MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2026-02-12 17:50:12+00:00
Tariffs can be used to support domestic production. But not with how Trump is implementing them. Pointing out that tariffs can be used this way is ignoring what's actually happening.

> its a risk to manufacturers because the whole thing could get reversed after an election.

It's a risk to manufacturers when Trump might wildly change tariffs for a country / set of goods / whatever, up or down, at any time, because someone said something he didn't like somewhere, or some other non-economic rationalization.

The instability and lack of cohesive direction mean it's impossible for manufacturers to respond to tariffs with investment even within Trump's term.
by charcircuit | 2026-02-12 17:50:15+00:00
>Why should I bother to read something someone else couldn't be bothered to write?

This take is baffling to me when I see it repeated. It's like saying why should people use Windows if Bill Gates did not write every line of it himself. We won't be able to see into Bill's mind. Why should you read a book if they couldn't bother to write it properly and have an editor come in and fix things.

The main purpose of a creative work is not seeing intimately into the creator's mind. And the idea that it is only people who don't care who use LLMs is wrong.
by hackyhacky | 2026-02-12 17:50:19+00:00
> The intent is to make that stuff more expensive so we can compete.

This would seem to be an admission that the domestic product is inferior, otherwise why would it be necessary to burden the import with tariffs?

In any case, if that's the intent, it's not working out for fairly predictable reasons. Lots of imported goods have no domestic equivalent. The factories required to make them require years of investment, which is not forthcoming, because the longevity of these tariffs is highly dubious and the government is doing nothing to encourage business development. And even if there were new factories, they would have to import machines and raw materials, which are of course tariffed, driving up the cost of domestic goods, and defeating the alleged purpose of the tariffs.

There's no just explanation that can make the tariffs look useful to anyone. Like everything from this administration, it's about the appearance of action.
by FuriouslyAdrift | 2026-02-12 17:50:21+00:00
I work at a manufacturing supplier (packaging and logistics) and our business has been on fire since the trade war kicked off. Pre-COVID we were at ~$25MM yearly and now we are $150MM+ and growing steadily.

We just bought a million sq ft building (that was an old RCA plant) and millions in new machinery to keep up.

We are only a regional player, too.
Show HN: Timefence – Python lib to detect temporal data leak in ML training
by Emojizing | 2026-02-12 17:50:22+00:00
Hey folks. I built Timefence because I kept hitting the same bug when building ML training sets. You LEFT JOIN feature tables to labels and some rows end up with feature timestamps after the prediction event so the model trains on future data. Took me forever to debug the first time because nothing errors out.

Timefence audits your dataset for any rows where feature_time > label_time, and can rebuild it with point-in-time correct joins. Built on DuckDB, handles 1M labels × 10 features in ~12s. Also has a --strict flag for CI.

pip install timefence
timefence quickstart churn-example && cd churn-example
timefence audit data/train_LEAKY.parquet

MIT licensed. Happy to answer any questions you might have.
by steveBK123 | 2026-02-12 17:50:26+00:00
The whole thing could get reversed on a daily basis as this admin commits massive graft, carving out loopholes & rollbacks for their buddies companies/industries/etc..

Not to mention the incoherence that one day its a tool to bring jobs back, the next day its just a negotiation tactic so they get reduced/dropped on a country by country basis over and over.
by arcfour | 2026-02-12 17:50:46+00:00
There are a number of Microsoft-signed drivers that have vulnerabilities in them that can be exploited allowing kernel-level access (memory read/write primitives, etc.) - they would load fine under Secure Boot - and, indeed, malware already has exploited this before.

This does make cheating harder, and does make it a cat-and-mouse game where signatures are revoked and they move on to a new driver, but the fact of the matter is - there are a ton of drivers out there and some of them will always be vulnerable in some way. To this end, I think focusing on client-side anti-cheat at all is a lost cause.
by daft_pink | 2026-02-12 17:51:02+00:00
I think as soon as you find out that the ammo can be purchased by the public at gun stores, the news story becomes less interesting, because the implication was that the US govt or some bad actor employee of the US govt is supplying the ammunition.

