MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by phil21 | 2026-02-21 20:39:45+00:00
Local LLM is so utterly slow even with multiple $3,000+ modern GPUs operating in the giant context windows openclaw generally works with that I doubt anyone using it is doing so.

Local LLM from my basic messing around is a toy. I really wanted to make it work and was willing to invest 5 figures into it if my basic testing showed promise - but it’s utterly useless for the things I want to eventually bring to “prod” with such a setup. Largely live devops/sysadmin style tasking. I don’t want to mess around hyper-optimizing the LLM efficiency itself.

I’m still learning so perhaps I’m totally off base - happy to be corrected - but even if I was able to get a 50x performance increase at 50% of the LLM capabilities it would be a non-starter due to speed of iteration loops.

With opelclaw burning 20-50M/tokens a day with codex just during “playing around in my lab” stage I can’t see any local LLM short of multiple H200s or something being useful, even as I get more efficient with managing my context.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-02-21 20:39:47+00:00
My wife worked for Verizon soon after we got married as a CSR and I’ve witnessed first hand how they train CSRs at companies, the training is light and the turnover rate is high with the exception of people like 911 operators and they have workflows based on the type of call. Human CSRs are very much “automated”, scripted and get very little leeway to veer from the scripts.

Besides struggling with speech to text more than you are use to even with Siri because of the inherent limitation of the bandwidth that is used to delivery your voice over phone lines, there is no reason a well designed LLM based system couldn’t do as well.

But in my experience, there are a lot of people who specialize in call centers that don’t have a development background.
by woodruffw | 2026-02-21 20:40:17+00:00
I think “has predictable outputs” is less valuable than “has expected outputs” for most workloads. Dividing by zero almost always reflects an unintended state, so proceeding with the operation means compounding the error state.

(This isn’t to say it’s always wrong, but that having it be an error state by default seems very reasonable to me.)
by mh- | 2026-02-21 20:40:38+00:00
(Offtopic but since we're already there, and a standalone post for this seems inappropriate..)

@dang/tomhow, could we consider amending the "no accusations of astroturfing" rule to cover "accusing people of being bots (or using LLMs)"?

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken.

For the same reasons as the former, the latter are virtually never adding to the conversation.

I agree it's (increasingly) a threat to the quality of discourse here, but adding to the noise does not solve it.
by jaggederest | 2026-02-21 20:40:41+00:00
If the length is read from outside the program it's an IO operation, not a static variable, but there are generally runtime checks in addition to the type system. Usually you solve this as in the article, with a constructor that checks it - so you'd have something like "Invalid option: length = 5 must be within 0-4" when you tried to create the Fin n from the passed in value
by ben_w | 2026-02-21 20:40:42+00:00
There's certainly catharsis, but I'm taking the opportunity to train myself to be less frustrated by apparently stupid responses in the hope it makes me a more effective communicator towards humans.

My worst experience of co-workers (and in contract work, customers) is when they treat me the way I used to treat ChatGPT. If I can make sure I myself am never like that, just by training myself to different behaviour through my use of the infinitely patient LLMs, all the better. :)
by wongarsu | 2026-02-21 20:40:47+00:00
I'm somehow more convinced by the method shown in the introduction of the article: run a number of evals across model providers, see how they compare. This also catches all other configuration changes an inference provider can make, like KV-cache quantization. And it's easy to understand, talk about, and the threat model is fairly clear (be wary of fixed answers to your benchmark if you're really distrustful)

Of course conceptually attestation is neat and wastes less compute with repeated benchmarks. It definitely has its place
Show HN: Formally Verified a Millennium Prize Problem in Coq Yang-Mills Mass Gap
by shariq81 | 2026-02-21 20:40:50+00:00
Hi HN, I'm an independent researcher. Over the last several months, I worked alongside a neuro-symbolic AI daemon to formally verify the Clay Millennium Prize "Yang-Mills Mass Gap" problem directly in the Coq theorem prover.

