MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by richardfeynman | 2026-02-25 23:21:09+00:00
Calling the Second Intifada "sparked by Israeli massacres" reverses the basic chronology and ignores Palestinian leaders' own admissions.

1) Marwan Barghouti (Fatah leader of the uprising in the West Bank) told The New Yorker in Jan 2001:
"The explosion would have happened anyway... But Sharon provided a good excuse."
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift

2) UK Parliament Hansard (Apr 16, 2002) quotes the semi-official PA daily Al-Ayyam (Dec 6, 2000) reporting PA communications minister Imad al-Falouji:
"the Palestinian authority had begun preparations for the outbreak of the current intifada... in accordance with instructions given by Chairman Arafat himself"
and that it was not meant merely as a protest over Sharon's visit.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2002-04-16/debates/d69...
(search within the page for "Al-Ayyam" or "Al-Falouji")

3) Arafat's widow Suha said Arafat decided to launch it ("Because I am going to start an Intifada") on Dubai TV, per MEMRI translation, quoted by CFR:
https://www.cfr.org/articles/arafat-and-second-intifada
https://www.memri.org/tv/suha-arafat-widow-yasser-arafat-200...

Also, this is not some uniquely Israeli talking point. Britannica describes the start as Palestinians erupting into violence after Sharon's Temple Mount visit:
https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada
by ErroneousBosh | 2026-02-25 23:21:15+00:00
> We're talking about cities, of course; in rural areas, nothing beats cars.

Where I grew up in NW Scotland, it's a five hour round trip to go to the supermarket. You pretty much need a car for that.

Where I live right now it's a five minute walk to the supermarket, but I still need a car because the things I work on are a long way from where I live, often up steep muddy mountain tracks.

When I lived in the middle of Glasgow people used to come up and have a go at me about driving a massive V8 4x4 in the middle of a city. What am I supposed to do with it? Bike to the suburbs and then go and drive up a mountain?

"But why not get a job where you don't need to drive hundreds of miles in a massive 4x4?"

Because then the things on the tops of mountains don't get fixed when they break, and the radios don't work properly, and then people like you die in a fire.

Sometimes it's hard for people to grasp that just because their not-really-a-job tapping numbers into an Excel spreadsheet all day can be done from home or from an easily walkable city centre location, it doesn't mean that everyone's job looks like that.

I do wish I could usefully use a cargo bike. Those things are awesome.
by freetime2 | 2026-02-25 23:21:24+00:00
The logical, socially-conscious side of my brain can't wait to see 6 cylinder engines go the way of the v8. Four cylinders and a hybrid system ought to be able to generate enough torque for just about anyone (except maybe heavy-duty hauling?). And the future is of course BEV.

But have to admit there is a part of me that would really love to drive something like the BMW M340i [1]. And the gas mileage (26/33 MPG) isn't even too bad.

[1] https://youtu.be/kr-h9T42NAI?si=IZaDC9UqAsUtjQN9
by Keyframe | 2026-02-25 23:21:24+00:00
Listen, I agree it's unusable or at least somewhat usable. As I said in another comment. Will Smith video was exactly three years ago. 3D has been a bit neglected, but it will come. I was a denier initially, but these things move real fast. Photogrammetry was never at the level of point and shoot and you have a production asset. However, it did and does serve a need and you can't deny it's not useful. It's not painless though.
by reliabilityguy | 2026-02-25 23:21:53+00:00
> there is a lot of coordinated astroturfing.

For some reason you still complained about astroturfing.

> I expect there have been variations on that sentiment

Yes. Before one human can create a thousand other fake humans indistinguishable from real ones.

Which you acknowledge yourself without realizing it.

Also, why do you ignore my question about 2nd amendment?

> I'm aware. That's why I dragged the conversation back on topic.

It was on topic, you simply chose to ignore the point you did not like.

> When put into its surrounding context, it is a plain statement of fact and reasonable assessment of the situation.

Sure bud, it is
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-02-25 23:22:46+00:00
> Building a subway in most US cities right now is very expensive.

This is true but seems like a problem worth solving. It's also true of more than subways; we have the same problem with bridges, housing and many other things. Better to get on with fixing it than use it as an excuse for doing something worse.

