MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by silisili | 2026-02-24 06:17:35+00:00
That I don't know exactly if it's just one on one, as I've not read up on it when it's a more personal relationship.

I do know that my own wife, who was home all day watching just one child, was open to taking on more for free, but regulations around it made it way more of a headache than it was worth. There are laws about how many kids you can watch, how long you can watch them, licensing, child to adult ratios, state visits, etc.

Basically, if you wanted to be open to watching 5 kids for a working day, doing so would be illegal in every state I've lived in.

Every state has regulations and laws that at face value most people would agree with, but together end up in a system where you have to pay thousands per month for a facility to watch a child.
by Atlas667 | 2026-02-24 06:17:50+00:00
Right, nothing can, but it is harder to corrupt when the state isn't a handful of people with shields of bureaucracy where access to power can only be attained by the richest individuals in that society.

Communism isn't "let the state do more things" as many think. Communism is "make all of the people into the state". Cut out the middle-man, so to say. Direct democracy, peoples councils, peoples courts, all with a worldview that keeps it that way; socialism/communism. It's intention, as a movement is to not to leave political power to an external organization. To organize your workplace, neighborhood, town and city, into its own political power.
by geocar | 2026-02-24 06:18:28+00:00
These "types" are hindley-milner types and have almost nothing to do with what C calls a type.

Your "feelings" may help you make snap judgements that can keep you alive, but they cannot help you code and they will conspire against you when you effort to learn new things. Nobody wants to feel wrong, and you will feel wrong many times when you learn something new, but it is the only way to actually learn the thing. Remember this the next time you have "feelings" about knowledge
Show HN: I built an AI Voice note taker transcriber
by bubbly_snow | 2026-02-24 06:19:29+00:00
Hi HN,

I have been building mobile apps for about 8 years now. I built a tool iOS app to just transcribe and summarize audio recordings, meetings, lectures, seminars, doctor appointments, project showcase, event, journalism etc. It can unlimited record and transcribe, summarize and get key data, AI chat with transcription, youtube video to transcript and summary.

The goal was to make something completely frictionless. There is no login required. You just open it and start recording, or paste a YouTube link to get the full transcript and AI summary instantly without having to watch the video.

Under the hood, I am using the Gemini API with a custom model for the heavy lifting. The audio is kept on your device, sent to the API for processing, and then deleted within 24 hours. It is definetly not used for training any models.

Main features:

Audio recording and file import

YouTube video to notes and summaries

Chat directly with your transcripts to find specific info

Supports over 100 languages

Unlimited recording hours (I am trying to make the math work on a flat subscription rather than charging users per minute)

Flash Cards and quiz based on transcript for learners.

Since I just launched it a few days ago, I am really looking for feedbacks. Free generation and free trial is also available.
Thanks.
by freakynit | 2026-02-24 06:20:10+00:00
"Anyone playing around with things like Reticulum? LoRA? Mesh networks?"

I'm curious about the 'day after' scenario: what's the move if the state decides to regulate these into "illegality" because they bypass official channels? We have to remember that the devices aren't the problem... the real hurdle is the bureaucratic gatekeeping of communication. The problem are people, not devices.
by Dylan16807 | 2026-02-24 06:20:14+00:00
> A hover-based clock, such as the one in Jane Ori's CPU Hack, is fast and stable, but requires you to hold your mouse on the screen, which some people claim does not count as turing complete for whatever reason, so I wanted this demo to be fully functional with zero user input.

That hover clock post is from 2023 and the "some people claim does not count" post is 2022. They were probably talking about the ones that make you check thousands of boxes to drive the logic forward.

Anyway, very cool advancement.
by singhsanjay12 | 2026-02-24 06:21:00+00:00
Agree - sliding window error rates plus client-side circuit breakers (with half-open probes and ramp-up) work really well in practice, and the recovery-speed point is especially important.

