. To the contrary, this entire post is about how their actions dont have their best interests at heart. When I pause a purchase because of this crap, I might not ever return to pick it up.

I never expect a faceless company to care about me. I do expect that when I willingly align my interests with theirs, things should get easier.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2026-02-05 20:29:50+00:00
Most likely we would do a closer-than-normal integration of Cardinal ....

https://cardinal.kx.studio/

You can already load Cardinal as a plugin and get the full scope of is power(s) (or VCV Rack if you paid for the "pro" version). You just don't get the GUI "integrated" into Ardour, and its tied to a specific track.

We might do this via I/O plugins (an existing Ardour feature), which would make the inputs & outputs of Cardinal be just like your hardware. Lots of details to that sort of design, however.

There is also PlugData which could theoretically be handled in a similar way.

What we will not try to do is to implement Yet Another Software Modular Environment ourselves. Cardinal/Rack (or even PD) are approximately infinitely better than anything we could or would do.
by crazygringo | 2026-02-05 20:29:52+00:00
> Or creativity — not recombination of known patterns, but the kind of leap where you redefine the problem space itself.

Have you tried actually prompting this? It works.

They can give you lots of creative options about how to redefine a problem space, with potential pros and cons of different approaches, and then you can further prompt to investigate them more deeply, combine aspects, etc.

So many of the higher-level things people assume LLM's can't do, they can. But they don't do them "by default" because when someone asks for the solution to a particular problem, they're trained to by default just solve the problem the way it's presented. But you can just ask it to behave differently and it will.

If you want it to think critically and question all your assumptions, just ask it to. It will. What it can't do is read your mind about what type of response you're looking for. You have to prompt it. And if you want it to be super creative, you have to explicitly guide it in the creative direction you want.
by V_Shukla | 2026-02-05 20:30:06+00:00
Interesting direction, as more parts of the software lifecycle become automated, content production workflows seem to be heading the same way. We’re seeing teams move toward generation pipelines where visuals, marketing assets, and campaign creatives are produced programmatically alongside product releases. Over time, these pipelines will likely be treated less like “creative work” and more like build systems, deterministic, repeatable, and version-controlled.
by RiverCrochet | 2026-02-05 20:30:17+00:00
> And people are free to, even under the duress of copyright. What's the problem there?

I assume a free society should operate with the least duress, because duress is "compulsion by threat or violence; coercion" which actively restricts activity as opposed to merely ignoring or not participating in it.

If someone would be free to create the thing without copyright duress, it is better even if delayed, because it was done with the least restriction of freedom.

The last movie I saw was Disney's Frozen which is based on a Hans Christen Andersen story currently in the public domain. It was good, but not "life of the author + 75 years" good.
by rawgabbit | 2026-02-05 20:30:19+00:00
Pseudo-intellectual aka bullshitter.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pseudo-intellectu...

computation does not involve defending against interception, a key area for biological systems,. He is confused about software/programming/hacking. Hacking absolutely involves intercepting messages e.g., man in the middle attack. I have no idea what he thinks biological systems is; does he think that bacteria/viruses intercept chemical messages that our brain sends to different organs in our body?

if a predator breaks the code, it usually can accumulate its preys free energy at a discount. Free energy -- yuck -- that is what happens when scientists give a terrible name to "usable work" or "usable energy". Free energy is about the usable work you can get out of a e.g., coal powered steam engine. He is mixing physics/thermodynamics with biology.
by mcirsta | 2026-02-05 20:30:44+00:00
I have just release a new browser, Wisp.
It's based on Netsurf but with serveral improvements.
Windows 64 bit and 32 bit are supported and also Linux using Qt6. Other frontends and combinations are available but not tested.
Netsurf had certain limitations for modern web page and while I plant to slowly try and modernize it there are still lots of shortcomings and bugs, consider this alpha.
Javascript is for now just some stubs based on QuickJS-NG.

https://wispbrowser.com/
by halapro | 2026-02-05 20:30:44+00:00
If this is true, it's insane that this would work:

- why does CWS respond to cross-site requests?

- why is chrome sending the credentials (or equivalent) in these requests?

- why is the button enabled server-side and not via JS? Google must be confident in knowing the exact and latest state of your installed extensions enough to store it on their servers, I guess
by V_Shukla | 2026-02-05 20:31:08+00:00
Data realism tends to be the quiet differentiator in generation systems. Once base model capability becomes commoditized, the biggest performance gap often comes from dataset curation, labeling quality, and how closely the training data reflects real deployment conditions. In visual generation workflows, even small improvements in dataset realism can significantly reduce the “synthetic look” that usually breaks usability in production contexts.
by moralestapia | 2026-02-05 20:31:19+00:00
I think that ... given one specific topic, few people understand it while the vast majority is completely oblivious to its workings.

