MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by torginus | 2026-02-28 13:28:21+00:00
The weird thing about this is many core Rust people agree that Rust is not the best language that could possibly ever be, even evaluated by the core principles of Rust (that is: no UB, no mutable aliasing, no memory bugs).

And if we move outside of Rust's memory model, some people have raised issues with the inconsistent syntax, and the module-based compilation model which makes compilers inherently slow, as you have to parse the whole module every time.

So there's room for improvement, and people are already working on putting ideas into practice, and some of these people who came from the Rust ecosystem itself.

And if you happen to disagree with Rust's core goals (or just place less emphasis on them), then it's obviously not the perfect language.
by zaphar | 2026-02-28 13:28:34+00:00
OpenAI and quite honestly the others think they are in a race to AGI not the bottom. That's why they aren't concerning themselves with moats or cost. This is quite simply a massive bet that we've already cracked AGI and the rest is just funding the engineering to make it happen.

I personally think we haven't cracked AGI yet but it doesn't change their calculus.
by credit_guy | 2026-02-28 13:28:42+00:00
> Amodei is the type of person who thinks he can tell the US government what they can and can’t do.

I don't think that's the case. Amodei is worried that AI is extraordinarily capable, and our current system of checks and balances is not adequate yet to set the proper constraints so the law is correctly enforced. Here's an excerpt from his statement [1]:

> Powerful AI makes it possible to assemble this scattered, individually innocuous data into a comprehensive picture of any person’s life—automatically and at massive scale.

Let's do this thought exercise: how long would it take you, using Claude Code, to write some code to crawl the internet and find all the postings of the HN user nandomrumber under all their names on various social media, and create a profile with the top 10 ways that user can be legally harassed? Of course, Claude would refuse to do this, because of its guardrails, but what if Claude didn't refuse?

[1]https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war
by flyinglizard | 2026-02-28 13:28:47+00:00
I think most of the sane public understands that Israel was aggressive in Gaza but did not deliberately target children. The reality is that you can't conduct a war in Gaza without hurting civilians because its such a densely populated place, and the lines between civilians and combatants barely exist. So either you accept it and move on, or you grant Hamas an immunity (which was pretty much the situation until October 7th).
Given that, it's not clear what justice and accountability you are looking for. Are you looking to investigate each child death as a murder case? Do a Nuremberg style trials for Israeli leaders?

The world will move on, because most accept while this was bad - doing nothing was even worse.
by dijit | 2026-02-28 13:29:10+00:00
"I've not made an argument" is a fascinating claim immediately after quoting someone
who used aggregate scale to call October 7th a "blip"- and agreeing with them.

Providing context in support of a conclusion is making an argument. That's what
arguments are.

The goalposts that moved: "blip" (single event framing) -> "scale of the conflict"
(aggregate framing) -> "I wasn't arguing anything." Three posts, three different
claims, now apparently none of them count.

Noted.
Show HN: Now I Get It – Translate scientific papers into interactive webpages
by jbdamask | 2026-02-28 13:29:36+00:00
Understanding scientific articles can be tough, even in your own field. Trying to comprehend articles from others? Good luck.

Enter, Now I Get It!

I made this app for curious people. Simply upload an article and after a few minutes you'll have an interactive web page showcasing the highlights. Generated pages are stored in the cloud and can be viewed from a gallery.

Now I Get It! uses the best LLMs out there, which means the app will improve as AI improves.

Free for now - it's capped at 20 articles per day so I don't burn cash.

A few things I (and maybe you will) find interesting:

* This is a pure convenience app. I could just as well use a saved prompt in Claude, but sometimes it's nice to have a niche-focused app. It's just cognitively easier, IMO.

* The app was built for myself and colleagues in various scientific fields. It can take an hour or more to read a detailed paper so this is like an on-ramp.

* The app is a place for me to experiment with using LLMs to translate scientific articles into software. The space is pregnant with possibilities.

* Everything in the app is the result of agentic engineering, e.g. plans, specs, tasks, execution loops. I swear by Beads (https://github.com/steveyegge/beads) by Yegge and also make heavy use of Beads Viewer (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46314423) and Destructive Command Guard (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46835674) by Jeffrey Emanuel.