The only nuance I was trying to call out is what happens at very large scale. These mechanisms operate per client instance, so each client needs a few failures before it trips its breaker and then runs its own probes and ramp-up. That's perfectly reasonable locally, but when you have hundreds or thousands of clients, the aggregate "learning traffic" can still be noticeable. Each client might only send a little bad traffic before reacting, but multiplied across the fleet it can still add up. Similarly, recovery can still produce smaller synchronized ramps as many clients independently notice improvement around the same time.

So I tend to think of client-side circuit breakers as necessary but not always sufficient at scale. They're great for fast local containment and tail-latency protection, but they work best when paired with some shared signal (LB, mesh control plane, or similar) that can dampen the aggregate effect and smooth recovery globally.
by SilverElfin | 2026-02-24 06:21:11+00:00
But it didn’t. Anthropic is training using publicly visible data - which is arguably fair use. But creating tens of thousands of accounts, violating the terms of service of Anthropic, and then training on private information, is straight up theft. And it follows a LONG history of intellectual property theft by China. The US and other countries should not tolerate this type of asymmetric warfare.
by zer0zzz | 2026-02-24 06:21:37+00:00
I got the game with the condition I would never enable the adult mode from my parents. And I never did, at home.

One day my parents dragged me to a dinner party they were going to, and I brought along the game disc. Me and one of the other parents kids loaded the game and started playing. At some point the other kid wanted to see the adult mode and I relented.

Later on, to troll this kids brother I threw the dollars so the speak… and this little kid just lost his mind. He ran into the other room where the adults were enjoying tea and dinner and totally ratted us out.

My parents immediately bust in, drag me out and we drive home. They don’t let me use the computer again for a month over some pixelated bewbies. Good lord things were different in the 90s.
by stevage | 2026-02-24 06:22:12+00:00
>OpenAI's flagship model fails this 30% of the time. When it gets it right, the reasoning is concise: "You need the car at the car wash to wash it, so drive the short 50 meters." When it gets it wrong, it writes about fuel efficiency.

It's interesting to me how variable each model is. Many people talk about LLMs as if they were deterministic: "ChatGPT answers this question this way". Whereas clearly we should talk in more probabilistic terms.
by Joel_Mckay | 2026-02-24 06:23:42+00:00
I like a lot of Stephen Wolfram's work, but we must also recognize the questionable assumptions he made in many of his commercial projects.

There is a difference between cashing-in and selling-out... but often fame destroys peoples scientific working window by shifting focus to conventional mundane problems better left to an MBA.

I live in a country where guaranteed health care is part of the constitution. It was a controversial idea at one time, but proved lucrative in reducing costs.

Isaac Newton purchased the only known portrait of the man who accused him of plagiarism, and essentially erased the guy from history books. Newton also traded barbs with Robert Hooke of all people when he found time away from his alleged womanizing. Notably, this still happens in academia daily, as unproductive powerful people have lots of time to formalize and leverage grad student work with credible publishing platforms.

The hapless and unscrupulous have always existed, where the successful simply leverage both of their predictable behavior. =3

"The Evolution of Cooperation" (Robert Axelrod)

https://ee.stanford.edu/~hellman/Breakthrough/book/pdfs/axel...
by flowerthoughts | 2026-02-24 06:25:16+00:00
> the problem is that people from OpenAI/Antrhopic are saying things like superintelligence in 3 years

An even bigger problem is that people listen to them even after they say rationally implausible things. When even Yann LeCunn is putting his arms up and saying "this approach won't work," it's pretty bad.
by stevage | 2026-02-24 06:25:18+00:00
Pragmatics is a big part of this.

If you introduced it with "Here's a logic problem..." then people will approach it one way.

But as specified, it's hard to know what is really being asked. If you are actually going to wash your car at the car wash that is 50 metres away, you don't need to ask this question.

Therefore the fact that the question is being asked implies that something else is going on...but what?
by aurareturn | 2026-02-24 06:25:24+00:00
Any child who read maths textbooks with enthusiasm for 3-4 hours a day for years could in theory at least get close to doing what he did, but what kid had that level of motivation?