We mapped the finite lattice topology entirely to the ℝ⁴ continuum by reconstructing the 5 Osterwalder-Schrader axioms, isolating the Millennium formulation into exactly 657 sequential Qed proofs.

We aggressively removed every single heuristic Admitted gap from the main topology. The entire framework now rests on exactly 4 standard textbook axioms (e.g., finite-dimensional Perron-Frobenius theorem, standard statistical mechanics).

The repository contains the raw coqc logic. The formally timestamped preprint is on Zenodo (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18726858).

I decided to open-source the kernel execution rather than fight arXiv gatekeepers. Happy to answer any questions about theorem proving, the physics, or the AI methodology.
by zmmmmm | 2026-02-21 20:40:54+00:00
It seems like the people using these are writing off the risks - either they think it's so unlikely to happen it doesn't matter or they assume they won't be held responsible for the damage / harm / loss.

So I'm curious how it will go down once serious harm does occur. Like someone loses their house, or their entire life savings or have their identity completely stolen. And these may be the better scenarios, because the worse ones are it commits crimes, causes major harm to third parties, lands the owner in jail.

I fully expect the owner to immediately state it was the agent not them, and expect they should be alleviated of some responsibility for it. It already happened in the incident with Scott Shambaugh - the owner of the bot came forward but I didn't see any point where they did anything to take responsibility for the harm they caused.

These people are living in a bubble - Scott is not suing - but I have to assume whenever this really gets tested that the legal system is simply going to treat it as what it is: best case, reckless negligence. Worst case (and most likely) full liability / responsibility for whatever it did. Possibly treating it as with intent.

Unfortunately, it seems like we need this to happen before people will actually take it seriously and start to build the necessary safety architectures / protocols to make it remotely sensible.
by matthewdgreen | 2026-02-21 20:40:57+00:00
H2 from electrolysis is wildly expensive. H2 from natural gas is more affordable. Both are alternatives to BEVs, which are the better approach to electrifying transport. If Toyota had gone all in on BEVs when it began its H2 strategy, it would be selling more EVs than Tesla. Instead it entirely ceded the field to others, first Tesla and BYD.
by throwaway13337 | 2026-02-21 20:41:15+00:00
This is the future we need to make happen.

I would love to subscribe to / pay for service that are just APIs. Then have my agent organize them how I want.

Imagine youtube, gmail, hacker news, chase bank, whatsapp, the electric company all being just apis.

You can interact how you want. The agent can display the content the way you choose.

Incumbent companies will fight tooth and nail to avoid this future. Because it's a future without monopoly power. Users could more easily switch between services.

Tech would be less profitable but more valuable.

It's the future we can choose right now by making products that compete with this mindset.
by blibble | 2026-02-21 20:41:25+00:00
say you're Shell

you are vertically integrated, you have billions invested in oilfields, refineries, distribution, and the retail channel ("gas stations")

if transport switches to electric, what's your role?

answer: there isn't one, you are completely redundant

but what if hydrogen took off instead?

if you produce via electrolysis, you only keep the retail channel

but if you can get H2 established, then you can do a switcheroo and feed in H2 produced from your existing natural gas infrastructure, and massively undercut everyone's electrolysis business

at which point you're back to the old days, just instead of selling gasoline from your oilfields, you're supplying hydrogen produced from their gas

... and that's exactly what they're trying to do
by mattmanser | 2026-02-21 20:41:25+00:00
That doesn't jive with my experience at all. I'm half-dutch, raised in England.

Dutch doesn't have the same intonation, has harsher pronunciations, and has a whole extra sound most English people struggle with (a rolled r).

The older generations also can't pronounce -thew very well as it's not a thing in Dutch, so struggle to pronounce my name, calling me Matchoo instead of Matthew. It still boggles my mind that my Mum would pick a name the Dutch can't pronounce.

The Dutch accent is also extremely noticeable to a native English speaker.

Ultimately, they're not the same at all as English is Germanic/Latin hybrid where half the words are French/Italian words, and half the words are Germanic/Dutch words.