> Moreover you're going to have to close the road down anyway

That's a one-time cost, and you're not required to close a 500 mile stretch of road for years on end. Dig one block, install the tunnel, cover it, dig the next block.
by kerlue | 2026-02-25 23:23:09+00:00
I believe there will be increased demand for in-house software engineering. Anecdotally, I’m seeing a trend where companies are revisiting the buy vs. build decision. They are slowly chipping away at expensive third-party SaaS solutions by building in-house applications. This allows them to build what the business needs instead of trying to modify SaaS solutions to fit their requirements. I believe AI will increase productivity but not replace engineering.
by ben_w | 2026-02-25 23:23:51+00:00
8% of electricity, not total world energy.

But the growth rate has been huge for as long as records have been kept, and was a factor of just over 10x between 2014 and 2024, speeding up more recently.

PV and wind together are likely to start breaking the electricity market severely in the first half of the 2030s; I hope, but it's not certain yet, that ongoing battery expansion will allow the demand for electricity to increase and this can continue to the end of the 2030s, because at the current pace of development those scale up to all our energy needs, not merely our present electrical needs, in a bit less than 20 years from now. (PV alone would do all of it in 20 years at present rate of change).
by cyberax | 2026-02-25 23:24:13+00:00
Yep. The power of rebranding.

Serfs were essentially slaves. They could be traded without any real limits and could be punished at will. The families could be split, and serfs were officially prohibited from making lawsuits against their owners.

And it was one of the reasons for Russia's "misadventures" during the 20-th century. The serfdom abolishment came when other countries were already in the midst of the industrial revolution.
by arjie | 2026-02-25 23:24:26+00:00
Yes, a different client on iOS and a Chrome extension for my laptop. What I built for myself (and perhaps you if you want it simple) is here: https://overmod.org/

This kind of software is pretty cheap to write these days. The Chrome extension there is open-source and the backend is a generic CRUD app running on a SQLite that I backup periodically. You're welcome to use it, and you're welcome to use the CRUD backend without it. I had Claude write a separate iOS app but it was on an older model so not very good (sufficient for me but I doubt for anyone else). The 'protocol' between the backend and the frontend is trivial so you could probably rebuild the iOS app with just the extension as reference to Opus 4.6. I pay my $100 to Apple and then just use it as a 'tester' haha.

I made that directory public because I think this benefits from a single place people can go to subscribe to lists, but if you were to rewrite on true full decentralized ATProto/ActivityPub I'd probably switch over my lists to that and use it instead.
by perching_aix | 2026-02-25 23:24:48+00:00
I thought it is by introducing an RCE vulnerability that you get an RCE vulnerability.

I'm being facetious of course, but this recent rhetorical trend of people confidently vouching for "pet" in "pet vs. cattle" is not a sustainable decision, even if it's admittedly plain practical on the short to medium run, or in given contexts even longer. It's just a dangerous and irresponsible lesson to blindly repeat I think.

Change happens. Evidently, while we can mechanistically rule out several classes of bugs now, RCEs are not one of those. Whatever additional guardrails they had in place, they failed to catch this *. I think it's significantly more honest to place the blame there if anywhere. If they can introduce an RCE to Notepad *, you can be confident they're introducing RCEs left and right to other components too **. With some additional contextual weighting of course.

* Small note on this specific CVE though: to the extent I looked into it [0], I don't find it reasonable to classify it as an RCE. It was a UX hiccup, the software was working as intended, the intention was just... maybe not quite wise enough.

** Under the interpretation that this was an RCE, which I personally disagree with.

[0] https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/blog/2026/2/19/cve-2026-20...
by derefr | 2026-02-25 23:24:53+00:00
> along the ubiquitous "please verify your account" emails with NO OPTION to click "that's NOT me, somebody misused my email"

What would you expect clicking that "wasn't me" link to do?

In 99% of cases, the user who signed up with your address already can't do any more with that account unless you positively confirm it was you; and the site also won't send you any more email because they don't consider the email verified (and so sending to it might result in their emails getting sent to spam -> their email-sending reputation score going down.) So things are already in the state you'd want them to be in, no?