* I'm an AWS fan and have been impressed by Opus' ability to write good CFN. It still needs a bunch of guidance around distributed architecture but way better than last year.
by urav | 2026-02-28 13:29:56+00:00
it's great to see so many AI powered enterprise software, agent infrastructures, dev tools, RGB wrapper... but who are you building for here?

Startups as a whole have been focused on building for agent use, assuming that a future of autonomous work is just going to emerge - yet aside from tech and engineering - claude code or openclaw isn't going to be running logistics ops, or admin for healthcare teams...

that's 70% of the worlds workforce, in legacy industries that are still being given a copilot, instead of a solution that actually reduces the workload, and frees up time.

i feel like that barrier is domain expertise. i mean i'm barely 23 years old, what do I, as a dev, know about ops challenges in manufacturing?

but with evos, by translating and codifying that expertise - it not only allows us to build domain specific applications, with a high success rate - and allow agents to carry niche expertise of a specific role, in a specific company - and let's an autonomous system start as if it's been an employee in the company for 30 years.

Maybe sometime in the future, these will be capabilities of domain expertise that we can plug into a neuralink... how sick would that be?

a rant, but the chain of thought is there. would love to discuss other's opinions
by jmyeet | 2026-02-28 13:30:15+00:00
> I am just befuddled by how much of this violence is directly motivated by religious concerns, both on the side of Iran and on the side of Israel and USA.

This just isn't true. Religion is never the reason for these conflicts. It's the excuse. It's how that conflict is sold to the rest of the world. It's how civilians are manipulated into dying in a conflict.

The source of these conflicts is always material. Always.

Reagan's Secretary of State, General Alexander Haig once said [1]:

> Israel is the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk, does not carry even one American soldier, and is located in a critical region for American national security.

In 1986, then Senator and future president Joe Biden said [2]:

> [Israel] is the best $3 billion ivnestment we make. Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to an invent an Israel to protect her interest in the region.

Much of US Middle East polciy was aimed to sabotaging and undermining Pan-Arab Nationalism (particularly under then Egyptian President Nasser) [3].

Nothing about any of this has anything to do with faith. In this case it's about oil.

Whatever crimes you think Iran might've done, I'll stack up the US crimes against Iran and it won't even be close, including:

1. Iran was a liberal democracy that the US deposed in 1953 at the behest of the British because BP didn't want to have to pay higher royalties, ultimately leading Mossadegh wanting to "nationalize" their own oil;

2. In 1978, then US-puppet Saddam Hussein expelled Khomenei from Iraq. This was about the time the US realized that Iran was likely lost. it is believed that the reason for this was that a fundamentalist regime was preferred to a Communist one (which was otherwise the likely outcome) as the US didn't want Iran to fall into the Soviet sphere of influence. So all this pearl-clutching about the current regime rings hollow when you realize the US helped created it;

3. As punishment for the Revolution, the US supplied weapons to Iraq and fueled the Iran-Iraq war for almost a decade that killed over a million people; and

4. Crippling economic sanctions, which is a fancy way of saying "starving people and denying them medical care", for daring not to be a US puppet.

If you point me to any conflict you think is based on faith, I'll show you the material interests behind it.

[1]: https://archive.ph/tMTBd

[2]: https://www.c-span.org/clip/senate-highlight/user-clip-joe-b...

[3]: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1958-60v12...
by input_sh | 2026-02-28 13:30:15+00:00
What you can do is look at the casualty rate per year and see how it went from hundreds in the 90s post-war period, to dozens throughout 2000s, to 0-1 in recent years and calculate your likelihood. Here's that chart for Bosnia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_mines_in_Bosnia_and_Herze...