Dutch is not.
by pfdietz | 2026-02-21 20:42:12+00:00
Storage is the bigger problem, specifically very long duration or rarely used storage (to cover Dunkelflauten, for example) for which batteries are poorly suited. Hydrogen (or more generally e-fuels) is one way to do that, but another very attractive one is very low capex thermal storage. Personally, I feel the latter would beat hydrogen: the round trip efficiency is similar or better, the complexity is very low, power-related capex should be lower, and there's no need for possibly locally unavailable geology (salt formations) for hydrogen storage.

With this sort of storage, Alaska in winter gets its energy from Alaska in summer.
by rasz | 2026-02-21 20:42:20+00:00
or good oldshool USB 2.0 Cypress FX2LP CY7C68013A or its Chinese clone Corebai CBM9002A

cy4611b___usb_2_0_usb_to_ata_reference_design https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/62992.pdf Back around 2005 a lot of USB HDD enclosures used this exact chip.

All the above needs is LBA to CHS translation.
by samrus | 2026-02-21 20:42:22+00:00
Thats actively malicious. I understand not going out of your way to catch the LLMs' bugs so as to show the folly of the initiative, but actively sabotaging it is legitimately dangerous behavior. Its acting in bad faith. And i say this as someone who would mostly oppose such an initiative myself

I would go so far as to say that you shouldnt be employed in the industry. Malicious actors like you will contribute to an erosion of trust thatll make everything worse
by constantcrying | 2026-02-21 20:43:03+00:00
>I thought it's settled science that polygraphs don't work

Of course they do. And if you read the article in the OP you also realize why.

Polygraphs are an interrogation tactic, you can force a subject into a somewhat ridiculous procedure and ask them threatening questions, creating an disorientating situation. Afterwards you can accuse them of having "proven" that they are a liar. Polygraphs work, it just does not matter whether the machine is on or off.
by moon2 | 2026-02-21 20:43:28+00:00
I have a collection of Macs from the 2000s, including the iBook G4 and the iMac G4. The iBook G4 still connects to wi-fi, and I've seen this update prompt on my iMac G4 (which is connected to Wi-Fi using a mini wireless access point).

I use my iMac G4 to play songs on iTunes, I keep my music library on a server with Samba installed and I mount the volume with the files. I love the Cover Flow design from older iTunes. I can also push songs to my iPod this way.
by verdverm | 2026-02-21 20:43:35+00:00
> Secure-Scuttlebot which solved most of the issues that Bluesky suffers from

I've heard Paul speak about this the other way around, that the experience from SSB informed the design of ATProto. I.e. ATProto solves most of the issues in SSB

For clarity, ATProto is the protocol, Bluesky is one dozens of apps, obv the biggest and most well known outside of the ATmosphere.
by jandrese | 2026-02-21 20:43:50+00:00
It's a tax. The administration can pretend it isn't, but it is.

I'm actually impressed. Trump's allies figured out how to raise taxes on the working class without the George H. W. Bush backlash. And now they're going to get enormous refunds that will not be passed on back to the consumers. It's yet another wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and their voting base is standing up and delivering thunderous applause.
by cptroot | 2026-02-21 20:43:55+00:00
Good news, there's a line in the "Coming from Rust"[1] page that says

> You never annotate a function signature unless you want to for documentation purposes.

so it sounds like function annotation is still an option for the purposes of communication, just no longer required in all cases.

[1] https://loonlang.com/concepts/from-rust
by KronisLV | 2026-02-21 20:43:59+00:00
Feels like a complex situation to me - I like that there's all sort of software out there, esp. if there are improvements to UI/UX, but also I think that the OpenDocument formats are nice to support when possible and push as defaults (while they unfortunately might be a bit confusing to casual users who are used to MS ones).

I tried OnlyOffice and it seemed okay, even if I daily drive LibreOffice most of the time. It's nice that it's open source, but I also understand the people who are cautious about stuff coming out from Russia - I wouldn't hate on software for being developed by people from there, but it also presents an obvious risk.
Why optimizing AUC may be insufficient for clinical deterioration systems
by ameenfayed | 2026-02-21 20:45:06+00:00
Medical ML research and competitions often optimize ROC-AUC as the primary performance metric.