The only problem I can think of with that state is that now you can't sign up "fresh" for an account with the same provider, because now there's already an account associated with your email address sitting there in their DB in the pending-email-verification state. (But you still can acquire that account, by clicking "forgot/reset password" and going through that flow, which will inevitably go through your email, as anything like a 2FA setup flow always waits behind email verification.)
by nickysielicki | 2026-02-25 23:25:11+00:00
I’m just curious, what would need to happen for you to change your opinion about this? Are you basically of the opinion that it’s not good enough today, never will be good enough in the future, and we should just wind back the clock 3 years and pretend these tools don’t exist?

It feels to me like a lot of this is dogma. If the code is broken or needs more testing, that can be solved. But it’s orthogonal: the LLM can be used to implement the unit testing and fuzz testing that would beat this library into shape, if it’s not already there. It’s not about adding a human touch, it’s about pursuing completeness. And that’s true for all new projects going from zero to one, you have to ask yourself whether the author drove it to completeness or not. That’s always been true.

You want people to hedge their projects with disclaimers that it probably sucks and isn’t production worthy. You want them to fess up to the fact that they cheated, or something. But they’re giving it away for free! You can just not use it if you don’t want to! They owe you nothing, not even a note in the readme. And you don’t deserve more or less hacker points depending on whether you used a tool to generate the code or whether you wrote it by hand, because hacker points don’t exist, because the value of all of this is (and always will be) subjective.

To the extent that the modern tools and models can’t oneshot anything, they’re going to keep improving. And it doesn’t seem to me like there’s any identifiable binary event on the horizon that would make you change your mind about this. You’re just against LLMs, and that’s the way it is, and there’s nothing that anyone can do to change your mind?

I mean this in the nicest way possible: the world is just going to move on without you.
by vintagedave | 2026-02-25 23:25:12+00:00
Toxicity is dehumanizing language, threats, doxxing, encouraging self-harm, that sort of thing. We have taught it examples of various levels, so it can align with those to report a score. Something like an unpleasant, insulting attitude to someone personally is fairly low on the toxic scale (but still toxic, it's not the right way to interact), whereas threats of violence or encouraging self-harm are very high.
by telchior | 2026-02-25 23:25:22+00:00
Minor correction, expat income is deductible up to (currently) $130k under the FEIE. After that it's taxes as usual. There's also an array of other mandatory forms like FBAR for foreign accounts, and the nightmare that is form 5471, with absolutely wild allowances for the IRS to impose penalties, often with no statute of limitations and per-violation fines. For example, a US citizen with multiple bank accounts and a mistake in FBAR reporting for multiple years running will be liable for the (iirc) $10,000 fine for each bank account, and each year (e.g. 4 accounts, 8 years, $320,000 fine).

Living and doing business overseas is as a US citizen is a high risk endeavor.
by jadenPete | 2026-02-25 23:25:42+00:00
It seems like this problem (differences in how humans and LLMs use probabilistic language) and hallucination are one in the same. LLMs don’t have access to information about how confident they are, so they always choose the most likely response, even if the most likely response isn’t actually that likely. Whereas if a human is unconfident, they’ll express that instead of choosing the most likely response.

Of course, LLMs can still speak about probabilities and mimic uncertainty, but that’s likely (heh) coming from their training data on the subject matter, not their actual confidence.

Humans are interesting because they employ a two-phased approach: when we’re learning, we fake confidence (you’d never write “I don’t know” on a test unless you truly had nothing of value to say), but during inference, we communicate our confidence. Some humans suffer from underconfidence or overconfidence, but most just seem to know innately how to do this.

Can anyone who works on LLMs clarify whether my understanding is correct?
by maxglute | 2026-02-25 23:26:12+00:00
It's more like renewables reducing velocity of increase in oil demand (for now). A few more pieces really need to come together, most oil displacement is EV and storage which is infrastructure problem.

Apart from PRC EV displacing 1mbd in oil. The other unmentioned stat PRC annual solar production, assume 30 year lifespan displaces about annual global oil consumption, i.e. 100mbd per day worth of oil. Their total solar output is 2x, what they produce, i.e. they produce enough solar to replace global oilm lng and a big chunk of coal in 10-15 years at full capacity. Storage hasn't caught up, true oil displacement depends on what storage lag will be, but likely short/medium term, not long term.