So they then hear someone who speaks like that, with a fast cadence and Andrew Tate's "Confidence" TM, and are inclined to think "yeah, the guy looks like he knows what he's talking about".

But for people who have minimal knowledge about the thing, it's evident that said person is just stupid.
by toomuchtodo | 2026-02-05 20:31:20+00:00
How Record-Low Fertility Rates Foreshadow Budget Strain - https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2025/0... - July 8th, 2025

appears to be a superior reference, found via Birthrates Are Down. That Can Be a Sign of Progress - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46904623 - February 2026
by krystofbe | 2026-02-05 20:31:23+00:00
I did some debugging on this today. The results are... sobering.

Memory comparison of AI coding CLIs (single session, idle):

| Tool | Footprint | Peak | Language |
|-------------|-----------|--------|---------------|
| Codex | 15 MB | 15 MB | Rust |
| OpenCode | 130 MB | 130 MB | Go |
| Claude Code | 360 MB | 746 MB | Node.js/React |

That's a 24x to 50x difference for tools that do the same thing: send text to an API.

vmmap shows Claude Code reserves 32.8 GB virtual memory just for the V8 heap, has 45% malloc fragmentation, and a peak footprint of 746 MB that never gets released, classic leak pattern.

On my 16 GB Mac, a "normal" workload (2 Claude sessions + browser + terminal) pushes me into 9.5 GB swap within hours. My laptop genuinely runs slower with Claude Code than when I'm running local LLMs.

I get that shipping fast matters, but building a CLI with React and a full Node.js runtime is an architectural choice with consequences. Codex proves this can be done in 15 MB. Every Claude Code session costs me 360+ MB, and with MCP servers spawning per session, it multiplies fast.
by surajkumar5050 | 2026-02-05 20:31:36+00:00
I think two things are getting conflated in this discussion.

First: marginal inference cost vs total business profitability. It’s very plausible (and increasingly likely) that OpenAI/Anthropic are profitable on a per-token marginal basis, especially given how cheap equivalent open-weight inference has become. Third-party providers are effectively price-discovering the floor for inference.

Second: model lifecycle economics. Training costs are lumpy, front-loaded, and hard to amortize cleanly. Even if inference margins are positive today, the question is whether those margins are sufficient to pay off the training run before the model is obsoleted by the next release. That’s a very different problem than “are they losing money per request”.

Both sides here can be right at the same time: inference can be profitable, while the overall model program is still underwater. Benchmarks and pricing debates don’t really settle that, because they ignore cadence and depreciation.

IMO the interesting question isn’t “are they subsidizing inference?” but “how long does a frontier model need to stay competitive for the economics to close?”
by Rperry2174 | 2026-02-05 20:31:45+00:00
yeah I'm mostly just talking about how they're framing it:
"Claude Opus 4.6 is designed for longer-running, agentic work — planning complex tasks more carefully and executing them with less back-and-forth from the user"

I guess its also quite interesting that how they are framing these projects are opposite from how people currently perceive them and I guess that may be a conscious choice...
by cal_dent | 2026-02-05 20:32:02+00:00
Housing issues and the second order effects from it is the most important issue in most developed economiss in my view.

The focus on just building as the solution is so limited. Redistribution of economic and cultural activity away from concentrated locations and a rethink of the credit environment around housing has to be a focal part of housing conversation. You can either have affordable housing or housing as an investment vehicle (store of wealth) but you can't have both.
by kazinator | 2026-02-05 20:32:17+00:00
Here is an interesting video by the channel DylanTalksTone.

Dylan cut in half a Fishman Fluence guitar pickup. These pickups have coils that are made using PCB traces. There are something like 26 layers for each of the two coils, and each layer contains a spiral of around that same number of windings.

The exposed copper ends in the cross-section make up a rectangular grid where you can count the rows and columns visually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uih75f4now

Around 7:04 is where the first shot of the cross section is shown.

It is way fewer windings than in a traditional passive pickup. By itself, the signal transfer would result in a very trebly, tinny tone. The active circuitry does all the tone shaping to get various pickup sounds.

The PCB process ensures a lot of consistency. The traces look wide enough such that the DC resistance of the coils is negligible and the accuracy of the printed circuit should produce a very consistent inductance from one unit to the next. Plus at such a low inductance, it won't even matter.
by FrustratedMonky | 2026-02-05 20:32:22+00:00
So, not, not allowed.