I lived along former front lines my entire life, I spotted some unexploded ones with my own eyes a long time ago, I'm not dead yet. That said, I am more equipped to handle such situations than you are, as I was taught how to do that since my first days in school. I firmly believe that outsiders are frequently overreacting these days, which is completely understandable, but that doesn't mean it is rational. Your odds of winning a lottery are infinitely higher than dying to a landmine in the few days you spend here. You can increase them by doing something stupid like avoiding those markings, but besides that you'll be fine.
by t312227 | 2026-02-28 13:30:23+00:00
hello,

as always: imho (!)

the usa will "bomb bomb bomb bomb iran" for a few weeks - as they wanted since 1979:

more details to the song

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomb_Iran

1. a few weeks in they will run out of ordnance to drop

2. they will declare victory and leave

3. iran wins by not being beaten

i think 2 things are possible but very unlikely - eg. small single digit per cent probability:

* successful regime change

* a really long war - like in afghanistan or irak (~ 10 or up to 20 years)

just my 0.02€
by holmesworcester | 2026-02-28 13:30:28+00:00
A reminder: Israel counts Hamas soldiers as military targets, even when they are out of uniform and in civilian life.

If we apply the civilized world's standards of war then yes, Israelis who are also off-duty soldiers or reservists don't count as military targets.

If we apply Israel's standards, however, they are.

Are Gazans not allowed to apply the same standards to their adversaries that their adversaries openly apply to them? Would you be this courteous, in their position?
by sakanakana00 | 2026-02-28 13:30:39+00:00
[Manifesto / 宣言]
"The world is overflowing with irrational and unjust deaths. Every life lost is steeped in the profound grief of parents, siblings, spouses, and children. We will establish this Altar of Flowers to honor and mourn the loss of every precious life, equally and without exception."
「世界には不条理な死があふれています。亡くなった命には親兄弟・妻や子などの悲しみが染みついています。尊い命の喪失を等しく悼むため、この献花台を設けます。」
[Current Focus: Phase 1 - Reclaim Flowers (LF)]
We are prioritizing the Reclaim Flowers (LF) Protocol. It is a lightweight sanctuary designed to visualize collective grief without debate or division.
現在、SEの負担を最小限に抑えつつ、最速で「悲しみの共有」を可視化できるLF（デジタル献花台プロトコル）の実装を最優先しています。
Task: Implement a 2D physics-based altar (e.g., Matter.js) where flower PNGs gently stack.
タスク: Matter.js 等を用いた、花（PNG）がふわりと降り積もる物理演算の実装。
Design: Non-profit, open-source, and purely anonymous. No tracking, no ads.
設計: 非営利、オープンソース、完全匿名。広告や追跡は一切なし。
[About the Founder]
Aizawa, a 75-year-old former fishmonger from Fukushima, Japan. This is his final challenge to ensure we don't leave a legacy of division for the next generation.
創設者の相澤は、福島の75歳の元魚屋です。次世代に分断の負債を遺さないための、最後の挑戦です。
[GitHub]
(https://github.com/voice-of-japan/Virtual-Protest-Protocol/b...)
by derbOac | 2026-02-28 13:30:45+00:00
I agree with the fundamentals of what you're saying.

I don't mean to suggest that corruption should only be cast in terms of lack of competency, or that there aren't other issues of importance. But I also think sometimes the lack of competency perspective on corruption is overlooked, and people forget that appeals to empathy and similar values are of no relevance to certain individuals, for whatever reason.

Corruption is problematic for a number of reasons; I think it's important to keep all of those reasons in mind.
by cogman10 | 2026-02-28 13:30:49+00:00
Sorry if my answer seemed evasive. I was reading into your question something not stated

> the people there should not fight and let them take over, because war is worse than dictatorship, right?

No, I think the people should fight back, obviously. A country being actively invaded has a right to fight back. The war isn't their choosing and laying down arms is a mistake because captured civilians are rarely treated well after a war.

I'm specifically talking about an established dictatorship vs war. Specifically, as I said, a civil war which is a proxy war for foreign agents. Starting a war to end a dictatorship is bad. A dictatorship starting a war is bad. However, a dictatorship not starting wars is ultimately a better place to live vs anywhere under and active civil war.
by instig007 | 2026-02-28 13:31:04+00:00
> Read past "are you asking serious questions." I literally answer it.

ok, you evaded the answer, I asked specifically about generality of the principle, you kept saying "the US did this, Iran did that". You're stalling and refusing to tell the actual answer on the question I asked, so that's germane.

