MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by stego-tech | 2026-02-23 00:15:25+00:00
And all of that sounds great on paper, until - again - you remember that what's being pitched and sold is not the cotton gin, or industrial automation, or robotic assembly lines, but generalized artificial intelligence. The sales pitch is the eventual replacement for all human labor in a consumption-driven society.

Who is going to buy flying vehicles when there's no jobs, and said vehicles are manufactured in dark factories like current Chinese EVs are? Certainly not the swaths of the unemployed.

Who is going to pay for MMORPGs curated by human GMs (again), their compute infrastructure, their content, their maintenance? Not the unemployed, not absent profound societal and policy changes!

The fact you're falling all the way back to basic resource extraction as potential outlets for labor is just...I don't even have the words to describe how profoundly out of touch you are with the effort involved, the harms caused (mining is one of the single most dangerous professions a human can possibly do, and your pitch is to send more humans into the mines? Or onto asteroids? Have you ever talked to a miner?), and the pittance of pay doled out to these humans as-is, nevermind in a post-AI society where labor availability far outstrips available roles.

The problem was never "what will humans do when they don't have to work", but "how will humans survive when they can't find work in a society predicated upon it for survival", and wow, you've done nothing to address that question beyond "send 'em to the mines".

Jevon's Paradox falls to pieces in the fact of a proposed tool that can replace human labor wholesale, and ya'll know it. Stop trying to wallpaper over this with historical context alone and actually sit, think critically, and address the core question at hand:

If human labor is no longer required due to generalized artificial intelligence and robotics rendering humans obsolete, how do we prepare for such a potentiality ahead of time without risking the collapse of society due to sudden and mass displacement of labor?
by alexpotato | 2026-02-23 00:15:49+00:00
Coding + Mahjong related story:

Back in college, while majoring in CS, I had a rough time dealing with semicolons, typos, missed characters while coding.

I thought to myself "I wonder if playing Mahjong in the Windows games would help me get better at scanning code and finding these types of errors". So I tried it and, lo and behold, it did.

Also, in this day and age of LLMs writing a lot of the code, scanning for missing semicolons in code sounds like "I was great at fixing telegraphs!"
by fyredge | 2026-02-23 00:16:44+00:00
Because they are harmful. The worry is not online use, but online addiction. We don't just allow parents to regulate what drugs their children consume (medicinal), we trust medical practitioners for the correct dosage. Similarly, social media regulation should be done to achieve the same effect.

The failings of individual families have far reaching consequences beyond their own homes, especially in non collectivist societies that mostly put themselves above all others.
by mdavidn | 2026-02-23 00:18:00+00:00
Welcome to the club. I registered my own domain and moved my digital life off Google services 18 years ago for this exact reason. If you need another reason: They scan all of your e-mail to target ads at you and your associates. Do it. It's not that difficult!

My "new" mail provider fetches messages from Gmail to create a unified inbox, which helped with the transition. Today, I'm thinking of shutting this off given the volume of misaddressed e-mail and spam that arrives via Gmail.
by altairprime | 2026-02-23 00:18:17+00:00
> I don't understand why you think you're not worth being paid a livable salary.

I haven’t said that at all. I think I’m worth a two-digit percentage of gross revenue in the executive market and have a track record of strategic prediction, untapped market identification, proven competence at leadership, and the tech chops to working-prototype my own ideas to faster than I can explain and delegate them and to assess and address top-tier engineers trying to slack off under the hood on a formal implementation of same.

But this isn’t a conversation about how I value myself as an executive. This is a conversation about how I value being paid as a worker. Workers don’t get paid enough to be strategic visionaries. Workers can sleep at night and don’t usually have to submit to court interviews under oath. I like being a worker, I’m an excellent worker, and I stand by my above comments on the topic of peanut butter raises: so long as executives and strategists and workers all receive peanut butter raises without unfair bias towards the formers, they seem perfectly fine to me. When executives get double-digit raises and strategists get paid worker wages, I get offended and angry and find alternate employment or outright change careers.

