MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by anonymous908213 | 2026-02-17 17:21:53+00:00
The worst part of the death of Show HN is that most of these people are so allergic to putting any effort in that they can't even write the description themselves. The repo's readme, the ShowHN post, and often even their comments will all be fully LLM-generated. This doesn't even take skill! Writing good marketing copy might take skill, but ShowHN isn't (supposed to be) marketing. Just describe the project in your own words, I promise it's not that hard. The bar is so low that even copy-pasting whatever you prompted to the LLM would be more interesting than the LLM's output. Although maybe it's better this way, since it makes it easier to filter out the garbage instantly.
by mathisd | 2026-02-17 17:21:57+00:00
I started building an agentic-ready data warehouse (GitHub.com/mathisdrn/orca) and was thinking that my skills could be optimized by benchmarking them. Turns out there is a better way of optimizing and building them using model languages themselves as evaluator and skill builder. See DsPy and GEPA.
I am wondering whether Anthropic and OpenAI skill-creator skill is themselves optimize to optimize skills efficiency on various tasks.
by stinkbeetle | 2026-02-17 17:22:01+00:00
Sorry I flubbed that -- I meant what are now called chiplets interconnected and packaged together used to be called MCMs. A chip was always a single piece of silicon (aka die), so chiplets used to just be called chips. There was never any rule that chips in an MCM were "standalone" or functional by themselves like some seem to be saying, in fact earlier computers used multiple chips for subsystems of a single CPU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POWER2 this thing had individual chips for IFU, LSU, ALU, FPU, and D$). There was never any rule that MCMs were not low latency or high bandwidth or must have a particular type of interconnect or packaging substrate.

Advances in technology and changing economics always shifts things around so maybe chiplets are viable for different things or will make sense for smaller production runs etc., but that doesn't make them fundamentally different that would make them not classified as an MCM like the article seems to suggest. It literally is just the same thing as it always was, multiple chips packaged up together with something that is not a standard PCB but is generally more specialized and higher performing.
by avidiax | 2026-02-17 17:22:26+00:00
Ultimately the way we will get out of this is inflation, except that so many pensions have COLA.

Years spent in retirement have roughly doubled, while the pyramid has shrunken from 16:1 workers to retirees in 1950 to 3:1 today.

Means testing and retirement age increases also cause a voter or worker revolt.

Going to be real hard to keep this on the rails.
by lokar | 2026-02-17 17:22:35+00:00
When you deposit money in a US regulated bank, there are basically two places that can end up:

- on deposit at the Fed, in the account of a Fed member bank (which could be your bank, or a bank your bank has an account at)

- loaned out by your bank (or again, a bank your bank uses)

The Fed, so far, has refused to allow new member banks (eg that could deposit at the Fed) that don't intend to ever loan out deposits. They would take all customer deposits and stick them at the Fed. Many (most? the ones at the Fed anyway) think allowing this would siphon away money that would otherwise be used to make loans. They are, in effect, putting their finger on the scale to push you to allow your savings to be used as loans.

The rise of Private Credit, where wealthy individuals and institutions loan money to private firms for to fund loans is the new thing that could break this open. These arrangements are long term, the customer can't "call" the money back, they are committed, and (for the most part) their commitment matches the duration of the loans. So there can be no bank runs. And the people providing the money know what they are doing.

Levine is mostly arguing that with so much money in private credit, we could do without forcing small savers to fund loans.
by dizhn | 2026-02-17 17:22:45+00:00
Well. I do get your point and I am aware of the situation and how Google pivoted away from a truly open source OS by systematically moving components like the keyboard to separate closed source apps. The fact remains though that it's Android Open Source Project where all Android systems are based on. It's become sort of a GNU/Linux kind of distinction where the "certified" Android is AOSP + Google. Though the situation is not that clear because there are other Android based phones that do not contain the Google layer but are still Android.
by gargi_tinyfish | 2026-02-17 17:23:01+00:00
Yes, it's another accelerator announcement. But hear me out!