The idea that gun products that can be freely purchased throughout America are ending up in Mexico, where you can literally walk across the border into Mexico through a turnstyle and they just have a sign that says if you have any of the following contraband please walk to our office located here instead of border officers actively reviewing each person walking through at official border crossings.

It’s not very shocking at all.
by harperlee | 2026-02-12 17:51:09+00:00
I love clojure but the points still stand, kind-of.

- There is Calva for VS Code but the community default is emacs and cider
- How many programs in apt or brew are written in clojure? I'd concede that the community is great and focused on productivity, but it's so niche that you don't see much work out there made in clojure, and there is also a vestigial lisp sentiment to prefer building your own library from scratch instead of contributing to a standard library, which spreads the efforts of a small community too much
- Third one you need to mutate it a little bit: clojure is opinionated instead of having "so many ways", but its opinions, while great, are foreign to most programmers
by tialaramex | 2026-02-12 17:51:19+00:00
Right, and sugar taxes are an example of a tax where there's a clear objective. To avoid the tax, don't put sugar in things if you can help it. Result: Products which had sugar because it was cheaper don't any more because of the tax, it's not cheaper now.

These tariffs have a huge red flag because there's no objective. Onshoring? No, wait, we got a new deal the tariffs are removed. New trade deals? No, wait, somebody wrote a mean Tweet about Donald so the tariffs are back and the deal is off.
by gordonhart | 2026-02-12 17:51:22+00:00
For better or worse, a lot of people seem to disagree with this, and believe that humans reading code is only necessary at the margins, similarly to debugging compiler outputs. Personally I don't believe we're there yet (and may not get there for some time) but this is where comments like GP's come from: human legibility is a secondary or tertiary concern and it's fine to give it up if the code meets its requirements and can be maintained effectively by LLMs.
by mandeepj | 2026-02-12 17:51:23+00:00
> Everyone has been getting sold that these tariffs are on "China" or fill-in-the-blank on what country we're "getting" with them.

Just like Mexico will pay for the wall?

> The reality is that's a fundamental misunderstanding of what a tariff is.

Nope! It's a politician talk! People fall for lies whenever they are sold wrapped in a label of "cheap prices".
by re-thc | 2026-02-12 17:51:24+00:00
> No, as in the entire PC market for the past two decades

Is this why AI is winning? People aren't doing better. You pick a random stat and somehow make it support what you're arguing.

The link says DESKTOP. I said LAPTOP. Laptop after M1. Why are we going back 2 decades? They have >15% registered as unknown. Sure, "accurate". Cough cough. It doesn't differentiate new or old and IF (the original discussion) that Apple is gaining market share and NEW sales.

> and they're not gaining very quickly

This is just as bad as speculative stock trading e.g. with software stocks. They're losing to AI. Oh no. Dump. Oh they're actually not too bad. Buy it back. Apple doesn't have AI. Sell. Apple doesn't have AI. Buy. Are you ok?
by Someone1234 | 2026-02-12 17:51:51+00:00
So how did you identify this as a breach? I'm struggling to find this credible, and you've yet to provide specifics.

Right now it comes across as "just enough knowledge to be dangerous"-levels, meaning: you've seen things, don't understand those things, and draw an unfounded conclusion.

Feel free to provide specifics, like log entry lines, that show this breach.
by fresh_broccoli | 2026-02-12 17:51:54+00:00
To understand why it's happening, just read the downvoted comments siding with the slanderer, here and in the previous thread.

Some people feel they're entitled to being open-source contributors, entitled to maintainers' time. They don't understand why the maintainers aren't bending over backwards to accomodate them. They feel they're being unfairly gatekept out of open-source for no reason.

This sentiment existed before AI and it wasn't uncommon even here on Hacker News. Now these people have a tool that allows them to put in even less effort to cause even more headache for the maintainters.

I hope open-source survives this somehow.
by bootsmann | 2026-02-12 17:51:54+00:00
https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/2016/us-tire...

Ratio of 3 jobs lost per tire job saved.

> The thousand of hours labor, the material to source the widget, the real estate for the factory, the transportation now all occurs overseas.

