MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by internet_points | 2026-02-17 20:03:07+00:00
I just sent TFA to a colleague of mine who was experimenting with llm's for auto-correcting human-written text, since she noticed the same phenomenon where it would correct not only mistakes, but slightly nudge words towards more common synonyms. It would often lose important nuances, so "shun" would be corrected to "avoid", and "divulge" would become "disclose" etc.
by Paracompact | 2026-02-17 20:03:10+00:00
Curious, what has you believe that? As someone who doesn't know much about chess AI, I was mostly able to follow along, and figured there were simply some prereqs the author wasn't explaining (e.g. distillation, test-time search, RLVR). If the article is deeply confused in some way I would indeed like to calibrate my BS detectors.
by kettlecorn | 2026-02-17 20:03:14+00:00
I meant in a general sense. grok/xAI are politically aligned with whatever Musk wants. I haven't used their products but yes they're likely harmful in some ways.

My concern is more over time if the federal government takes a more active role in trying to guide corporate behavior to align with moral or political goals. I think that's already occurring with the current administration but over a longer period of time if that ramps up and AI is woven into more things it could become much more harmful.
by fabian2k | 2026-02-17 20:03:22+00:00
It's impressive how bad they're at hiring the safety drivers. This is not even measuring how good the Robotaxi itself is, right now it's only measuring how good Tesla is at running this kind of test. This is not inspiring any confidence.

Though maybe the safety drivers are good enough for the major stuff, and the software is just bad enough at low speed and low distance collisions where the drivers don't notice as easily that the car is doing something wrong before it happens.
by cjbenedikt | 2026-02-17 20:03:43+00:00
Ten, twelve years ago I couldn't lift my right arm over my head to reach for a mug on a shelf without pain. Sometimes so much pain I had to use my left arm instead. Today I can do single arm pull-ups without any pain. No MRI, not even a physio, just careful exercise. Started by regularly swimming, then weights, then calisthenics.
by vladgur | 2026-02-17 20:03:49+00:00
You dont need to be a billionaire to be able to afford a good school for your children if the public ones dont meet your criteria.

Im not sure about this particular school, but i am greatly disappointed at baseline california core requirements for math and science in middle school and the parents choice is to either have your child be bored in school while complementing their education with RSM or Singapore Math after hours
Or to choose a private school that will make your child more competitive with kids being educated by other countries systems.
Show HN: Vestauth – Auth for Agents
by scottmotte | 2026-02-17 20:03:52+00:00
I"m the creator of dotenv and dotenvx. A month ago I started building a way for agents to store and rotate secrets as part of dotenvx and I ran into a problem. Agents can't sign themselves up autonomously. They need a way to do this - without a human in the loop.

I searched for solutions but wasn't happy with any so I created Vestauth.

Here's how it works:

It manages both the agent and the provider side. The agent with one command can set up a cryptographic identity avoiding human designed handshake mechanisms like OAuth. And on the provider side there is no management of API keys, no username and passwords, no users table even. Authentication works with a single line of code verifying this cryptographically.
by rasz | 2026-02-17 20:03:59+00:00
This is very bad. No filtering, all transitions on harmonics.

Emotes in readme, emotes in scripts, emotes in source files, lol libs used = LLMed up the ass. Someone pointed Claude (yes, CLAUDE.md is in the repo) at https://github.com/F5OEO/rpitx and told it to wrap it around in fluff go code, then sprinkled profanities and pirate theme on top.
by miki123211 | 2026-02-17 20:04:02+00:00
This is one area where reinforcement learning can help.

The way you should think of RL (both RLVR and RLHF) is the "elicitation hypothesis[1]." In pretraining, models learn their capabilities by consuming large amounts of web text. Those capabilities include producing both low and high quality outputs (as both low and high quality outputs are present in their pretraining corpora). In post training, RL doesn't teach them new skills (see E.G. the "Limits of RLVR"[2] paper). Instead, it "teaches" the models to produce the more desirable, higher-quality outputs, while suppressing the undesirable, low-quality ones.