"The concept of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources originated with the academic discipline of historiography. The point was to give historians a handy way to indicate how close the source of a piece of information was to the actual events.[a]

Importantly, the concept developed to deal with "events", rather than ideas or abstract concepts. A primary source was a source that was created at about the same time as the event, regardless of the source's contents. So while a dictionary is an example of a tertiary source, an ancient dictionary is actually a primary source—for the meanings of words in the ancient world."

"All sources are primary for something

Every source is the primary source for something, whether it be the name of the author, its title, its date of publication, and so forth. For example, no matter what kind of book it is, the copyright page inside the front of a book is a primary source for the date of the book's publication. Even if the book would normally be considered a secondary source, if the statement that you are using this source to support is the date of its own publication, then you are using that book as a primary source."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_usin...
by cue_the_strings | 2026-02-05 20:32:23+00:00
As I've said before, Matrix really is the only viable open source solution for in-company communication.

Every other solution (Zulip / Mattermost / whatever) is too risky, they could easily bait-and-switch you like Gitlab did, by moving important features to different tiers, or engage in other shenanigans afforded by the open core model.

Matrix has a bad reputation because it used to be downright terrible (first time I tried it, in like 2018-2019), but is a lot better now.
by nxobject | 2026-02-05 20:32:38+00:00
I wonder whether it's easier at small liberal arts colleges – my alma mater has a second-semester course teaching SML, Go, and PDP-11 assembler.

The issue is that "CS 110" gets used by a lot of STEM students in other departments that require computational methods and statistical tools, and that require you get to a CS course taught by actual computer scientists. I don't necessarily think that it's a bad thing that you'll need CS 101 before a higher-level biology elective that needs R!
by rcxdude | 2026-02-05 20:32:39+00:00
A place I worked at used it as part of an interview question (it wasn't some pass/fail thing to get it 100% correct, and was partly a jumping off point to a different question). This was in a city where nearly everyone uses bicycles as everyday transportation. It was surprising how many supposedly mechanical-focused people who rode a bike everyday, even rode a bike to the interview, would draw a bike that would not work.
by belter | 2026-02-05 20:33:03+00:00
A yes PWC :-) That is what I would expect :-))

I just hope the divine powers of Luca Pacioli might help you, before is too late. A whole set of accounting bodies and real world disasters expressly advise against its use and spreadsheets in general.

You even have dedicated pages...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spreadsheet_mistakes

EuSPRIG Horror Stories - Spreadsheet mistakes
https://eusprig.org/research-info/horror-stories/

For example the (ICAEW) UK chartered accountants explicitly warn auditors. And
research has shown that around 94% in these contexts contain errors:

"Errors in Operational Spreadsheets" - https://faculty.tuck.dartmouth.edu/images/uploads/faculty/se...

Also... Excel does not use exact decimal arithmetic. It stores numbers in IEEE-754 binary floating point,
which cannot precisely represent many decimal values used in accounting. Microsoft documents this explicitly:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/office/troubleshoot/excel/...

It also only preserves 15 significant digits and silently zeroes anything beyond that: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/excel-specificati...

So this means:

– decimal values are approximated

– rounding errors accumulate

– large financial values lose precision

– results depend on formula structure and rounding order

That alone disqualifies it as Accounting ledger. Historically you have lots of
famous examples of bad outcomes of treating Excel as financial infrastructure...

The JPMorgan London Whale - $6B loss
A flawed Excel risk model and copy paste errors understated risk and helped produce multi-billion losses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_JPMorgan_Chase_trading_lo...

TransAlta energy trading — $24M loss
Simple spreadsheet row misalignment in bidding model cost aprox 10% of the company profit.
https://www.lumeer.io/spreadsheet-for-project-management/

Fannie Mae - $1.3B reporting error
Wrong spreadsheet formula caused more than $1B accounting misstatement.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/oct/28/microsoft...
https://archive.is/w1cjj

Fidelity Magellan — $2.6B error
Missing minus sign in a spreadsheet overstated capital gains by billions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spreadsheet_mistakes

Large audit firms also publish entire risk frameworks, ( and I am sure PWC does also...) explaining why uncontrolled spreadsheets are a major source of financial misstatement in the first place.
by dkersten | 2026-02-05 20:33:18+00:00
Just anecdotally, each release seems to be buggier than the last.

To me, their claim that they are vibe coding Claude code isn’t the flex they think it is.

I find it harder and harder to trust anthropic for business related use and not just hobby tinkering. Between buggy releases, opaque and often seemingly glitches rate limits and usage limits, and the model quality inconsistency, it’s just not something I’d want to bet a business on.