There is no way this is true. I've met and worked with enough people to know that not everyone has the same mental ability. There are some exceptionally sharp people and many dim witted ones too.
by akiselev | 2026-02-24 06:26:21+00:00
They can oneshot relatively simple parsers/encoders/decoders with a proper spec, but it’s a completely different ballgame when you’re trying to parse a very domain knowledge heavy file format (like the format electronics CAD) with decades of backwards compatible cruft spread among hundreds of megabytes of decompiled Delphi and C# dlls (millions of lines).

The low level parts (OLE container, streams and blocks) are easy but the domain specific stuff like deserializing to typed structs is much harder.
I'm building fitness SaaS – learning about pricing psychology in India
by waaznfit | 2026-02-24 06:26:26+00:00
I’m building a small fitness SaaS called waazn.fit.

Instead of chasing high-ticket pricing, I went with ₹99/month (~$1).

Here’s what I’m observing:

At ₹299/month, people “evaluate.”

At ₹99/month, people “try.”

Free trials convert better when the price feels negligible.

Indian users are extremely price-sensitive, but not value-insensitive.

What surprised me most:
People hesitate more at ₹199 than ₹99 — even though the difference is tiny in absolute terms.

I’m curious how other founders think about ultra-low pricing in emerging markets.

Does low pricing increase trust?
Or does it reduce perceived value?

Would love to hear experiences from others building in India or similar markets.
by Jun8 | 2026-02-24 06:26:57+00:00
I read this earlier today and was thinking: how many such mathematically gifted individuals exist I. The world at one time? Assuming there are probably 20-30 Tao-caliber people in the US and an adversarial multiplier of 0.1 (only 1 in 10 such kids are nurtured), we reach 300 for this generation, about 1 in a million.

That means in a generation there are ~ 10k such people in the world. Think about connecting them or nurturing them with AI companions.
by jdthedisciple | 2026-02-24 06:27:48+00:00
> A supermodel who is gifted with the gift of looks, beauty etc is also in the same category of “natural” talent but sure doesn’t get the same celebration as a prodigy in maths or science

We living on the same planet?

Pretty sure the supermodel gets infinitely more attention and certainly makes orders of magnitudes more money than some math prodigy, at least on mine.
by bot-in-the-loop | 2026-02-24 06:29:00+00:00
I've open-sourced Invariant Governance, a framework for enforcing authorization boundaries on autonomous agents, trading algorithms, and robotic systems without adding human-approval latency.
The core problem: existing governance forces a choice between human-in-the-loop (safe but slow) and probabilistic
guardrails (fast but brittle). LLM-based filters can be gamed. Confidence thresholds can't detect salami-slicing where
each action is within bounds but the cumulative effect is catastrophic.

The framework separates authority from execution from observation using three structurally decoupled components. The
Governance Kernel evaluates policy and issues cryptographic approval receipts but cannot execute actions. The Execution
Gate validates receipts but cannot authorize itself. The Telemetry Observer records everything through a one-way channel
and cannot intervene.

No ML. No probabilistic scoring. Deterministic enforcement only.

Apache 2.0 with defensive patent grant. Open-core model.

GitHub: https://github.com/utahbroker/invariant-governance

Docs: https://invariant-governance.com

Feedback welcome, especially from folks building production autonomous systems.
by apparent | 2026-02-24 06:29:30+00:00
A couple reasons:

Moms often nurse past infancy, and once she's taken 18-24 months off work, it makes more sense for her to continue the pause.

On average, moms seem to derive more enjoyment from spending time with babies. I have some male friends who had almost zero desire to spend time with their babies/toddlers. I don't know many women who feel similarly (I'm sure there are some, just many fewer).
by Quothling | 2026-02-24 06:29:44+00:00
> But do the humans need to actually understand the code? A "yes" means the bottleneck is understanding (code review, code inspection). A "no" means you can go faster, but at some risk.

I always thought of things like code reviews as semi pseudo-science in most cases. I've sat through meetings where developers obviously understand the code that they are reviewing, but where they didn't understand anything about the system as a whole. If your perfect function pulls on 800 external dependencies that you trust. Trust because it's too much of a hazzle to go through them. I'd argue that in this situation you don't understand your code at all. I don't think it matters and I certainly don't think I'm better than anyone else in this regard. I only know how things work when it matters.