I am from tinyfish.ai (web agents + browser infrastructure for autonomous web workflows like navigation, auth, state, operations on the live web). We partnered with Mango Capital to put $2M behind founders building agentic applications on top of it.

Partnered with 15+ companies to give you the entire stack — MongoDB, v0 by Vercel, ElevenLabs, Fireworks.ai, Google for Startups, Composio, and others — providing free credits and direct channels to their eng teams (not their support teams).

The part that might actually interest you:

The application is a working MVP. You build an app, record a demo video of your code running and app working, and post the video publicly on X. (No slide decks please, everyone’s had enough of them).

We're specifically not interested in:

- Chatbots with a nice UI
- "AI agents" that make one API call and format the output
- Anything that can be built without browser infrastructure

We are interested in apps that do actual labor on the live web — multi-step workflows, real session management, complex UI navigation, and automate ops at scale.

9 weeks, fully virtual, rolling admissions from Feb 17. $2M seed pool, funding decisions made directly with Robin Vasan (Mango Capital).

Do check it out if that sounds interesting: tinyfish.ai/accelerator

Happy to answer questions!
by aristofun | 2026-02-17 17:23:19+00:00
Controversial point - many problems of today's IT industry stem from people taking their job too personal.

Do you know many plumbers or doctors who are so connected to their work that they do plumbing or doctoring as a hobby?

I personally try to avoid such Programmers when possible, they usually overengineer everything they touch just for the sake of engineering. Without even realizing there is a problem.
by ASalazarMX | 2026-02-17 17:23:44+00:00
I don't know why you were downvoted. This is the FOMO that encourages agent gambling, automated experimentation in the hopes of accidentally striking digital gold before your peers do. A million monkeys racing 24/7 to create the next Harry Potter first.

Ideas are a dime a dozen, now proofs of concept are a load of tokens a dozen.
by Gud | 2026-02-17 17:23:50+00:00
You are thinking about this as a reasonable, compassionate human being who is at the very least neutral toward your fellow man’s well being.

The psychos who run the show don’t think like that. Many of them enjoy abusing other people.

They will wall themselves off with their robots with instructions to kill to control the masses.

Unless, power is given to the people through widespread (direct-)democratic reform, urgently.
by ModernMech | 2026-02-17 17:23:54+00:00
On the one hand, I understand why this can seem disheartening; we want the kids to be pure and protect them from the BS of the world. It would be great if we could just allow kids to play around with science, and there's no pressure to compete or perform.

At the same time, the reason they're doing the CV padding is because we, the adults in control of those systems they wish to gain access to (which is not the science fair), have made it so they need to pad their CV in the first place.

So as much as we want them to be purely driven by curiosity and independent exploration, our society at large does not allow for that kind of thing. Fixing those kinds of macro incentives doesn't happen by reforming the science fair.

If we want curiosity driven independent exploration for children, our society should provide that modality for adults. That we don't provide it for adults is reflected on our children; because we impose credentialism on adults, the adults understand credentialism is important to success and they impose it on their children. If adults understood that creative inquiry and independent exploration are paths to success, then more children would be encouraged to pursue that at the elite level.
by thaumasiotes | 2026-02-17 17:24:14+00:00
> Who would give a loan with no collateral to young people with no credit on the hopes the major they picked had a viable job market years from that point?

Who gives out scholarships now?

Let's also note that the obvious response to the risk of the job market shifting after several years is to shorten the number of years required to pad out the degree, which is pure societal upside. The standard model of a four-year college degree only has you taking classes from your major during the final two years.
by lenerdenator | 2026-02-17 17:25:16+00:00
> But this then belies a very uncomfortable acknowledgement which is that we cannot afford the government workforce currently in place

It's not just the government. It's all of the other stuff seniors buy. It used to be that you just kind of stuck around and retired in the area where you had worked. You had paid off that house, so you retired in it. Maybe you went to the Shriners' hall and played bingo with a core group of friends until you couldn't anymore. Then you moved into a retirement home and they found activities for you to do there until Father Time came to collect his due. Maybe you spoiled yourself with a Buick or Lincoln sometime between getting your gold watch from the plant manager and croaking.

