MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CableNinja | 2026-02-16 16:05:13+00:00
I seriously doubt we will stay on earth like that. Humans have always been explorers and pioneers. You can only look at something through a screen for so long before you get the itch that you cant scratch through a screen. Humans will inevitably leave this planet.

Robots on other planets is a rough process. Most planets, lacking atmosphere, have dust that gets EVERYWHERE, and its really bad for mechanical, electrical operations. The moon has a static charge that causes the regolith powder to seep into the smallest cracks. Humanoid robots will not last long, and all other forms are just a single failure from uselessness. Until they can either self-repair, or repair others (meaning n+1 minimum robots sent), it will not be useful for long exploration. And, honestly, id be pretty worried to find robots that could self-repair or repair others. Thats just a small step away from self-replication, and that leads down other scary paths.
by ForHackernews | 2026-02-16 16:05:28+00:00
In the comments on a recent post[0] regarding new EU rules banning the destruction of unsold fashion merchandise, many (presumably European) commenters are insisting that passing clothes to African resellers will be pure greenwashing: a waste of CO2 shipping them only to be burned elsewhere.

This article is an interesting counterpoint: In fact, in Nigeria thrifting (Okrika) is so popular that the government felt compelled to ban it in order to protect a local fashion industry.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47025378
by miloignis | 2026-02-16 16:05:40+00:00
I believe that the rename to OpenClaw happened after the cutoff date for pretty much all model's training data, so unless you say something that causes them to look it up they'll get it wrong and assume it's about the old PC game. I was messing around trying to get different models to setup an OpenClaw NixOS VM for me and had to disambiguate for most of the models I tried.
by steveBK123 | 2026-02-16 16:05:45+00:00
Or sama is just waiting to premium subscription gate companions in some adult content package as he has hinted something along these lines may be forthcoming. Maybe tie it in with the hardware device Ive is working on. Some sort of hellscape tamogotchi.

Recall:
"As part of our 'treat adult users like adults' principle, we will allow even more, like erotica for verified adults," Altman wrote in the Oct.
by runjake | 2026-02-16 16:05:52+00:00
> We have someone who vibe coded software with major security vulnerabilities. This is reported by many folks

> We also have someone who vibecoded without reading any of the code. This is self admitted by this person.

Peter was pretty open about all of this. He doesn't hide the fact. It was a personal hack that took off and went viral.

> We don't know how much of the github stars are bought. We don't know how many twitter followings/tweets are bought.

My guess, from his unwillingness to take the free pile of cash from the bags.fm grift, is that this in unlikely. I don't know that I would've been able to make the same decision.

> Then after a bunch of podcasts and interviews, this person gets hired by a big tech company. Would you hire someone who never read any if the code that they've developed? Well, this is what happened here.

Yes, I'd hire him. He's imaginative and productive and ships and documents things. I can fix the code auditing problem.

> In this timeline, I'm not sure I find anything inspiring here.

Okay?

> It's telling me that I should rather focus on getting viral/lucky to get a shot at "success".

Peter has been in the trenches for years and years, shipped and sold. He's written and released many useful tools over the years. Again, this was a project of personal love that went viral. This is not an "overnight success" situation.

> So am I jealous, yes because this timeline makes no sense as a software engineer. But am I happy for the guy, yeah I also want to make lots of money someday.

Write and release many, many useful tools. Form a community and share what you're building and your chances will greatly increase?
by newsclues | 2026-02-16 16:06:20+00:00
But you create an incentive for organized crime to recruit youth to commit crimes and not have to suffer the consequences.

At a certain point, poorly thought out "protections", turn into a system that protects organized crime, because criminals aren't as stupid as lawmakers, and exploit the system.

There is a big difference between making a mistake as a kid that lands you in trouble, and working as a underling for organized crime to commit robberies, drug deals, and violent crime, and not having to face responsibility for their actions.

The legal system has so many loopholes for youth, for certain groups, that the law is no longer fair, and that is its own problem, contributing to the decline of public trust.
by unyttigfjelltol | 2026-02-16 16:06:23+00:00
So here in the U.S., the Karen Read trial recently occupied two years of news cycles— convicted of a lesser crime on retrial.

Is the position that everyone who experienced that coverage, wrote about it in any forum, or attended, must wipe all trace of it clean, for “reasons”? The defendant has sole ownership of public facts? Really!? Would the ends of justice have been better served by sealed records and a closed courtroom? Would have been a very different event.

Courts are accustomed to balancing interests, but since the public usually is not a direct participant they get short shrift. Judges may find it inconvenient to be scrutinized, but that’s the ultimate and only true source of their legitimacy in a democratic system.
by Bootvis | 2026-02-16 16:06:26+00:00
From the Stockfish docs at https://official-stockfish.github.io/docs/stockfish-wiki/Sto....