> I haven't seen anything in any English, European or Asian sources that seemed to suggest they were.

too bad, get better with search

> Negotiating in good faith means negotiating with a genuine intent to reach a deal. That requires acknowledging what the other side is saying and respecting reality. Someone can intentionally bullshit. Or they can be forced to bullshit because their regime at home has to save face and doesn't think it can survive being seen as giving in to America.

Negotiating in good faith means negotiating with a genuine intent to reach a deal. That requires acknowledging what the other side is saying and respecting reality. Someone can intentionally bullshit. Or they can be forced to bullshit because their political leaders at home have to save face before their donors and don't think they can survive elections being seen as giving in to Iran.

> Bad analogy. Here's a better one: you're my landlord and I'm your tenant. (Ignoring the power imbalance between Iran and America, particularly when America is parking warships, is delusional.) You say I have ten minutes to plead for not being evicted. I genuinely don't think I did anything wrong. But I spend ten minutes talking about why your shoes are stupid. That's not engaging in good faith.

Bad analogy, I walk barefoot and I don't talk to tenants, my representatives do and they end the contract with you on a legal basis of contractual terms and that's about it. That's my property after all.

Now, you in turn are still standing in a traffic jam and getting angry at me and people around you, you claim that we all don't respect your preferences and timings, so we must be acting in bad faith.
by Matl | 2026-02-28 13:31:21+00:00
> Iran's simultaneous proxy wars with its entire neighborhood

Except that's not happening and is complete BS. It also assumes these proxies have no agency and would not have acted on their own.

> It's not theoretically wrong. Just antiquated, destructive and–in the trade-based modern world–increasingly counterproductive. (You're trashing and alienating your natural trading partners.)

Guess what would allow Iran to peacefully trade with Israel. The end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.
The reason Iran cannot simply ignore that occupation is because it would loose the moral high ground in the Shia/Muslim world. And having that moral high ground (i.e. its support for the Palestinian cause) is also part of its power projection strategy.

> If your neighbour is developing ballistic missiles and explicitly calling for your anihilation, you're not going to "simply sit back and let [your]self be attacked.

Given that Israel does indeed have ballistic missiles and is explicitly calling for for the annihilation of Palestinians, or even 'Arabs' in general, does that in your mind justify October 7th?

> Iran isn't a material threat to Israel's power projection into Gaza and the West Bank.

Not Iran itself, but Israel insists that Iran support for 'proxies' is. Maybe not to Israeli power projection, but to its security at least.
by maxbond | 2026-02-28 13:31:31+00:00
I'm not going to import it into Claude, I'm not sure what I'll do with it other than pulling out some Deep Research reports I haven't gotten around to yet but was planning to read in the immediate future. I do think that would almost work - Claude presumably can't create "old" chats but I think pointing an agent at Google Takeout-style dumps makes these more viable as leverage to actually move away from these services. I think asking the agent to turn it into an Obsidian vault is probably the best bet?

I have Memory turned off so I'm afraid I won't be able to tell. I would guess so. The export hasn't completed yet either.
by nixon_why69 | 2026-02-28 13:32:07+00:00
At every step, for years, they've tried to de-escalate while Israel and the US launched direct attacks against them. Embassies bombed, that general in Iraq in 2020, last summer and now this. All of these attacks completely unprovoked except for the fact that they are friendly with Hamas and Hezbollah.

They are practically Gandhi in this story.

Looking forward, the problem with being irrationally hateful is that its irrational. What's the plan here? Persia will still exist, and its unlikely any future rulers will like Israel, given what's going on. So what's the win condition?
by mattlondon | 2026-02-28 13:32:35+00:00
No, I think I have to respectfully disagree: in the continuum of the Palestine-Israel conflict, this was a small blip. Israel has been killing civilians indiscriminately for years/decades, annexing territory, bulldozing homes etc.