(Yes, if you’re being paid less than seven or eight figures a year to provide long-term strategic vision and development to your company, you’re probably being cheated out of the wage they’d pay you as strategic consultant to do that same work. Study your written job definition more closely and stop donating unpaid-volunteer work to your employers. If they object, ask them to revise your job description and increase your pay accordingly. This is all bog standard corporate worker stuff that everyone here already knows.)
by orsenthil | 2026-02-23 00:18:28+00:00
Everything evolved into a marketing platform right now. It is innately driven by the human desire for power, control and greed. There are very humans that recognize it and act in beneficial ways when power is given to them. With the rest, we get what we have right now. That’s normal thing with humans. We want to market to others, show our power, and we want to be marketed by powerful hoping we will become like them.
by bubblewand | 2026-02-23 00:19:21+00:00
You have to make everyone abide by them, for it to not-suck. At a minimum, software and service providers would have to respect settings client agents tell them they have (as in the AppleTV case, it's bordering on pointless for platforms to even have them if most vendors ignore them)

That'd probably be enough (plus something for school devices in particular to let parents set stricter settings during non-school hours, without having full admin rights on the devices) to do a ton of good, but it's not a startup, it's a protocol and maybe a law.

The startup version would probably try to capture that as some kind of one-stop-shop web portal.
by alextingle | 2026-02-23 00:19:25+00:00
Why don't you work on improving rsync, rather than reinventing the wheel? Or create something new??

It's fine as a personal project, but as soon as you get other people using your new code, they'll be exposed to all the bugs that you are inevitably creating.

Honestly, this kind of "rewrite something battle tested in my favourite language" project is dangerous and insane.
by spranab | 2026-02-23 00:19:34+00:00
Thanks for your valuable feedbacks.

SQLite handles this well in practice. saga-mcp uses WAL mode with busy_timeout=5000 and synchronous=NORMAL, so concurrent writes queue up rather than fail. The intended use case is one agent per project per session — if you had multiple agents writing to the same .tracker.db, WAL mode serializes the writes transparently.

For MCP adoption — it's growing fast. Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Cursor, and Windsurf all support it natively now. The spec is simple (JSON-RPC over stdio or SSE), so the barrier to both building and consuming MCP servers is low.
by a-dub | 2026-02-23 00:19:50+00:00
> I mean, if you turn off incremental compilation and build in a container (or some other "clean room" environment), it should turn out the same each time. Local builds are very non-deterministic, but CI/CD shouldn't be.

lol, should. i believe you have to control the clock as well and even then non-determinism can still be introduced by scheduler noise. maybe it's better now, but it used to be very painful.

> Either way it's a nitpick though, a compiler hypothetically can be deterministic, an LLM just isn't? I don't think that's even a criticism of LLMs, it's just that comparing the output of a compiler to the output of an LLM is a bad analogy.

llm inference is literally sampling a distribution. the core distinction is real though, llms are stochastic general computation where traditional programming is deterministic in spirit. llm inference can hypothetically be deterministic as well if you use a fixed seed, although, like non-trivial software builds on modern operating systems, squeezing out all the entropy is a non-trivial affair. (some research labs are focused on just that, deterministic llm inference.)
by odie5533 | 2026-02-23 00:19:56+00:00
I would think hard on Ghana. It has no shortage of black people living in poverty. Yet it's extremely safe compared to the US as a whole. You're far less likely to be the victim of a violent crime walking down a street in Ghana surrounded by impoverished black people than you are in many streets in the U.S. Not all of Africa is like that. Many countries are more dangerous than the U.S. But Ghana shows pretty clearly that it's not a racial or even strictly a poverty issue. And that increasing our incarceration rate is quite possibly the opposite of what needs to be done. We need to consider other solutions.

It feels good and easy to say lock the bad people up. But the numbers don't show that as a solution if the real issue you're trying to solve is decrease violent crime.
by Veserv | 2026-02-23 00:20:07+00:00
I do not see how that follows. Memory bandwidth is measured in the hundreds of Gb/s. You can issue tens of unnecessary full memory copies before you bottleneck at a paltry 10 Gb/s.

It is much more likely there is something else terribly wrong in a network stack if it can not even drive a measly 10 Gb/s.
by avidiax | 2026-02-23 00:20:14+00:00
Looking at the English keyboard and the English digraphs, it doesn't seem like the coverage is that well optimized. We are currently capturing 8.65% of the digraph weight, but just getting the top-5 would account for 5% by itself.