I'm pretty sure you could design an RL task that specifically teaches models to use modern idioms, either as an explicit dataset of chosen/rejected completions (where the chosen is the new way and the rejected is the old), or as a verifiable task where the reward goes down as the number of linter errors goes up.

I wouldn't be surprised if frontier labs have datasets for this for some of the major languages and packages.

[1] https://www.interconnects.ai/p/elicitation-theory-of-post-tr...

[2] https://limit-of-rlvr.github.io
by Cieric | 2026-02-17 20:04:10+00:00
Now that I could agree with, the only place where hiccups have started to occur are with wave intrinsics where you can share data between thread in a wave without halting execution. I'm not sure disallowing it would be the best idea as it cuts out possible optimizations, but outright allowing it without the user knowing the number of lanes can cause it's own problems. My job is the fun time of fixing issues in other peoples code related to all of this. I have no stakes in rust though, I'd rather write a custom spirv compiler.
by butterlettuce | 2026-02-17 20:05:01+00:00
I really don’t appreciate BigCoffee pushing their anxiety juice on me.

Ever since I stopped drinking that mini-panic-attack potion, my heart hasn’t skipped a beat, my sleep has been great and I don’t feel tired all the time.

Hopefully one day people wake up (haha) and dump it the way we’ve dumped cigarettes.
by Herring | 2026-02-17 20:05:52+00:00
Last time it took a huge depression to get people to start working together (FDR's socialism lite).

I think part of the problem is capitalism itself. Most US companies are run like tiny little fascist dictatorships, which is a great training ground for the real thing. It doesn't socialize people to cooperate. Contrast eg Norway, where businesses operate inside a formal 3-way agreement (Trepartssamarbeidet) between the government, employers associations, and trade unions.
by LordDragonfang | 2026-02-17 20:06:10+00:00
> A blade of grass has more humanity and is more deserving of respect than anything being referred to as AI does.

Emphatically disagree.

Even ignoring the obvious absurdity in this statement by pointing out that an LLM is emulating a human (quite well!) and a blade of grass is not:

I don't trust any human who can interact with something that uses the same method of communication as a human, and for all intents and purposes communicates like a human, and not feel any instinct to treat it with respect.

This is the kind of mindset that leads to dehumanizing other humans. Our brain isn't sophisticated enough to actually compartmentalize that - building the habit that it's right to treat something that talks like a sapient as if it deserves zero respect is going to have negative consequences.

Sure, you can believe it's a just a tool, and consciously let yourself treat it as one. But treat it like an incompetent intern, not a slave.
Ask HN: Why) are you using AI to browse the web?
by ATechGuy | 2026-02-17 20:06:11+00:00
[Posting again in hopes of gaining further perspectives and insights]

Do you still browse the web the same way you did (say 5 years ago) or you use AI to browse, summarize, etc. on websites? Is it about speed/efficiency, instant answers (gratification), or something else?

I've noticed I'm less willing to read long articles now that I can get instant summaries. I'm curious to understand if AI is saving us time or is it training us to avoid effort.
by strcat | 2026-02-17 20:06:26+00:00
> It's had continual security updates apart from the Android version.

Nope, it doesn't receive most privacy and security patches. Users are being heavily misled about what's provided. First of all, the kernel is nearly entirely not being updated which is a massive portion of the privacy and security patches. Murena's devices have poor privacy and atrocious security including due to the failure to properly provide basic privacy/security patches. Their claims about what they provide need to be distinguished from what is actually provided. /e/ updates the patch level regularly to claim they provide the security patch backports but that doesn't mean they actually provided all of them. It's an arbitrary value and they don't set it accurately.

Fairphone 3 uses the end-of-life Linux 4.9 branch, Fairphone 4 use the end-of-life Linux 4.19 branch and Fairphone 5 uses the end-of-life 5.4 branch. Each was largely not receiving the upstream LTS updates while they were still provided but now they're not provided. An OS that's not receiving basic kernel updates is definitely not receiving security patches anymore, but they were largely never providing these updates in the first place long before the kernel branch or devices were considered end-of-life.