What was different this time was that it was Israel who was the victim, not the Palestinians. And the only way that Israel knows how to respond to these kinds of things is to kill and to destroy.
by marginalia_nu | 2026-02-28 13:32:44+00:00
The core question of ethics as posed by the ancient Greeks is something like "what is the best way to lead your life".

"... to accomplish what?", is a damn reasonable follow-up, and ends (telos) is something the same Greeks discussed quite extensively.

Modern treatments have tried to skip over this discussion, and derive moral arguments not based on an explicit ends. Problem being they still smuggle in varying choices of ultimate ends in these arguments, without clearly spelling them out, opting to hand-wave about preferences instead.

As such this question is often glossed over in modern ethical discussion, and disagreements about moral ends is the crux of what leads to differing conclusions about what is ethical.

Is it to maximized your own happiness like Aristotle would argue, or the prosperity of the state, or the salvation of the soul, or to maximize honor, or to minimize suffering, or to minimize injustice, or to elevate the soul, or to maximize shareholder value, or to make the as world beautiful as possible, or something else?

If you fundamentally disagree about what our goal should be, you're very unlikely to agree on the means to accomplish the goal.
by hirako2000 | 2026-02-28 13:32:49+00:00
The comment was serious. It didn't feel the need to take a side.

The DoD declaration reflects a certain context, we had the patriotic act, a whistleblower exiled in Russia for defending the constitution, etc etc. We didn't need to wait a MAGA movement to be expecting such comment from the DoD.

If hackernews threads turn into mouthpieces for opinions then we have no use posting anything in here.

The comments are naively claiming commercial agreements make Anthropic right, as if contracts had more weight than the constitution.

I would rather call out a "virtuous signalling" entity in the valley simply standing for something aligned with civil liberties, and using it as a political stance in what nobody would deny is an unfortunate polarized political climate.

What to make of OpenAI then. Should I give my opinion that they took a falsely constitutional stance, or simply made for-profit move to land a juicy government contract, while making the public think they kept the same red lines as their main competitor?

Or just stick to the fact: The DoD will, as always, get away with its liberticide demands to get what it wants, because other big tech will fall inline.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-28 13:32:52+00:00
> If you had to live in gaza or north korea right now, which would you choose?

Me as me? Gaza. Because I'd get out. That's a bullshit answer, though, so I'll answer as a local. And there, it's honestly a coin toss because Gaza is possibly the shittiest war zone outside Africa right now. But if you said North Korea or Syria during its civil war? North Korea or Myanmar? I'm going with not Pyongyang.

The only one where I'd honestly choose North Korea hands down is Sudan, because that's the one nobody really gives a shit about which means it's going to go on forever.
by dijit | 2026-02-28 13:32:59+00:00
Of the 378 people killed at and around Nova, 16 were off-duty soldiers attending the
rave and 4 were killed fighting [1]. That's 20 out of 378 ... so about 5%.

So even by the standard you're proposing, Hamas massacred around 358 people who
wouldn't qualify as military targets under anyone's rules of engagement. Including
theirs, apparently, since Hamas's own explanation was that they "may have thought"
the ravers were soldiers "resting"; i.e. they didn't know and killed them anyway.

The argument you've constructed requires Hamas to have been applying a targeting
framework. The evidence is that they found a large crowd of Israelis and opened fire.

[1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-okayed-nova-music-festival...
by MinimalAction | 2026-02-28 13:33:10+00:00
Quite offtopics:

1. For a site visited by millions, a header element (perhaps h2, h3, h4) followed by a paragraph has such less spacing, it looks weird and hard to read.

2. There is an interesting question at the end [0]: Can you reactivate my deleted account? I was quite interested because if the could, then they never really deleted the data. The page doesn't answer that question satisfactorily at all!

[0]: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/9019931-can-you-reactiva...
by BarbaryCoast | 2026-02-28 13:33:12+00:00
OK, so way at the bottom it says this:

"This title does not impose liability on an operating system provider, a covered application store, or a developer that arises from the use of a device or application by a person who is not the user to whom a signal pertains."

This is obviously a law so poorly written that it'll never pass a court challenge. Assuming anyone brings one.