As for actual oil use, notice how PRC hammering EVs but still importing high % of oil, that's ongoing strategic reserver SPR and petchem play, i.e. even though they'll use less oil, they plan to store more (to mediate prices), and convert more into petchem products. So future is world where cheap renewables will displace oil from transportation to industr... because lots of energy = more industry = increase demand for fossil inputs. Which could mean less/same/more oil demand, unhelpful, I know.
by naasking | 2026-02-25 23:26:16+00:00
No, Arab riots targeted Jewish communities starting in the 1920s through the 1930s. Up through the 1930s, Jewish immigration and land acquisition was by purchase of land, and the areas they occupied were sparsely populated. This talk of "colonization" is ahistorical propaganda.

And this also exposes the falsehood behind your question of why Zionists "displaced" Palestinians. If you don't consider purchasing land to be legal and ethical acquisition, then I don't know what to tell you. This is not what colonial displacement looks like.

Finally, as for why they were immigrating there, why not ask yourself what was happening to Jews throughout the world from 1915 up through the 1940s.
by cucumber3732842 | 2026-02-25 23:26:48+00:00
Europe has stupid displacement taxes so they'll make some high strung 0.9L turbo 3/4cyl with all the technology that gets .01mpg better MPG than a ~2L engine while taking twice as much $$ in service to make it to any given milage.

IDK why they don't just tax the actual fuel used like the rest of the world (not that they don't do that).
by CharlieDigital | 2026-02-25 23:27:16+00:00
Probably oversold here because if you read the fine print, the savings only come in cases when you don't need the bytes in context.

That makes sense for some of the examples the described (e.g. a QA workflow asking the agent to take a screenshot and put it into a folder).

However, this is not true for an active dev workflow when you actually do want it to see that the elements are not lining up or are overlapping or not behaving correctly. So token savings are possible...if your use case doesn't require the bytes in context (which most active dev use cases probably do)*
by sech8420 | 2026-02-25 23:27:32+00:00
That’s a fair point. I know a few foremen who use photogrammetry religiously for site surveys and volume tracking where 'lumpy' geometry doesn't matter. It’s a huge win for that niche. But yes, 3D has been lagging behind and I'm having a really hard time guestimating when it's good enough for high quality product models.
by alexjplant | 2026-02-25 23:27:42+00:00
> I don't think Hendrix was on a 'mission' to solve engineering puzzles at all. He was just experimenting, as an artist.

1,000,000%. Guitar is one of those hobbies where people mythologize and build elaborate hagiographies around players they like and the gear that they used. Hendrix was a generational talent but I highly doubt he was sitting around enumerating problem statements and systematically exploring solution spaces. The Fuzz Face was one of like four dirtboxes available during that time so he chose that one. He flipped a guitar upside down because he could source one more easily than a lefty model. He leveraged feedback because he discovered it naturally and realized that he could make it sound totally badass.

The man clearly had a vision and executed it but his decisions were pragmatic, not the product of grand technical reasoning. It reminds me of the student who wrote a bunch of authors and asked to what degree they were conscious of the themes and symbolism in their work [1]. Many were not - as it turns out English teachers often put the cart before the horse. This is just the rock and roll version of such.

I can't really knock the article though as it has a lot of sound (pun intended) analysis in it as opposed to typical guitar forum dreck about NOS tube and hand-wired turret board magic.

[1] https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2011/12/05/document-the-...
Show HN: Edictum – Runtime governance for LLM agent tool calls
by acartag7 | 2026-02-25 23:27:52+00:00
We tested 6 frontier models across 17,420 tool-call interactions and found that models consistently refuse harmful requests in text while executing them through tool calls. We call this divergence the GAP metric. The text says no. The tool call says yes.
Edictum is a runtime governance library that enforces safety contracts at the tool-call boundary — the point where you have the tool name, the arguments, and the ability to block before execution. YAML contracts with preconditions, postconditions, PII redaction. Deterministic allow/deny/redact, no LLM-in-the-loop.
Zero runtime dependencies, 55μs per evaluation, works with LangChain, CrewAI, OpenAI Agents SDK, Claude Agent SDK, Agno, Semantic Kernel, and nanobot. MIT licensed.
Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.16943
GitHub: https://github.com/acartag7/edictum
Show HN: Provision Stateless GPU Compute with Claude Code's Remote Control
by Facingsouth | 2026-02-25 23:28:26+00:00
claude mcp add terradev --command terradev-mcp