Similar to iOS and other operating systems, Android only backports a subset of privacy and security patches to older Android branches. Only Android 16 QPR2 has the full set of Android privacy and security patches. You aren't receiving all of the standard Android privacy and security patches if you're not on Android 16 QPR2. Many of the patches are also treated as optional and deferred as being mandatory far into the future. It's also worth noting the dates are misleading. Android's March 2026 security backported have been finalized for a while and up to August 2026 are available to ship by OEMs already but a lot more will be added to June 2026. February 2026 Android security patches are the latest with a public bulletin but not the latest available to ship.

Fairphone and especially /e/ also have very incomplete patches for firmware and drivers. /e/ also has major issues patching other components including the browser engine used by the OS for the WebView.
by poszlem | 2026-02-17 20:06:30+00:00
This is a bit of a tangent, but it highlights exactly what people miss when talking about China taking over our industries. Right now, China has about 140 different car brands, roughly 100 of which are domestic. Compare that to Europe, where we have about 50 brands competing, or the US, which is essentially a walled garden with fewer than 40.

That level of internal fierce competition is a massive reason why they are beating us so badly on cost-effectiveness and innovation.
by MrCheeze | 2026-02-17 20:06:40+00:00
In my experience with the models (watching Claude play Pokemon), the models are similar in intelligence, but are very different in how they approach problems: Opus 4.5 hyperfocuses on completing its original plan, far more than any older or newer version of Claude. Opus 4.6 gets bored quickly and is constantly changing its approach if it doesn't get results fast. This makes it waste more time on"easy" tasks where the first approach would have worked, but faster by an order of magnitude on "hard" tasks that require trying different approaches. For this reason, it started off slower than 4.5, but ultimately got as far in 9 days as 4.5 got in 59 days.
by fabian2k | 2026-02-17 20:06:43+00:00
This is with safety drivers. So at this point you can't really make any conclusions about how good the Robotaxi is at avoiding major crashes since those should ideally be handled by the safety drivers. Without the actual data around all driver interventions you cannot make any positive conclusions about safety here.

My suspicion is that these kinds of minor crashes are simply harder to catch for safety drivers, or maybe the safety drivers did intervene here and slow down the car before the crashes. I don't know if that would show in this data.
by heathrow83829 | 2026-02-17 20:06:51+00:00
this is misleading because they're not comparing apples to apples.

the insurance companies are looking into all the details I'm sure to be able price the risk accordingly. Lemonade is putting their money where their mouth is and it's pricing FSD miles at 1/2 the rate of manned driving. that's because FSD gets 1/2 the number accidents per mile.
by simonh | 2026-02-17 20:07:15+00:00
All true, but I remember several articles in the Economist in the first year warning that no collapse was imminent, and basically that the Russian central bank had plenty of options to recalibrate the economy in the medium term. They made comparisons with other countries that have been subject to similar, or even much more severe sanctions.

Overall I think they’ve been the best source of analysis on this I’ve found. They were explaining what CDOs and such were, and why they were a systemic risk years before the collapse in 2008.
by PlatoIsADisease | 2026-02-17 20:07:23+00:00
Don't take this seriously, but here is what I imagined happened:

Sam/OpenAI, Google, and Claude met at a park, everyone left their phones in the car.

They took a walk and said "We are all losing money, if we secretly degrade performance all at the same time, our customers will all switch, but they will all switch at the same time, balancing things... wink wink wink"
by xdotli | 2026-02-17 20:07:26+00:00
> limited to a single markdown file of instructions
single file of instructions is common in most benchmark papers, e.g. Terminal Bench. Also we have very complicated prompts like this one: https://www.skillsbench.ai/tasks/shock-analysis-supply

> opaque verifier
Could you specify which tasks' verifier is not clear or defective for benchmarking purpose?

> No problems involving existing codebases, refactors, or anything of the like,
Also not true and we have many tasks e.g.https://www.skillsbench.ai/tasks/fix-build-google-auto, https://www.skillsbench.ai/tasks/fix-build-agentops, https://www.skillsbench.ai/tasks/react-performance-debugging
by parl_match | 2026-02-17 20:07:34+00:00
no offense but you completely misinterpreted what i wrote. i didnt say who hosts the materials, i said who hosts the tool. i didnt mention anything about the platform, which is a very relevant but separate party.

if you think i said otherwise, please quote me, thank you.