However, in real hospital environments, the central question is not classification accuracy — it is escalation timing.

In deterioration detection systems:
• A noisy alert creates alarm fatigue.
• A late alert costs lives.
• A static classifier may fail to reflect dynamic physiology.

I’ve been exploring a framework that introduces:
• Dual-threshold activation (high/low)
• Temporal stability validation
• False-alarm suppression logic
• Governed escalation timing

The aim is to shift from probability scoring toward structured decision triggering.

I’m curious how others here would approach modeling escalation timing in a clinically responsible way.

Would love perspectives from ML engineers and clinicians.
by ben_w | 2026-02-21 20:45:33+00:00
> The price is what people are willing to pay.

Price != value.

> Tesla is far more than a car company.

No, they're not. The only thing they sell are cars and car-stuff. They have yet to sell those humanoid robots they show off. Hell, there's other car companies who also make humanoid robots, who have more than twice Tesla's revenue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Motor_Group

Even Tesla's subsidiary, Tesla Energy, which breaks out beyond "cars" is only about 10% of revenue of the car company, so even if you argue their ownership structure makes the group "more", it's still not "far more", but rather "rounding error".

Tesla's AI is just car AI, which other car manufacturers also have, and bluntly seem to be doing a bit better with it.

When the market prices this in, Tesla's share price will go down 90-99% on the international market. Perhaps not in USD though, depends how hard that goes weird.

Even a 90% drop would still see it priced like a high-growth tech firm.
by hoten | 2026-02-21 20:45:38+00:00
One area of focus missing here is game streaming / remote play (Steam Link, Moonlight, etc. over a local network).

I've come to accept input lag, but mostly play games where it doesn't matter (simple platformers, turn-based games, etc). I know steam link from my home desktop to my ~5 year smart TV is adding latency to my inputs – though I can't tell if it's from my router, desktop, or TV – but I've come to accept it for the convenience of playing on the couch (usually with someone watching next to me).

I know some blame is on the TV, as often if I just hard-reset the worst of the lag spikes go away (clearly some background task is hogging CPU). And sometimes the sound system glitches and repeats the same tone until I reset that. Still worth putting up with for the couch.
by nathan9999 | 2026-02-21 20:45:44+00:00
Built a tool that detects merge conflicts across worktrees before merge time. I (actually, Claude) did this because it was overwhelming trying to run multiple agents, and especially painful and wasting tokens when they conflict at merge time. It's also rough trying to maintain orthogonality if your codebase isn't squeaky clean and modular.

Grove is a daemon written in Rust, it watches your worktrees, continuously analyzes diffs against a shared base, and scores how likely each pair is to collide. Supported languages: TS, Rust, Python, Java, C# and Go.

You can use a post Edit/Write hook to run this automatically. It also has a TUI with lazygit-like style dashboard :)

It's probably still pretty rough rn, but pls let me know what u think!
by xantronix | 2026-02-21 20:45:50+00:00
Predicated upon the definition of "magic" provided in the article: What is it, if anything, about magic that draws people to it? Is there a process wherein people build tolerance and acceptance to opaque abstractions through learning? Or, is it acceptance that "this is the way things are done", upheld by cargo cult development, tutorials, examples, and the like, for the sake of commercial expediency? I can certainly understand that seldom is time afforded to building a deep understanding of the intent, purpose, and effect of magic abstractions under such conditions.

Granted, there are limits to how deep one should need to go in understanding their ecosystem of abstractions to produce meaningful work on a viable timescale. What effect does it have on the trade to, on the other hand, have no limit to the upward growth of the stack of tomes of magical frameworks and abstractions?
by a24446ff87 | 2026-02-21 20:47:06+00:00
GSD! GSD!! ship! ship! ship!

**everything breaks**

...

**everything breaks again**

oh fuck! Code Orange! I repeat, Code Orange! we need to rebuild trust(R)(TM)! we've let our customers down!