Now, that's not enough. We need entire retirement communities hundreds of miles away in warmer climes where they can play golf several months out of the year. We need cruises and travel packages. We need cosmetic procedures to look younger. We need more advanced surgeries that extend life, though not participation in the workforce. And of course, now that Lincoln is a Mercedes.

And that's great, because we've told everyone that they deserve it after a long, hard career. There's only one problem: we never addressed where that retirement income was actually coming from. They're coming from that 7% SWR, which must be funded somehow. Otherwise the retirees might have to stay in-town, be cold during the winter, and provide childcare for the grandkids because preschool now costs as much as a year of college tuition. And that makes them cranky and they start calling investment advisors and politicians demanding answers.
by queenkjuul | 2026-02-17 17:25:16+00:00
Lots of people putting that stuff on their credit cards. I personally know many people who are deeply struggling financially, and many more who have chosen not to have kids when they would liked to have.

And you'll see my struggling friends out and about town having fun; you might see them at restaurants and bars, but maybe that's happening once a month instead of once a week, or maybe I'm buying the rounds that day as I'm best positioned to afford it. Or maybe we're just wandering around the mall/park/city just window shopping and spending no money.

I do also know some people younger than me who've never lived without their parents, don't date, and are barely employed.

There's a lot of people in the world, 5% could lock themselves in their rooms forever and you genuinely wouldn't notice.
by WalterBright | 2026-02-17 17:25:32+00:00
If I may pontificate a bit, I was a major contributor to the success of C++.

Back in the 80s, I was looking for a way to enhance my C compiler. I looked at Objective-C and C++. There was a newsgroup for each, and each had about the same amount of traffic. I had to pick one.

Objective-C required a license to implement it. I asked AT&T if I needed a license to implement C++, and could I call it C++. AT&T's lawyer laughed and said feel free to do whatever you want.

So that decided it for me. At the time, C++ did not exist on the PC other than the awkward, nearly unusable cfront (which translated C++ to C). At the time, 90% of programming was done on the PC.

I implemented it. It was the first native C++ compiler for the PC. (It is arguable that it was the first native C++ compiler, depending on whether a gcc beta is considered a release.)

The usage of it exploded. The newsgroup traffic for C++ zoomed upwards, and Objective-C interest fell away. C++ built critical mass because of Zortech C++.

Borland dropped their plans for an OOP language and went for Turbo C++. Microsoft also had a secret OOP C language called C*, which was also abandoned in favor of implementing C++.

And the rest is history!

P.S. cfront on the PC was unusable because it was 1) incredibly slow and 2) did not support near/far pointers which was required for the mixed PC memory models.

P.P.S. Bjarne Stroustrup never mentioned any of this in his book "The Design and Evolution of C++".
by arn3n | 2026-02-17 17:25:33+00:00
I think there's a pretty simple explanation for this: It's hard to admit when we're not doing well. It's easy to say that the world is getting worse, that you're worried for the future, but to admit that you personally are having trouble is depressing and a little humiliating. I'm guilty of this -- even when times are really bad for me personally, I try to be optimistic and consider my current misery as a temporary misfortune. It helps to keep moving forwards.
by CamperBob2 | 2026-02-17 17:25:43+00:00
It's not an easy thing to box up and ship, unfortunately. Also, another problem (and another incentive to strip the hardware and stuff the column with diodes and capacitors) is that it has seen a lot of salt air exposure from a nearby reef tank sump. In short, you don't want this particular one.

It is pretty similar to this: https://www.ebay.com/itm/167962146153 -- a bit bigger, and it originally cost about the same.
by claytongulick | 2026-02-17 17:25:58+00:00
My understanding (please correct me if it's incorrect) is that the "worst-case" scenario for a broadcaster is that they may have to upload a record of political air time to a public file.