> Historically hosts have always absolutely been responsible for the materials they host,

[citation needed] :) go read up on section 230.

for example with dmca, liability arises if the host acts in bad faith, generates the infringing content itself, or fails to act on a takedown notice

that is quite some distance from "always absolutely". in fact, it's the whole point of 230
Show HN: Radar – Automated vulnerability scanning for SMBs (free in beta)
by oscarsixsecllc | 2026-02-17 20:07:44+00:00
Hi HN, I built Radar to give small businesses and MSPs access to real vulnerability scanning without enterprise pricing or long-term contracts.

What it does: Enter a domain you own, verify ownership via DNS TXT record, and Radar runs a full scan — subdomain enumeration, DNS recon, port and service scanning, and vulnerability assessment (OWASP Top 10, infrastructure flaws, exposed assets). You get a PDF report in under 60 minutes.

What it is not: This isn't a penetration test. There's no manual exploitation or business logic testing. It's automated vulnerability scanning — the security baseline that most small businesses skip because pentests are $10k+ and confusing to buy.

Tech: Serverless on Google Cloud Run. Each scan spins up, runs, and tears down. Pay-as-you-go at $99/scan — no subscriptions.

Free during beta: Radar is in beta right now and Stripe is in test mode, so scans are free. Use test card 4111 1111 1111 1111 (exp: 11/11, cvc: 111) at checkout.

Try it: https://www.oscarsixsecurityllc.com/#solutions

Happy to answer questions about the scanning methodology, architecture, or anything else.
by nebula8804 | 2026-02-17 20:07:51+00:00
AOC has just improves her ranking big time in the last few days. If she keeps this up she 'maybe' she has a shot at the White House (maybe, its going to be a long two years).

Think about it: A bernie Sanders type candidate not taking corporate PAC money is currently in the running for the White House! We saw with Mamdani they will throw everything at her. Will she falter? Hope not but feeling better than I have felt in a while.
by Spivak | 2026-02-17 20:08:30+00:00
I think this is the strongest disagreement I have gotten from someone who understands my point completely and agrees with it.

This is exactly why I'm saying that university can be made orders of magnitude less expensive is because the primary educational value you get which comes from professors lecturers, and TA's is not expensive at all. Everything else is negotiable and an opportunity to make cuts.
by zeras | 2026-02-17 20:08:53+00:00
Every system can be gamed, but if it were me and I were looking for a simple filtering solution, I would do something like this ..

Set a policy of X comments required per submission in the last 30 days (not counting last 24 hours) for all submissions, not just "Show HN:" posts.

Meaning, users would need to post X comments before they could post a submission and by not counting the last 24 hours, someone couldn't join, post X comments and immediately post a submission.

It would limit new submission posts to people who are active in the community so they would be more familiar with the policies and etiquette of HN along with gaining an idea of what interests its members.

One thing I noticed recently while going through several of the Show HN submissions was that a lot of the accounts had been created the same day the submission was made.

My guess is HN has become featured on a large number of "Where do I promote/submit my _____?" lists in blogs, social media, etc. to the point that HN is treated like a public bulletin board more than a place to share things with each other in the community.

I love the Show HN section because so many interesting things get posted there but even I have cut back on checking it lately because there are simply too many things posted to check out.

I hope they do something to improve it.
by screye | 2026-02-17 20:09:06+00:00
Surprised Canadians would pick the US as a tourist destination to begin with.

Europe is cheaper and more fun. America's one advantage: nature, is matched and at times exceeded by Canada. Flights to warm places like Miami and SD take just as long as Mexico or the Caribbean.