Ask Claude Code to find the cheapest spot A100 from your own directory of APIs for providers (keys kept local), dry-run multi-cloud provisioning, compress and cache datasets for egress optimization, spin up NUMA-aware Kubernetes clusters, and deploy a GPU snapshot to InferX for fast cold starts, all with conversational language, all running locally with your own API keys.
by _DeadFred_ | 2026-02-25 23:28:30+00:00
I think we live in two different Americas. My mom who was a controller and CFO in Cali couldn't land a $50k spreadsheet job when she semi-retired here to be near grandkids. Old boy with a pickup definitely isn't doing that. We have plenty of actual non-grift factories going up here from owners relocating. The Apple 3am example isn't making or breaking an industry product, it's just shitty management, probably needed because the product was scheduled to go onto a boat, something that isn't needed if made here, or some artificial bs. Imagine operating that way as a public company, I think that's working with unacceptable risk and a failure of management.

But we'll probably just talk past each other past this point. It will be interesting to see what happens. Like I said, I remember the Japan scare. Then all manufacturing going to Mexico (and my dad making sure he didn't buy the heche en mexico lable) before it finally landed in China.
by hnav | 2026-02-25 23:28:42+00:00
I think that's where BEV and L4 autonomy comes in once it's commodified. Buses are huge in part because of having to amortize the driver and that makes them very crude. An autonomous mini-bus that can fit 10 people would fit more organically into cityscapes, destroy the pavement less, be run at 20% of current headways, etc, etc. Honestly the only big issues there I can think of are seatbelts (lower mass means that it may decelerate much more rapidly than a normal bus in an accident) and accessibility.
by themafia | 2026-02-25 23:29:21+00:00
> to a declining, unstable empire

It's funny that we've wrapped the clock all the way around and people don't see Europe as the declining and unstable empires anymore.

> less like stable infrastructure

It's perfectly stable. The news makes a lot of money generating interesting in overstating this problem. The supreme court is designed for national stability. It is doing it's job. It just doesn't act _instantly_, and if you're aiming for actual stability, you don't want it to.
by scoofy | 2026-02-25 23:29:56+00:00
The demand is there: https://la.urbanize.city/post/plan-skyline-altering-tower-ab...

The point is that the vast majority of budgetary issues in LA could be solved by just legalizing, and streamlining the production of something as simple as three-story row housing like the kind that's normal in San Francisco (which has a surprisingly good long-term outlook despite their current budget woes).

It's not rocket science here. If you make it easy to build housing, the industry grow to meet demand. If you make it difficult, it will be dominated by a handful of major players who can navigate the process.
by radolang | 2026-02-25 23:30:46+00:00
I needed to invoice a client and hated every tool I tried. So I built my own. Clerk lets you create invoices in seconds — type "invoice Acme for 10 hours at $150/hr" in the AI chat and it's done. PDF import, payment tracking, recurring invoices, email delivery. Built solo with AI coding agents. Free tier, no credit card.

- First commit: Feb 18, 7pm
- Functional MVP (create/send/track invoices): Feb 18, ~11pm — about 4 hours
- "Would show to investors" quality: Feb 20 end of day — about 2.5 days
- First real invoice to a real client: around Feb 21-22
- Today's state (landing page, pricing, polish): Feb 25 — 7 days from first commit

Would love feedback. https://clerkfinance.com
by neop1x | 2026-02-25 23:31:39+00:00
I use a sandbox example extension with comes with Pi, it uses the anthropic sandbox runtime (bubblewrap on linux). The runtime has one bug and needs one improvement (I've made PRs, no response yet). Pi's sandbox example extension does not block internal tools (read/write) according to rules, I've created a PR but can't submit because of Pi's OSS vacation BS... https://github.com/badlogic/pi-mono/compare/main...k3a:pi-mo... I am quite happy with my patched forks for now