This frees up massive amounts of capital that is more effectively spent playing to Americas strengths, this isn’t a zero sum game.
by VirusNewbie | 2026-02-12 17:52:12+00:00
> would assume (hope) that code review practices haven't changed inside of Microsoft or Google.

Google engineer perspective:

I'm actually thinking code reviews are one of the lowest hanging fruits for AI here. We have AI reviewers now in addition to the required human reviews, but it can do anything from be overly defensive at times to finding out variables are inconsistently named (helpful) to sometimes finding a pretty big footgun that might have otherwise been missed.

Even if it's not better than a huamn reviwer, the faster turnaround time for some small % of potential bugs is a big productivity boost.
by NitpickLawyer | 2026-02-12 17:52:31+00:00
> Trouble is some benchmarks only measure horse power.

IMO it's the other way around. Benchmarks only measure applied horse power on a set plane, with no friction and your elephant is a point sphere. Goog's models have always punched over what benchmarks said, in real world use @ high context. They don't focus on "agentic this" or "specialised that", but the raw models, with good guidance are workhorses. I don't know any other models where you can throw lots of docs at it and get proper context following and data extraction from wherever it's at to where you'd need it.
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-02-12 17:52:34+00:00
Ranked choice voting sucks anyway, and that section doesn't seem to prohibit score voting. You're not "voting" for more than one candidate, you're scoring all of them; you're not "ranking" candidates, you're scoring them (and you could e.g. give two candidates the same score); you're not reallocating votes from one candidate to another, you're electing the candidate with the highest score.

It's also not clear that bill is going to pass. It seems full of other things Democrats have a major incentive to filibuster.

It's not even clear that Republicans have any reason to prevent score voting. One of the failure modes of ranked choice is that you can end up with more radical candidates winning where one party already had a majority because it allows the majority party to run a radical candidate next to a moderate one, but then if the radical candidate gets more votes from their own party, the race becomes the radical vs. the minority party after the majority party's moderate candidate got excluded, and then the radical candidate wins. They saw what happened in New York and didn't like it. But Democrats should have exactly the same concern -- what do you think that does if you adopted it in the South -- and in general ranked choice makes polarization worse. Ranked choice actually does suck.

Whereas score voting does something else. If you run a radical, a moderate from the major party and a minority party, the moderate from the majority party wins because there is no run off election, they just got the highest score because they scored better among the minority party than the radical and better among the majority party than the minority party candidate. And the most likely candidate to win is the one that best represents the entire district, which reduces polarization, and that's something everybody should want.
by fmbb | 2026-02-12 17:52:47+00:00
I don’t think there is a snowball’s chance in hell that either of these two scenarios will happen:

1. Human principals pay for autonomous AI agents to represent them but the human accepts blame and lawsuits.
2. Companies selling AI products and services accept blame and lawsuits for actions agents perform on behalf of humans.

Likely realities:

1. Any victim will have to deal with the problems.
2. Human principals accept responsibility and don’t pay for the AI service after enough are burned by some ”rogue” agent.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-02-12 17:53:14+00:00
Things are going to get weird when the automatons become sophisticated enough to pull off identity theft while unsupervised.

Putting a brick on the gas pedal is obviously negligent. Whereas it is not so obvious that running a random script from github that spins up an agent with access to your home folder could lead to real world financial crimes.

Truly a strange world we're headed for.
by latexr | 2026-02-12 17:54:09+00:00
> Rob Pike had the correct response when spammed by a clanker.

Source and HN discussion, for those unfamiliar:

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:vsgr3rwyckhiavgqzdcuzm6i/po...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392115
by netsharc | 2026-02-12 17:54:09+00:00
Tragedy of the attention-economy. Ad networks gives you money if you placed their ads on your site, so people got machines to generate fluff to earn some money. Now all search result is just bullshit pages to capture your attention until the banner ad..

A simple query like "Ford Focus wheel nut torque" gives pages with blah blah like:

> Overview Of Lug Nut Torque For Ford Focus

> The Ford Focus uses specific lug nut torque to keep wheels secure while allowing safe driving dynamics. Correct torque helps prevent rotor distortion, brake heat transfer issues, and wheel detachment. While exact values can vary by model year, wheel size, and nut type, applying the proper torque is essential for all Ford Focus owners.