I also feel like distance travelled is the wrong (or an incomplete) metric. Change in direction seems like a good proxy for mental or physical effort. To take it to an extreme, I'd be very satisfied with a keyboard that had me move my thumb in a circle as on the original iPod, provided it just read my mind and inputted the right text. That's extreme distance but little effort.

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/%7Emec/2003-2004/cryptography/su...

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typewise

+---------+---------------+-----------+-------------------------------------+
| Digraph | Frequency (%) | Adjacent? | Pair on Keyboard |
+---------+---------------+-----------+-------------------------------------+
| TH | 1.52 | Yes | T is right of H |
| HE | 1.28 | No | Separated by O and [Space] |
| IN | 0.94 | Yes | I is top-left of N |
| ER | 0.94 | Yes | E is below R |
| AN | 0.82 | No | A is bottom-center; N is top-right |
| RE | 0.68 | Yes | R is above E |
| ND | 0.63 | No | N is top-right; D is bottom-right |
| AT | 0.59 | No | Separated by [Space] and S |
| ON | 0.57 | No | Separated by H and T |
| NT | 0.56 | Yes | N is top-right of T |
| HA | 0.56 | No | Separated by [Space] |
| ES | 0.56 | No | Separated by [Space] |
| ST | 0.55 | Yes | S is below T |
| EN | 0.55 | No | N/E are on opposite sides |
| ED | 0.53 | No | E is center-left; D is bottom-right |
| TO | 0.52 | No | Separated by H |
| IT | 0.50 | Yes | I is above T |
| OU | 0.50 | Yes | O is below U |
| EA | 0.47 | Yes | E is top-left of A |
| HI | 0.46 | Yes | H is below-left of I |
| IS | 0.46 | No | Separated by T |
| OR | 0.43 | Yes | O is below R |
| TI | 0.34 | Yes | T is below I |
| AS | 0.33 | Yes | A is below-left of S |
| TE | 0.27 | No | Separated by H and [Space] |
| ET | 0.19 | No | Separated by H and [Space] |
| NG | 0.18 | Yes | N is above G |
| OF | 0.16 | Yes | O is below F |
| AL | 0.09 | Yes | A is right of L |
| DE | 0.09 | No | E/D are distant |
+---------+---------------+-----------+-------------------------------------+
by echoangle | 2026-02-23 00:22:29+00:00
> Imagine if you have a human personal assistant, what would you ask them to do?

That’s kind of the confusing thing for me, I wouldn’t have a human personal assistant do anything for me as long as any money is on the line. I couldn’t teach them my preferences well enough to trust them to do it the way I want, instead of just doing it myself.

Personal assistants only make sense to me if you’re so rich that money doesn’t really matter to you anyways.

Your trip booking thing for example is something I would never give to a human assistant.

The alert for stuff on sale can already be done on the usual price tracking websites.
by emilss | 2026-02-23 00:22:30+00:00
True, I'd hate learning a new DSL...

Also true, suppose one would have to basically make it support basically full nodejs code? I wonder how restricting AWS Lambda gets, once you start building something complex.

Why instead of AI? I started thinking about this more because of AI, if you have a clear definition of your backend, with solid primitives, that can just get deployed at each commit, without much concern for the infra and such, this makes it easier to slop your way through features?
by rramadass | 2026-02-23 00:22:39+00:00
Seems similar to John Stillwell's classic Elements of Mathematics: From Euclid to Gödel - https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691171685/el...

It has one chapter each for Arithmetic, Computation, Algebra, Geometry, Calculus, Combinatorics, Probability, Logic.

He positioned it as a sort of a modern update to Felix Klein's Elementary Mathematics from an Advanced Standpoint series of books.

From the preface;

This book grew from an article I wrote in 2008 for the centenary of Felix Klein’s Elementary Mathematics from an Advanced Standpoint. The article reflected on Klein’s view of elementary mathematics, which I found to be surprisingly modern, and made some comments on how his view might change in the light of today’s mathematics. With further reflection I realized that a discussion of elementary mathematics today should include not only some topics that are elementary from the twenty-first-century viewpoint, but also a more precise explanation of the term “elementary” than was possible in Klein’s day.