> Rating Stockfish against a human scale, such as FIDE Elo, has become virtually impossible. The gap in strength is so large that a human player cannot secure the necessary draws or wins for an accurate Elo measurement.

[1]: https://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/
by WorldMaker | 2026-02-16 16:06:31+00:00
Reading word shapes comes from a place of good, studied intent. Reading word shapes is how people who read quickly read. It is in many ways an advanced way of reading. Trying to jump to it was a hope that you could shortcut some of the literacy curve. Unfortunately, trying and sometimes failing to read word shapes is also how some neurodivergent brains work naturally (the family of dyslexias as the big complex elephant in the room). If your brain jumps directly to word shape, and somewhat often gets it wrong, being forced to slow down, break words apart and start from smaller basic building blocks can be helpful.

It's a reminder that different people learn at different paces.

I think overall the additional details expand and perhaps better the metaphor: a lot of people want to jump directly to the advanced CSS stuff and skip the fundamentals. For some people that works and may be a shortcut. Other people need to spend more time breaking their teeth on the fundamentals, getting them wrong, learning from their mistakes, and getting rock solid on the slower building blocks before trying to do anything advanced.
by eibrahim | 2026-02-16 16:07:22+00:00
This is a really important cautionary tale about autonomous AI agents operating without proper guardrails. The gap between 'AI agent that can do useful tasks' and 'AI agent that understands consequences' is still enormous. It highlights why having human oversight in the loop matters — whether it's content review, action approval, or just sanity-checking outputs before they go live. The best setups treat the AI as a capable but supervised collaborator, not a fully autonomous actor.
by dcrazy | 2026-02-16 16:07:25+00:00
I was puzzled by your claim that Condé Nast was forced to vacate its headquarters last year. After some Googling, it seems you are referring to their English offices. Condé Nast is still headquartered at One World Trade as it has been since 2014, and is still owned by the Staten Island-based Advance Publications as it has been since 1959.
by tacitusarc | 2026-02-16 16:07:34+00:00
5.2 thinking also told me to walk.

o3, interestingly:

Drive.
Even though it’s only 50 m, the car itself has to be at the wash bay—otherwise the staff or machines can’t clean it. Rolling or pushing the vehicle that distance isn’t practical or safe (you’d still need someone inside to steer and brake), so just hop in, creep over, and shut the engine off right away.
by johnwalkr | 2026-02-16 16:07:55+00:00
I had a new one yesterday. In Apple Music (iPhone), you can long hold on a song or album and press "add to playlist" and then select the playlist. The next action you probably want to do is long hold on another album and tap "add to playlist". You have to wait 2 seconds to do this because a pop-up that says "x added to playlist" appears in the exact location you need to click on. It not only obscures the area, it prevents a tap from registering.
by alexhans | 2026-02-16 16:08:10+00:00
It really depends on the type of agent and problem but your path resonates as a way to slowly build more complexity as you start understanding the uncertain space. I've written about it in my blog with the intent of helping non tech users [1] and also created a site with cookbooks and eval tool comparisons [2].

I've successfully managed to get non technical users into the terminal, even before Agent Skills were a thing. It's absolutely doable.

If any of what I share helps or you have any feedback/questions let me know. I'm quite interested to see if the framing works.

- [1] https://alexhans.github.io/posts/series/evals/building-agent...

- [2] https://ai-evals.io/
by bambax | 2026-02-16 16:08:12+00:00
> What's that you're saying? Yours actually works and is higher quality, because you know about things like TTFP and INP and "not putting your Supabase god-token in the client"? Oh, you sweet summer child: I take no pleasure in this but I need to tell you that these things don't matter anymore. Quality is not a metric anyone cares about in 2026.

That's funny and all but it can't really be true that quality doesn't matter. It has to matter at some point. Maybe it doesn't matter during the initial sales cycle; I've seen it happen: the CEO sees a slick demo that works, every user / developper rolls their eyes and try to warn them, they don't listen, and the deal is done.

But eventually if the thing that's supposed to be done, isn't, something will have to give. Even if at first they fire all the eye-rollers and replace them with obedient corporate drones, if the think isn't working and it's on the critical path, it will have to be replaced by something that actually does work.
by TheDong | 2026-02-16 16:08:40+00:00
Yeah, because chrome is required to use -safari- webkit too, apple won't allow alternative browsers on the app store.

Except in the EU, but they don't allow it globally so no sane company is going to invest time into building a browser for iOS while apple is intentionally region-locking the ability to install them.

So yeah, on iOS, rendering bugs on Chrome are quite often apple's fault, and the Chrome team can't fix em.
by damnesian | 2026-02-16 16:08:54+00:00
I know I personally retain things better if I write them out, on paper, than if I type or record them. It's a cognitive advantage every kid not only should be allowed, but at a crucial time of development when they NEED to exercise that muscle.