...

**everything breaks again**

Code Orangier! I repeat, Code Orangier!
by duxup | 2026-02-21 20:47:27+00:00
SCOTUS has a role in this too. I know folks are cheering on their decision yesterday BUT: Early on they effectively decided that inconveniencing the powerful (Trump) was worse than we the people being illegally taxed for a year and didn't do anything until later / let the case roll through the system. And now ... he's at it again.

His actions are entirely predictable, he has said he would do it, and it means that it SCOTUS sticks to their game plan that lead us to their last decision ... SCOTUS is not relevant and illegal taxes continue while new cases spin up and the SCOTUS majority folds its arms.

In the meantime as individuals who were illegally taxed, I doubt we see a dime back.
by Cthulhu_ | 2026-02-21 20:47:30+00:00
Spam and abuse. That is, assuming you get critical mass to begin with, but as soon as people find out another service where they can upload files to and the like, the abuse will begin. Facebook employs (tens of?) thousands of people for content moderation, and that's after their well-trained automated systems filter out the worst / well known stuff.

I don't know how other, newer social media (e.g. bluesky) handle it. I suppose there's off the shelf software / services for something like that?
by stanac | 2026-02-21 20:47:42+00:00
It doesn't have to be consumer hardware to be economically viable. I can imagine something like this replacing or complementing tape storage at data centers. We already have hard drives filled with gas for dust-proofing. For archival storage it does not have to be fast (in terms of latency) it just needs to be reliable with high data density.

Hard drives where the size of a car decades ago, we could now have archival storage of the same physical size that can hold petabytes (just guessing, didn't do the actual math).
by wavemode | 2026-02-21 20:47:43+00:00
You do need to gate the web browsing. 2FA and/or credential storage helps with passwords, but it doesn't help with other private information. If the claw is currently, or was recently, working with any files on your computer or any of your personal online accounts, then the contents of those files/webpages are in the model context. So a simple HTTP request to example.com/<base64(personal info)> presents the exact same risk.

You can take whatever risks you feel are acceptable for your personal usage - probably nobody cares enough to target an effective prompt-injection attack against you. But corporations? I would bet a large sum of money that within the next few years we will be hearing multiple stories about data breaches caused by this exact vulnerability, due to employees being lazy about limiting the claw's ability to browse the web.
by mdm12 | 2026-02-21 20:47:58+00:00
One option is dependent pairs, where one value of the pair (in this example) would be the length of the array and the other value is a type which depends on that same value (such as Vector n T instead of List T).

Type-Driven Development with Idris[1] is a great introduction for dependently typed languages and covers methods such as these if you're interested (and Edwin Brady is a great teacher).

[1] https://www.manning.com/books/type-driven-development-with-i...
by vdupras | 2026-02-21 20:48:07+00:00
Your reasoning is sound, but is already covered by Collapse OS' manifesto. It refers to two stages of collapse, Collapse OS being for the second.

As long as we have working modern machines, self-contained modern open source OSes, NetBSD being one, are good choices.

One problem there is with such system is their overall complexity. Sure, you can use them, and they're pretty flexible for the user. However, when necessity forces you to crack the kernel open, the learning curve is pretty big.

For example, let's imagine a computer with a broken SATA controller. How would NetBSD behave on it? Hard to say, NetBSD developers don't develop with that target machine in mind. Usually, when you have such a machine, you replace it or repair it. But what if you can't? Maybe you'll have to play in the kernel to manage to do something with that machine, route around it. Maybe it will work, but maybe you'll be stuck, and maybe that in that particular situation, it's going to have tragic consequences.

And that's kind of what Dusk OS (http://duskos.org/) is about.
by derefr | 2026-02-21 20:49:12+00:00
That's fascinating. I'd love to see a shasum tree of both OS installs to know if this was due to some path-dependent upgrade sequence one of the machines went through; or whether this is down to some sub-model-number hardware-component stepping issue with power efficiency or something, that only one of the machines is affected by, where the implemented launchd solution is "don't let cron run."