Other than NYC and Utah-area national parks, I can't think of unique reasons for Canadians to vacation in the US specifically.
by throwawaytea | 2026-02-17 20:09:12+00:00
I know HN hates anecdotal health advice.. especially natural stuff.. but order yourself some Stinging Nettle powder or grounds, loose, and make yourself a decently strong tea everyday. I personally drink a liter, but I've had friends helped by just one cup daily.
I had strong seasonal allergies that for 3-5 months of the year would leave me in sneezing fits, or drooling liquid out of my nose, or just with a constant itch in my nose.
After years of stinging nettle drinking, on the worst days I have small symptoms.
A skeptical friend was finally convinced when we went hiking in an area that started to even bother him, someone who had almost no allergies ever, yet I had half of his reaction.. and he had known how sensitive I was prior.

Obviously there are many types of allergies and who knows if it works for you.. but worth a shot.
by skissane | 2026-02-17 20:09:37+00:00
How many people do dogs kill each year, in circumstances nobody would justify?

How many people do frontier AI models kill each year, in circumstances nobody would justify?

The Pentagon has already received Claude's help in killing people, but the ethics and legality of those acts are disputed – when a dog kills a three year old, nobody is calling that a good thing or even the lesser evil.
by JoshTriplett | 2026-02-17 20:09:41+00:00
You have given no argument for why an LLM cannot be intelligent. Not even that current models are not; you seem to be claiming that they cannot be.

If you are prepared to accept that intelligence doesn't require biology, then what definition do you want to use that simultaneously excludes all high-end AI and includes all humans?

By way of example, the game of life uses very simple rules, and is Turing-complete. Thus, the game of life could run a (very slow) complete simulation of a brain. Similarly, so could the architecture of an LLM. There is no fundamental limitation there.
by LorenPechtel | 2026-02-17 20:09:52+00:00
Yup, this is the real problem. What he's talking about isn't the real problem. The real problem is we have gone to a "model" of fund less, pretend we can make it up by increasing risk. And rather than face a big problem it gets swept under the rug until it can't be any more.

We also have the problem that paying pensions becomes somebody else's problem. Thus in contract negotiations pushing benefits into pensions rather than current wages becomes attractive. You can agree to more without breaking the current budget.

The old rules worked better because limiting what pension funds could be in also limited the shenanigans that were possible.
by rfonseca | 2026-02-17 20:10:11+00:00
I was part of the early alpha for this, they opened a beta wait list today. The thing that is different here is that they remove 99.9% of the friction to create agents, the target user group is not a user who can run Claude Code and install their app on some service, it is everyone else who couldn't be bothered to worry about plans, keys, domain names, datatabes, etc.

You talk to a master agent (Sidekick) describing the app you want, and it creates it for you, batteries included (a lot of tools, which are vetted MCP servers and skills, a database, cron-jobs, and a hosting environment where your apps live). The tools connect to many things such as email, slack, weather, sports, news, web, and your agents can do all sorts of things.
by tibbar | 2026-02-17 20:10:14+00:00
I can't speak to your specific set up, but it sounds like you're halfway there if you can access the previous traces? All anyone can ask for is "show me the traces that led up to this point"; the "why did you do this" is a notational convenience for querying that data. If your set up isn't summarizing those traces correctly, then that sounds like a specific bug in the context or model quality, but the point is that the traces exist and are queryable in the first place, however you choose to do that.

(I am still primarily talking about agent traces, like the original OP, not internal reasoning blocks for a particular LLM call, though - which may or may not be available in context afterwards.)

In particular, asking "why" isn't a category error here, although there's only a meaningful answer if the model has access to the previous traces in its context, which is sometimes true and sometimes not.
by CydeWeys | 2026-02-17 20:10:37+00:00
> especially when it comes to dynamic range

You can solve this by having multiple cameras for each vantage point, with different sensors and lenses that are optimized for different light levels. Tesla isn't doing this mind you, but with the use of multiple cameras, it should be easy enough to exceed the dynamic range of the human eye so long as you are auto-selecting whichever camera is getting you the correct exposure at any given point.
by sensanaty | 2026-02-17 20:10:43+00:00
I genuinely fail to see the usefulness, though, it seems counterproductive to me to do this kinda stuff. In my experience I just throw out the whole chat/session as soon as I notice it's starting to repeat mistakes/start doing stupid shit consistently, the few times I've tried interrogating it I could immediately tell all it was doing is, for lack of a better word, being a sycophant and aping my words back at me.