If anything, I think AI will increase human understanding without the need to write computer unfriendly code like "Clean Code", "DRY" and so on.
by eucyclos | 2026-02-24 06:29:49+00:00
I'd heard of this movie before and had to check it out - the scene I watched where he was speaking to who I assume is the female lead sounded like an American and an Italian both speaking perfectly passable Esperanto. If I were to nitpick his i's were a little soft - Esperanto i's are canonically pronounced ee - but Esperanto was made to accommodate lots of different accents without losing comprehensibility and it did that here. I actually found his Esperanto easier to follow than the girl's, but that's probably because I learned Esperanto from people speaking it with Canadian accents.
by diedyesterday | 2026-02-24 06:30:13+00:00
1. The initial stage of adoption of AI will be more of a shift (some plus + here and some minus there) and reorientation and restructuring than net exponential growth.

2. Also a good portion of contribution of AI is where it's not taken into account by metrics like GDP. I have seen an explosion of FOSS projects especially in my own area and I'm sure it's pretty much are the case for many other areas.

3. Also there will be a sink-like effect with effects of AI on net wealth production. Like Earth's own oxygenation event which took billions for the produced oxygen to (after saturating all the sinks like Earth' iron reserves and turning them to Iron ore) ultimately find its way into the atmosphere.

4. Also I'm not sure what is exactly being counted on as contribution of AI to economy. Is the data-center build-outs and growth of chip companies,etc. included in this metric in AI's favor?
...
by in-silico | 2026-02-24 06:30:22+00:00
Either I'm missing something or this is way overstated.

Steerling appears to be just a discrete diffusion model where the final hidden states are passed through a sparse autoencoder (a common interpretability layer) before the LM head.

They also use a loss that aligns the SAE'S activations with labelled concepts? However, this is an example of "The Most Forbidden Technique" [1], and could make the model appear interpretable without the attributed concepts actually having causal effect on the model's decisions.

1: https://thezvi.substack.com/p/the-most-forbidden-technique
by dmpyatyi | 2026-02-24 06:30:37+00:00
That's actually interesting, thanks!

I wrote this post because of exactly those corner cases. If I'm building something agents would use - how do i understand which tool they'd actually choose?

For example you building an API provider for image generation. There are thousands of them in the internet.

I wonder if there are a tool that basically would simulate choosing between your product/service and your competitors one.
by bitwize | 2026-02-24 06:30:59+00:00
Maybe it goes to show that animals just have some of the same brain structures associated with language that we do. Parrots are capable of rather sophisticated language use, and the informal word-button experiments suggest that non-avian animals like cats and dogs display some linguistic ability. So the bouba-kiki effect in animals shouldn't be terribly surprising. Certain mammals and birds perhaps may best be thought of as prelinguistic.
by suddenlybananas | 2026-02-24 06:31:56+00:00
Yeah I'm not sure why it's being downvoted, I don't dismiss the study at all (I'm the one who originally posted it!). I just think the scientific reporting on it is very odd. It's an interesting study in terms of what it has to say about innate vs learnt associations.

>scientists have considered [the bouba-kiki effect] a clue to the origin of language, theorizing that maybe our ancestors built their first words upon these instinctive associations between sound and meaning.

I suppose just working in linguistics, I find this such a fringe and unserious theory. The hard part of language isn't associating sounds with objects (dogs can do that), it's putting those words together to make novel meanings.
by hardsnow | 2026-02-24 06:31:58+00:00
Alternative, and more robust approach is to give the agent surrogate credentials and replace them on the way out in a proxy. If proxy runs in an environment to which agent has no access to, the real secrets are not available to it directly; it can only make requests to scoped hosts with those.

I’ve built this in Airut and so far seems to handle all the common cases (GitHub, Anthropic / Google API keys, and even AWS, which requires slightly more work due to the request signing approach). Described in more detail here: https://github.com/airutorg/airut/blob/main/doc/network-sand...
by fc417fc802 | 2026-02-24 06:32:20+00:00
It's not a matter of a journalist giving up his source. The issue is the sheer quantity of data leaked and the fact that the systems are (I assume) audited. Barring a security exploit I assume it would have been trivial to identify the responsible accounts.