If an opposing candidate sees this, they can then request equal air time from that broadcaster.

The rule is in place so that one party or viewpoint can't dominate broadcast media. That's a good thing right?

The rule change here is that traditionally "bona fide" news programs have been, by default, issued an exception to the rule. That has spawned a bunch of "pseudo-news" shows that have also been claiming this exception. Here, the FCC is now saying "hey, you don't just automatically get granted an exception to the rule and get to call yourself a bona fide news program if you're not actually one"". That seems completely reasonable to me.

Broadcast media is held to this FCC standard because they are granted a monopoly for a broadcast spectrum, and it isn't physically possible for a competitor to broadcast on the same spectrum. Streaming etc... doesn't need to follow these rules.

I do think it's wrong that talk radio doesn't seem to be held to the same standard, though.
by lokar | 2026-02-17 17:26:20+00:00
There has, for 30+ years, been a real problem with politicians refusing to speak truth, or anything close to it. They tell voters what they want to hear. This is often "truth adjacent", and they thus offer partial solutions that tend to not work out.

The US has real problem that require real changes, but the political system is not responding.

IMO, people sense this, grow frustrated, and become willing to take a chance on someone who seems to speak (more) truth, and claims to be willing to pursue real changes.

We are starting to see more moderate mainstream politicians willing to speak more truthfully, and propose policy changes that may not appeal to everyone. But I'm not sure it's happening fast enough.
by wcallahan | 2026-02-17 17:26:32+00:00
American here who values individual liberties greatly. I know things are politically tense at the moment, but I’m not sure I understand this popular contemporary sentiment.

I’ve always believed governments and companies should be regarded with fairly low trust, and the behavior of big tech companies and some recent government actions are great examples why.

But what disappoints me a bit about this moment is (the perhaps inevitable?) response to nationalism with more nationalism.

Just as I didn’t seek to punish the EU over authoritarianism in Hungary and Poland, I feel the current moment has many responding to the symptoms instead of the sources of the problems. This is not a defense of policies I believe concern you, it’s a question of priorities.

I think the author of the article got it right. Because in addition to privacy, I believe one should be able to navigate the internet freely without a mandate to do business with monopolistic dominant companies, which includes rights like ownership of your data.
by PlatoIsADisease | 2026-02-17 17:26:40+00:00
I dont think its safe to assume perfect balance.

Further, I know it goes against economic orthodoxy, but I am a big fan of buying low and selling high. When the market is bad, I become more frugal, I might even run on debt instead of selling. When the market is at all time highs, I'll sell some from riskier and move that into other things.

Another oddity in this situation... People die slightly more often during flu season, so you could game this and plan to withdraw less.
Show HN: IsMichaelBurryRight – Live Index Tracking AI Bubble Stress Signals
by antonionduarte | 2026-02-17 17:26:58+00:00
I'm a software engineer who got curious about whether the AI infrastructure buildout follows the same patterns as the telecom and dot-com cycles. So I built a composite stress index that tracks 12 financial signals: credit spreads, capex/EBITDA ratios, NVIDIA revenue deceleration, neocloud leverage, hyperscaler debt issuance - and maps them against historical benchmarks.

The data comes from SEC filings, FINRA TRACE, and public market data. Current reading: the AI buildout's capex intensity is tracking closer to AT&T's telecom peak (72% of EBITDA) than the dot-com equity bubble.

Stack: Go backend, Fly.io deployment (collector, private API and public API deployments separate), Postgres database. Next.js frontend deployed on Vercel.

Would love feedback on the methodology and signal weighting. The full breakdown is on the website.
Show HN: I built a tool that helps YC companies figure out what to build next
by schreibertuc | 2026-02-17 17:27:16+00:00
I'm a PM who got tired of the same cycle: do a bunch of customer interviews, dump them in a doc, tell myself I'll synthesize them later, never do.