So, the first goal of the book is to give a bird’s eye view of elementary mathematics and its treasures. This view will sometimes be “from an advanced standpoint,” but nevertheless as elementary as possible. Readers with a good high school training in mathematics should be able to understand most of the book, though no doubt everyone will experience some difficulties, due to the wide range of topics...

The second goal of the book is to explain what “elementary” means, or at least to explain why certain pieces of mathematics seem to be “more elementary” than others. It might be thought that the concept of “elementary” changes continually as mathematics advances. Indeed, some topics now considered part of elementary mathematics are there because some great advance made them elementary...

Note: "Elementary" here does not mean Easy.
by tveita | 2026-02-23 00:22:43+00:00
> In GitHub, you have to switch tabs (which is slow and distracting) to go between the PR summary and the code.

As a case study of Github UI friction, take merging a Dependabot PR from the PRs tab, with code approval required before merges. By my count this takes 6 clicks, and none of them approach a 'snappy' response time.

This is for mostly trivial single-line diffs. The entire thing could be 1 click - a hover preview on the PR list, and an 'approve and merge' button.

(To list them out: Click PR, "Files changed", "Submit review", "Approve", "Submit Review", "Merge")
by amatecha | 2026-02-23 00:22:57+00:00
> the "dumb" feed from my instance was already enough to waste my time

I guess you joined a crappy instance. The Explore feed on my instance is freakin' awesome and full of a constant stream of interesting and enjoyable posts by cool people. Mastodon isn't very optimal when you join the biggest instances on the network (like mastodon.social or similar). The tech is best experienced with invite-only communities of people who agree on a basic set of standards for their social experience.
by furyofantares | 2026-02-23 00:23:17+00:00
I'd love if someone with experience can correct me if I'm wrong but in my experience it can do all of that really, really badly. I find the happy and most likely case for any sort of autonomous thing is that it totally fails to do anything. The sad case is it does the wrong thing. There's just no case where these things make good judgement calls or understand what you think is important.

I do still find some things useful about my nanoclaw setup - convenience and easy scheduling of LLM related tasks. Well, promising actually, not useful yet. But autonomy is not one of those things.
by solskede | 2026-02-23 00:23:44+00:00
Hi HN,

I was experimenting with AI crawlers (like GPTBot and ClaudeBot) recently and realized a massive gap: most modern SPAs are practically invisible to them. If you are running a React or Next.js app without proper SSR, the AI often just sees an empty body tag.

Standard SEO isn't enough anymore. Bots are now looking for specific machine-readable files like /llms.txt, structured JSON-LD, and clear robots.txt permissions tailored for AI. I tested my own company's site and it scored horribly.

So I spent the last few days building AIO Checker to automate this audit. It scans a URL and provides:

A 0-100 AI Visibility score based on 7 technical factors.

A breakdown of missing elements (SSR, llms.txt, etc.).

An exportable .md audit file. The idea is that you can drop this markdown file directly into Cursor, Windsurf, or Claude, and prompt it to "fix the codebase based on this audit."

The initial scan is free, and the full markdown export is a one-time $4.99 fee.

I would love your feedback. Let me know if it breaks on your site's architecture, if you disagree with the scoring weights, or what you think about the emerging /llms.txt standard. Roast the UI/UX if you must.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-02-23 00:23:50+00:00
If you read my initial reply where I said your information is already out there with 100+ SaaS products for the average company.

I agree with you, Anthropic could care less about a two person vibe coded startup that will never go anywhere or a random CRUD app.

But the OP was concerned about big company things. So they should have big company enterprise agreements.

FWIW, I’ve been working for 30 years across ten companies and only 6 of those years are with any company you have probably ever heard of - General Electric when it was still and F10 company and Amazon - it was my 8th company.

I don’t consider myself “ex-FAANG”, it was a job I got at 46 with every intention of only staying for four years. I hate large companies and would rather get a daily anal probe with a cactus then go back to one (Google/GCP was a serious option a year ago). My bread a butter before I went into consulting was small less than 100 person company. Even we had enterprise agreements then

(for those doing the math, I worked in the cloud consulting department at AWS -ProServe. Everyone who works in the department are “blue badge” full time RSU earning employees. Google has a similar department)
by AuthAuth | 2026-02-23 00:24:15+00:00
I posted a cool clip from the UFC and got banned even though the content had a warning. It wasnt even that violent just a clean headkick ko.