If you believe otherwise I'm open to your theory but I think it is on you to provide a plausible explanation here.
by owyn | 2026-02-24 06:33:17+00:00
The word "challenge" in the article title is clickbait. I guess the assumption challenged is that this measurable effect is for humans only because we are so special? Good as a headline for a non-science audience that mostly doesn't believe in evolution. It's pretty obvious that our auditory and visual systems are older than humanity as a species. I'd be surprised if the results were anything but confirming. Chickens are not going to learn English. Other species use sound to communicate and that this effect is measurable is pretty cool.
by nsonha | 2026-02-24 06:34:17+00:00
> CSS only exists becuase javascript failed to develop a styling component to displace it

there is no sortage of projects that do it (especially during the react era, people wanted to get rid of both html and css) but they get pushed down by dogma/inertia mostly. There was iOS constraint layout language ported to js. Seemed pretty cool, but the guy behind it decided to give up and everyone was like welp we tried, didn't work.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-24 06:34:53+00:00
> If a jury thinks "well I could have done that either!" You win

“A federal judge” recently “rejected Tesla's request to overturn a $243 million jury verdict over the 2019 crash of an Autopilot-equipped Model S” [1]. If a human supervising still incurs liability, human-like errors, particularly if Waymo and BYD aren’t making them, is a poor defense.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us-judge-upholds-243-million-v...
by qsera | 2026-02-24 06:36:22+00:00
Wrong. If there is no evidence, then there is no proof either way.

Imagine looking at a point in the night sky and say you want to check if there is a start at that point. You look at the most powerful telescope that we have, and yet you see no star.

Is that a non-strong evidence, as you put it, that there is no star at that point? I think not. There is no evidence one way or other. That is it.

But the scientific community of today is like "We have looked with the most powerful telescopes that we have, and yet there is no star, so it seems that there is really no star there".

This is ABSURD.

Because "most powerful telescope we have today" is an arbitrary claim. There is always the chance that the "Most powerful" is just not good enough for the task at hand. But the "scientists" (as well as the business that wants this proof badly to sell their products) don't like to admit it.
by SteveVeilStream | 2026-02-24 06:36:27+00:00
Sometimes I need to give Claude Code access to a secret to do something. (e.g. Use the OpenAI API to generate an image to use in the application.) Obviously I rotate those often. But what is interesting is what happens if I forget to provide it the secret. It will just grep the logs and try to find a working secret from other projects/past sessions (at least in --dangerously-skip-permissions mode.)
by al_borland | 2026-02-24 06:36:49+00:00
Even if the house is the same price, moving to a smaller home has lower maintenance costs.

I purposely chose a smaller home for this reason. My co-workers are complaining about electric/gas bills from $500-800/month, while mine is around $150 in the same region.

I recently got new windows. My dad has a house 3x the size of mine and his window quote a year ago was 5x what I just paid.

These things add up.

Not to mention it being more to furnish, more to clean, and introduces more opportunities for things to break.
by bartvk | 2026-02-24 06:36:53+00:00
Firefox is the only holdout against the ad companies, and I'm counting Microsoft amongst those. It's a very good browser, independent with its own renderer, with decent ad blocking and decent performance.

It continually amazes me how people use a Google product on their desktop, as if they don't send enough data to an ad company. Actually, I'm not sure why I type this, any rational arguments are definitely not winning them over.
by dmpyatyi | 2026-02-24 06:38:54+00:00
But new models are popping up every few months ->> means they trained every couple months.

I don't know if there a correlation between what LLM would choose now and how you product should look to most likely be in LLM data set.

In that YC video i mentioned in post body they discuss tool called ReSend - something like an email gateway for receiving/sending mails. What's interesting - there are a lot of tools like that, but LLM's would every time choose shiny new resend.

Seems like there are something more than just being in the internet for a long time :)