So I built Mimir as a fun side project for myself and my day job. You paste in your raw feedback — interviews, support tickets, survey responses, whatever... and it pulls out themes, ranks them, and tells you what to build next. Every recommendation links back to the actual quotes so you're not just trusting a black box.

There's a real pipeline underneath that does extraction, clustering, synthesis across sources. You can chat with your data, push back on recs, and it learns your product context over time so things get more relevant. When you're ready, it generates specs and GitHub issues so you can hand things off to eng (or, an ai agent).

I've been testing it on public data from YC companies. Obviously some of this is probably way off, but, again it's just using public data so you can imagine it'd be a bitter better with first-party data. And also using it myself....to build it.
by MarleTangible | 2026-02-17 17:27:19+00:00
Sounds like I should give Claude Code another try. The last time I worked with it, it was quite eager to code without a good plan, and would overcomplicate things all the time.

Not entirely relevant, but the example I remember is I asked for help with SQL to concatenate multiple rows into a single column with SQL Server and instead of reminding me to use STRING_AGG, it started coding various complicated joins and loops.

So my experience is/was a little different. Regardless, I think I should take one of my old programs and try implementing it from ground up by explaining the issue I'm trying to solve to see how things progress, and where things fail.
by lbrito | 2026-02-17 17:27:29+00:00
I kind of think of that as just increasing the standard deviation. Its been a while since I experimented with this, but I remember trying a temp of 1 and the output was gibberish, like base64 gibberish. So something like 0.5 doesn't necessarily seem to solve this problem, it just flattens the distribution and makes the output less coherent, with rarer tokens, but still the same underlying distribution.
by greatgib | 2026-02-17 17:27:35+00:00
I would not say if Grok has a real problem or not but the CCDH that did the study looks like to be a "scam". I don't know who fund them but they have clearly an agenda and would "manufacture" data however they can to support it.

Title of the study and article says that Grok "Generated", but in fact:

> The CCDH then extrapolated

Basically they invent numbers.

They took a sample of 20k generated images, and it is assumed (but I don't know if the source is reliable) that Grok would have generated 4.6 millions image at the same time. So the sample is 00.4%.

If you see the webpage of the CCDH it is a joke their study.
First:

- Images were defined as sexualized if they contain [...] a person in underwear, swimwear or similarly revealing clothing.

- Sexualized Images (Adults & Children): 12,995 found

- Sexualized Images (Likely Children): 101 found

First they invent their own definition, then adequately mixup possible "adult" pictures to give scary numbers.
by saghm | 2026-02-17 17:27:39+00:00
Yes, that's the fundamental tradeoff. But if the amount of time you save writing the code is higher than the amount of extra time you need to spend reading it, the tradeoff is worth it. That's going to vary from person to person for a given task though, and as long as the developer is actually spending the extra time reading and understanding the code, I don't think the approach matters as much as the result.
by marcusverus | 2026-02-17 17:27:56+00:00
Luckily we don't have to figure this out from first principles, we can just look at the data. 9/10 countries with the highest GDP per capita have populations under ~7 million, and the vast majority of the top 20 do as well. This is true both in PPP and nominal dollars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...
by daseiner1 | 2026-02-17 17:28:08+00:00
democracies past, present, and future inevitably crumble as the need to cater to the demos grows greater and greater with every generation of voters.

i know this is a contrivance but nevertheless: we don't consult the entire hospital how to treat my heart condition yet we accept on face value that obeying the vagaries of the hoi polloi is the best way to decide who controls the levers of power in civil society.
by rockdiesel | 2026-02-17 17:28:16+00:00
Funny that you mention that. That's how it originally worked, but I changed it to filter in brands because I assumed golfers are more brand loyal, and thought they might want to only look at the brands they normally play with.

I think your toggle idea is a good one though, and I'll look to implement that. I can see how some people might want that.