There are stories out there about how AI is the future for schools and how each kid will have their own learning path tailored for their interests and abilities. Now I know "special ed" back in the day was not much more than glorified daycare and only deepened the stigma the neurodiverse already experienced. but there's a place in the middle somewhere, where kids of different abilities and interests could meet and learn. for different reasons, each kid had to stretch a little- to test their limits, to find new commonalities with others, to learn AND grow together.

I can't help but think automated education tailored for individuals is going to massively backfire. There will be fundamental concepts skipped for the sake of individuality. There will be no sense of social belonging or commiseration/triumph. It's going to feel like- and be as edifying as- the tailored home page of a streaming service that really, honestly knows exactly what you are going to love, leaving you feeling passive and transparent and dumb, certainly not any smarter nor even taken care of, just probed.
by commandersaki | 2026-02-16 16:09:19+00:00
I'm not sure if vim-pencil addresses this, but I find writing in the online typst editor to be a delight, particularly its soft-wrap mode and its auto-indent.

Even though I have a very narrow editor when you type for example:

this is a very very long sentence
- this is a very incredibly long sentence too

And say it is too narrow for the viewport, it will soft wrap like so:

this is a very very
long sentence
- this is a very
incredibly long
sentence too

Even though the bulleted sentence is soft wrapped, it maintains the indent of the sentence which I find a really useful visual aid.
by jmward01 | 2026-02-16 16:09:41+00:00
This reminds me of the old brain-teaser/joke that goes something like 'An airplane crashes on the boarder of x/y, where do they bury the survivors?' The point being that this exact style of question has real examples where actual people fail to correctly answer it. We mostly learn as kids through things like brain teasers to avoid these linguistic traps, but that doesn't mean we don't still fall for them every once in a while too.
by yosamino | 2026-02-16 16:09:52+00:00
> The only good solution would be if all messaging apps used the same protocol so everyone could be reached.

That's exactly what XMPP was created to solve, an open standard that could be implemented by anyone. For a while it even looked like there was a chance for that to work out. Whatsapp, Google Talk, Cisco Jabber, and some others used to be based on XMPP.

Unfortunately it didn't quite pan out that way.
by beernet | 2026-02-16 16:09:54+00:00
While that might take it a little too far, Lex surely is a dangerous individual. On various occasions did he sympathize with the war and terror that Russia is doing in Ukraine. I do not click on any of his content because I will not support these (and a few other questionable, to say the least) views of his. Also his image of an MIT researcher is hilarious.
by imperfect_blue | 2026-02-16 16:10:02+00:00
It's a terrible idea because approximately 90% of the cost of clothing is not in producing it, but in the supply chain - keeping it in stock, transporting it to and from warehouses, the manpower needed to organize and sorting and inspect it.

So by saving the 10% of the cost of the clothing, you end up wasting way more in labor and transport and inventory costs. All of which ends up way worse for the environment than had you just shredded it and treated it as compost.
by ajross | 2026-02-16 16:10:02+00:00
The compiler space in 1985 was really thin. You were basically looking at Microsoft/Lattice C and Turbo Pascal. And while I don't have any of them handy for a test, that's pretty much exactly the character of the code they'd generate. In particular the 8086 calling conventions were a kludgey dance on the stack for every function, something forth could actually improve on.
by larsiusprime | 2026-02-16 16:10:32+00:00
If I understand it, the premise of this article is that because the marginal cost of software production is now free, now nobody can compete against garbage quality code sold by the slickest "sales critter", so everyone should just give up.

I mean, it seems at the very least, that open source and in-house production has a natural advantage here? If the marginal cost of software production is now free, then FOSS/in-house just got easier to create and maintain too. Does that make it easier for FOSS/in-house, both available without a subscription to an external third party, undermine "sales critter" SAAS, by the author's own premises?
by NiloCK | 2026-02-16 16:10:49+00:00
Every recent model card for frontier models has shown that models are testing-aware.

Seems entirely plausible to me here that models correctly interpret these questions as attempts to discredit / shame the model. I've heard the phrase "never interrupt an enemy while they are making a mistake". Probably the models have as well.

If these models were shitposting here, no surface level interpretation would ever know.
by JPKab | 2026-02-16 16:10:56+00:00
You have made a false claim. What is your evidence that I am religious, let alone a religious radical?

I mean, if we're going to make accusations based on perceived political tribal allegiances, I can say to you with equal certainty that you're a neo-Marxist.