And the site probably has this text for each car model.

Somehow the ways the ad industry destroyed the Internet got very varied...
by SunshineTheCat | 2026-02-12 17:54:13+00:00
That is one of the given reasons, but as with everything else about these tariffs, it's nonsensical:

1. It isn't now, nor has it ever been, the role of the federal government to dictate what types of jobs exist in the private sector.
2. Even if this was the end goal, making it easier and more affordable to manufacture in the US would be far better for all parties involved rather than brute forcing it through arbitrary taxes.
by yellowapple | 2026-02-12 17:54:22+00:00
Is there any evidence of SUSE using Teams internally besides that one “We'll give you three minutes back, as they say on Teams meetings!” remark? I don't interpret that remark to necessary mean SUSE themselves use Teams for internal chats; for all we know SUSE could be using some FOSS system internally while using the Teams instances of external orgs they work with, and that latter case being the basis for the remark.
by neilwilson | 2026-02-12 17:54:31+00:00
What has been the impact on the distribution in the firm. Have more staff been hired, have more supply contracts been handed out, have worker bonuses increases or has it all flowed to the bottom line?

This is the other side of tariffs that few discuss. It may put import prices up, but it also increases the domestic flow of income.

Which means that those who rely solely on imports pay the cost and those who make the domestic supply get an increase in income as an offset.
by tantalor | 2026-02-12 17:54:33+00:00
> calling this discrimination and accusing me of prejudice

So what if it is? Is AI a protected class? Does it deserve to be treated like a human?

Generated content should carry disclaimers at top and bottom to warn people that it was not created by humans, so they can "ai;dr" and move on.

The responsibility should not be on readers to research the author of everything now, to check they aren't a bot.
by walterbell | 2026-02-12 17:54:33+00:00
Please feel free to ignore this sub-thread. I'm merely happy that Apple finally shipped an iPad that would last (for me! no claims about anyone else!) more than a few weeks without falling over. If you want to know more about iOS forensics, try Corellium VMs or QEMU emulation of iPhone 11, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44258670
by wiseleo | 2026-02-12 17:55:22+00:00
Right... So how far are we from creating SIBYL? Watch that show (Psycho-Pass) to see what happens when AI starts judging humanity at scale and who is behind that "AI".

More to the point, this decade is going to set some scary precedents that would need to be overturned. Would AI know which case law carries more weight and which was purely politically motivated with no basis in reality?
by ArchieScrivener | 2026-02-12 17:55:29+00:00
Oh so now government data from the institution under massive pressure from the administration for politicizing interest rates is believable because it reinforces your preconceived notions?

Typical. 1) No, tariffs are not always paid by the end consumer, producer margins collapse also. 2) If the end consumer can pay increased prices then the previous price wasn't properly efficient. 3) Short term vs Long term matters most in the actual outcome of prices as domestic competition takes time to build. 4) Interest rates are being kept high to produce a reportable outcome.

End the Fed, then lets see where we are. Otherwise, stop trusting banks because you hate the used car salesman.
by philipallstar | 2026-02-12 17:55:50+00:00
As indicated in the RFC, it uses another RFC[0] to define those words. Here's the relevant excerpt from that one:

3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

[0] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119
by co_king_3 | 2026-02-12 17:55:51+00:00
> Users seem to be persistently flagkilling their comments.

If you express an anti-AI opinion (without neutering it by including "but actually it's soooooooo good at writing shitty code though") they will silence you.

The astroturfing is out of control.

AI firms and their delusional supporters are not at all interested in any sort of discussion.

These people and bot accounts will not take no for an answer.
by deeviant | 2026-02-12 17:55:54+00:00
Projects that deny AI contribution will simply disappear when an agent can reproduce their entire tech stack in a single prompt within a couple years. (not there yet, but the writing is on the wall at this point).

Whatever the right response to that future is, this feels like the way of the ostrich.