If I started an instance it would get defederated because people would take one look and assume its toxic. But its not, Im not, I've spend years in the leftie techie activist spaces and cause no issues.
by blibble | 2026-02-23 00:24:19+00:00
> A while back I made completely separate Google accounts for YouTube and Maps just so my longstanding Gmail account wouldn't get banned if the system somehow detected that my Youtube account for example breached Google's TOS.

I bet you that if they ban one they ban the other too

the only safe way is to get your important data out of Google entirely

after manifest v3's announcement, I de-googled: gmail, chrome, search, google cloud, photos, family on android phones

2 years later, it's all gone, except youtube

and if they ban that I don't care
by mananaysiempre | 2026-02-23 00:24:38+00:00
> package-lock.json merge=ours

This strikes me as a bad idea. Which side of the merge is “ours” and which ond is “theirs” during merges or rebases is something of a crapshoot[1], so this kind of setting only makes sense when merge conflicts are only ever discovered and resolved by automatic tooling (e.g. the git-annex branch[2] in git-annex-enabled repos).

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/25576415/what-is-the-pre...

[2] https://git-annex.branchable.com/internals/#index2h2
by bubblewand | 2026-02-23 00:24:38+00:00
At least outlawing user-targeted advertising and most of the related data collection & selling (for things like credit cards and magazines, too, shouldn't limit it to just things like social media) would fix an absolute ton of problems, or at least improve them a lot, including this one.

I'm not sure it's a total solution but it'd likely help, and there are plenty of other reasons to do it.
by andrewmonostate | 2026-02-23 00:24:49+00:00
Treni is a runtime project, not an agent framework.
The problem we’re targeting is that most agents today operate on serialized tool outputs (HTTP -> JSON -> string parsing). That means the policy often cannot observe execution quality directly.

Our thesis is “seeing is believing”: keep models + routing + tokenization + tool execution + state in one GPU runtime so the agent can branch on execution signals (entropy/logprobs, retrieval distance/quality, route confidence) before committing the next step.

What we set out to prove (in order):
A) Speed: is a unified runtime materially faster than the Python stack?
B) Routing: does in-process routing beat external hop routing under matched tasks?
C) Awareness: do uncertainty-aware loops improve multi-step outcomes?

Current status from the docs:
- Speed: warm path on G5 is 80.602 ms mean / 90.350 ms p99; warm baseline ratio is 29x vs Python pipeline.
- Runtime vs vLLM (external-cold, token parity max_tokens=48): 5.130 vs 84.837 ms TTFT (16.537x), 316.403 vs 1232.660 ms full (3.896x), 1320.240 vs 28937.430 ms cold-total (21.918x).
- Routing matrix (G5): overall ext/int 1.208x (internal faster), internal error 0.0000, external error 0.0347.
- Awareness harness (C2): runtime-native uncertainty deltas are positive in both baseline and stress (e.g., +0.1539 internal baseline; +0.1154 external stress).

Paper connection:
The Entropy-Guided Loop paper (arXiv:2509.00079) is the research base for the uncertainty trigger logic. Reported there: ~95% of larger reasoning model performance at ~1/3 compute, with selective refinement activating on ~31% of responses and +16pp accuracy lift.

What is still open:
- lower startup overhead in the fused miss-mitigation path
- higher-N, region-pinned commercial reruns to tighten CIs

If you have ideas, I’d really value specific feedback on:
1) failure modes we should add to the harness
2) uncertainty policies (thresholds, rolling debt, escalation rules)
3) task families that would be most convincing for decision-quality (not just latency)
by paxys | 2026-02-23 00:25:09+00:00
I don't know why people here can't accept the simple fact that AI companies are offering cheap "unlimited" plans as a loss leader to tie you to their ecosystem, and then make up for it via add-ons, ads etc. If you use those API tokens to access external services it defeats the point. The hack may have worked so far, mainly because no one was checking, but they are all going to tighten the access eventually (as Anthropic and Google have already done).

Either stick to first party products or pay for API use.