Of course I don't know that. And you don't know anything about me.
by roywiggins | 2026-02-16 16:11:01+00:00
> There's no government as effective at instituting necessary changes as a benevolent autocracy

Autocracies have lots of issues around eg building a sufficiently capable bureaucracy that isn't too corrupt to do things. It can make it harder, not easier. Democracy can lean on democratic legitimacy, constitutional traditions, and a history of allowing power transitions without anyone losing their heads or launching a civil war over it. Those are all really useful things that autocracies have to cope without. It's not like it's easy mode.
by apple1417 | 2026-02-16 16:11:03+00:00
Leading this by saying I've only used Ida free, I can't comment on Ida pro. I'm also a very lite user of both, I give name functions/vars, save bookmarks, and occasionally work out custom types, and that's about it, none of the real fancy stuff.

I was recently trying to analyse a 600mb exe (denuvo/similar). I wasted a week after ghidra crashed 30h+ in multiple times. A seperate project with a 300mb exe took about 5h, so there's some horrible scaling going on. So I tried out Ida for the first time, and it finished in less than an hour. Faced with having decomp vs not, I started learning how to use it.

So first difference, given the above, Ida is far far better at interrupting tasks/crash recovery. Every time ghidra crashed I was left with nothing, when Ida crashes you get a prompt to recover from autosave. Even if you don't crash, in general it feels like Ida will let you interrupt a task and still get partial results which you might even be able to pick back up from later, while ghidra just leaves you with nothing.

In terms of pure decomp quality, I don't really think either wins, decomp is always awkward, it's awkward in different ways for each. I prefer ghidra's, but that might just be because I've used it much longer. Ida does do better at suggesting function/variable names - if a variable is passed to a bunch of functions taking a GameManager*, it might automatically call it game_manager.

When defining types, I far prefer ida's approach of just letting me write C/C++. Ghidra's struct editor is awkward, and I've never worked out a good way of dealing with inheritance. For defining functions/args on the other hand, while Ida gives you a raw text box it just doesn't let you change some things? There I prefer the way ghidra does it, I especially like it showing what registers each arg is assigned to.

Another big difference I've noticed between the two is ghidra seems to operate on more of a push model, while Ida is more of a pull model - i.e. when you make a change, ghidra tends to hang for a second propagating it to everything referencing it, while Ida tries pulling the latest version when you look at the reference? I have no idea if this is how they actually work internally, it's just what it feels like. Ida's pull model is a lot more responsive on a large exe, however multiple times I've had some decomp not update after editing one of the functions it called.

Overall, I find Ida's probably slightly better. I'm not about to pay for Ida pro though, and I'm really uneasy about how it uploads all my executables to do decomp. While at the same time, ghidra is proper FOSS, and gives comparable results (for small executables). So I'll probably stick with ghidra where I can.
by unleaded | 2026-02-16 16:11:08+00:00
Somewhat unconventional (and i'm not really a seasoned reverse engineer so take it with some salt) but I started by hacking old video games (nes, gameboy, arcade.. that kind of thing). You could start with making basic action replay RAM cheats to e.g. give Mario infinite lives, then you can use breakpoints, the debugger, and a 6502 ISA reference to edit instructions and make ROM patches.

from then you can use things like Ghidra (which supports a lot of those old CPU arches) for more advanced analysis and make the game do almost whatever the hell you want if you have the patience.

I think a lot of the skills will transfer quite well (obviously not 1:1, you will need to learn some things) to the more employable side of RE if that's what you're interested in
by Cyph0n | 2026-02-16 16:11:08+00:00
You’re either missing my point or deflecting. Let me expand one last time.

Israel claims to be threatened by its neighbors. Israel claims to want peace with countries in the region. Neighboring countries have repeatedly stated that a precondition to normalization is a just solution for Palestinians. But Israel does not want a just solution.

In other words, the problem is entirely self-inflicted. Israel wants peace, but without making any concessions on the issue of Palestine. So instead it pursues a system of “peace through violence” - just like it does in the West Bank and Gaza.
by skeledrew | 2026-02-16 16:11:18+00:00
> don't understand that those abilities have been around for a while now

Hugely underestimated comment. That's pretty much the entire point here. Many people didn't know something with these capabilities was already possible. Or some - like me - knew of the potential, but couldn't be bothered/didn't have the time to put the bits together in a satisfactory flow (I'm currently exploring and building on nanobot[0], which is directly inspired by OpenClaw; didn't touch OC because it's in JS and I'm a Python person). Everything came together really well, which is why it's a "killer app". And now the dam has burst there will be customized takes on the concept all over the place (I'm also aware of a Rust "port", Moltis[1]), taking the idea to next levels.

[0] https://github.com/HKUDS/nanobot
[1] https://github.com/moltis-org/moltis
by CamperBob2 | 2026-02-16 16:11:26+00:00
If it answers this out-of-distribution question correctly -- which the other major models do -- what else should we conclude, other than that a meaningful form of "understanding" is being exhibited?

Do we need a new dictionary word that acts as a synonym for "understanding" specifically for non-human actors? I don't see why, personally, but I guess a case could be made.