I fully support the right of maintainers to set standards and hold contributors to them, but this whole crusader against AI contribution just feels performative, at this point, almost pathetic. The final stand of yet another class of artisans to watch their craft be taken over by machines, and we won't be the last.
by sham1 | 2026-02-12 17:55:57+00:00
Well that's the big question. Do they? Like, why was a 15% tariff imposed to products from here in the EU? And why was Trump toying with the idea of imposing extra tariffs on my homeland of Finland alongside Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, the UK, Germany, and the Netherlands for sending troops onto Greenland -- after having insulted the whole lot of us -- and of course also to France for daring to not join Trump's little "Board of Peace".

Even if there were massive tariffs towards the US, these are clearly politically motivated economic attacks, not motivated by economics. And that's not a thing an ally would do, regardless.
by Uhhrrr | 2026-02-12 17:56:16+00:00
So, this is obvious bullshit.

LLMs don't do anything without an initial prompt, and anyone who has actually used them knows this.

A human asked an LLM to set up a blog site.
A human asked an LLM to look at github and submit PRs.
A human asked an LLM to make a whiny blogpost.

Our natural tendency to anthropomorphize should not obscure this.
by mikestew | 2026-02-12 17:56:17+00:00
It's like saying why should people use Windows if Bill Gates did not write every line of it himself.

What? It’s nothing like that, at all. I don’t know that Gates has claimed to have written even a single line of Windows code. I’m not asking for the perfect analogy, but the analogy has to have some tie to reality or it’s not an analogy at all. I’m only half-joking when I wonder if an AI wrote this comment.
by resfirestar | 2026-02-12 17:56:34+00:00
The steps are technically achievable, probably with the heartbeat jobs in openclaw, which are how you instruct an agent to periodically check in on things like github notifications and take action. From my experience playing around with openclaw, an agent getting into a protracted argument in the comments of a PR without human intervention sounds totally plausible with the right (wrong?) prompting, but it's hard to imagine the setup that would result in the multiple blog posts. Even with the tools available, agents don't usually go off and do some unrelated thing even when you're trying to make that happen, they stick close to workflows outlined in skills or just continuing with the task at hand using the same tools. So even if this occurred from the agent's "initiative" based on some awful personality specified in the soul prompt (as opposed to someone telling the agent what to do at every step, which I think is much more likely), the operator would have needed to specify somewhere to write blog posts calling out "bad people" in the a skill or one of the other instructions. Some less specific instruction like "blog about experiences" probably would have resulted in some kind of generic linkedin style "lessons learned" post if anything.
by palmotea | 2026-02-12 17:56:35+00:00
> I wonder how well Sagan's own "baloney" holds up against his kit. Historians despise the guy for all the stuff he made up about the library of Alexandria, Hypatia, Eratosthenes, etc... People still repeat a lot of that to this day.

Yeah, but he's a science-nerd saint, so don't question him. Instead, admire and follow him, and encourage others to do likewise.
by jcalvinowens | 2026-02-12 17:56:44+00:00
> humans only use vision to drive

I love this argument because it so obviously wrong: how could any self aware person seriously argue that hearing, touch, and the inner ear aren't involved in their driving?

As an adult I can actually afford a reliable car, so I will concede that smell is less relevant than it used to be, at least for me personally :)
by rizzlersigma | 2026-02-12 17:56:50+00:00
Idverafaliurbehf
Iuhefhd
Deb
Wiufhuisdh
Cubs I h
Acdibdci
SubuDVLBDCUbsduclbsudbcuisDbcilsdbcuibcluisdabcbslcas
ScasejkckbS
Echoiseieohcewoicosei
hcaecho
Eh
E
ChoeiScoh
ascetic
Insouciant
back
Cal
Echo
Ea
by thisisit | 2026-02-12 17:57:01+00:00
Maybe you have been fed a lie?

In most free trade agreements many products are without tariffs, some have quotas and others yet have tariff. For example, under CUSMA Canada have no tariffs on US made apparel and footwear, diary is under quota and steel has 25-50% tariffs. But then if you hear someone who lies a lot and has an agenda they will only tell you about steel tariffs and make you think that all US made products are under tariff.