MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by atleastoptimal | 2026-02-14 23:12:04+00:00
That AI would be writing 90% of the code at Anthropic was not a "failed prediction". If we take Anthropic's word for it, now their agents are writing 100% of the code:

https://fortune.com/2026/01/29/100-percent-of-code-at-anthro...

Of course you can choose to believe that this is a lie and that Anthropic is hyping their own models, but it's impossible to deny the enormous revenue that the company is generating via the products they are now giving almost entirely to coding agents.
by Nannooskeeska | 2026-02-14 23:12:05+00:00
No, but SponsorBlock[0] is fantastic for that. I even have it setup on my home server[1] so it skips sponsor segments on my Apple TV, which is where we watch most of our YouTube.

[0] https://sponsor.ajay.app/
[1] https://github.com/dmunozv04/iSponsorBlockTV
by lifestyleguru | 2026-02-14 23:12:47+00:00
> Me thinks they are factoring in a high % of evasion under 100,000 euros per year gains.

Paultry individual investors have it the hardest to evade and optimize the taxes actually. Oftentimes they pay double dividend tax (WHT, only partial write off because of bilateral treaty, local dividend tax) while financial institutions were receiving... double refund of WHT (CumEx scandal).
by staticassertion | 2026-02-14 23:13:43+00:00
To be clear, lots of evidence will be screenshots. I sent screenshots to auditors constantly. For example, "I ran this splunk search, here's a screenshot". No biggie.

What I would not do is take a screenshot of a vendor website and say "look, they have a SOC2". At every company, even tiny little startup land, vendors go through a vendor assessment that involves collecting the documents from them. Most vendors don't even publicly share docs like that on a site so there'd be nothing to screenshot / link to.
by nkmnz | 2026-02-14 23:13:55+00:00
Their math is 120%-80%=40% while the correct math is (80-120)/120=-33% or (120-80)/80=+50%

It’s more obvious if you take more extreme numbers, say: they estimated to take 99% less time with AI, but it took 99% more time - the difference is not 198%, but 19900%. Suddenly you’re off by two orders of magnitude.
by Aerbil313 | 2026-02-14 23:13:59+00:00
I don't use any social media (except HN ~once a week) and every time I suggest a person they try stopping social media it's either a quiet "Yeah I know it's not good but I can't stop" or defending the "fun" and supposed virtues of doomscrolling with great fervor.

I think it's this latter camp of people. It triggers them as if you threatened to take away his candy from a child.
by atoav | 2026-02-14 23:14:46+00:00
As someone who still occasionally mixes for a living, designs and builds audio hardware: Audiophiles are full of shit and this has been scientifically shown probably since the 90s (various AES studies conducted on the perception of CD quality).

Of course there is a difference between cheap gear and decent gear. But the difference between decent gear and audiophile gear is non-perceptible in a blind ABX test. And here is the thing: especially in the elctronics side (so amps) decent gear has become increasingly cheaper.

Audiophiles also tend to have downright naive claims about sound, like the silver cable sounding more clear and "silvery" while something with gold would then sound warmer and richer. All while they measure the same down to inperceptable differences. And of course the device with the walnut case sounds warm because wood is warm and so on.

It would be funny if it wasn't auch a successful con.
by upboundspiral | 2026-02-14 23:15:02+00:00
The idea is that the government is biased towards hiding certain information and private companies are biased towards hiding a different set.

While unlikely, the ideal would be for the government to provide a foundational open search infrastructure that would allow people to build on it and expand it to fit their needs in a way that is hard to do when a private companies eschews competition and hides its techniques.

Perhaps it would be better for there to be a sanctioned crawler funded by the government, that then sells the unfiltered information to third parties like google. This would ensure IP rights are protected while ensuring open access to information.
by Dylan16807 | 2026-02-14 23:15:16+00:00
This assumes very slow AI progress. I'm not one to hype up LLMs, but I would never claim it'll take 200 years before an AI can untangle a sewing machine with robot hands. Stuffing an envelope and applying a stamp? My bet is less than 20 years. That's a level of tactility that can do a tremendous amount of real-world activity. And the capability of a high end robot controlled by a human keeps expanding, so in the hypothetical "AGI" scenario the flood fill gets pretty big.
by claudeomusic | 2026-02-14 23:15:19+00:00
I think a big part of this discussion lost for a lot is a lot of people are trying to copy/paste how we’ve been developing software over the past twenty years into this new world which simply doesn’t work effectively.

The differences are subtle but those of
us who are fully bought in (like myself) are working and thinking in a new way to develop effectively with LLMs. Is it perfect? Of course not - but is it dramatically more efficient than the previous era? 1000%. Some of the things I’ve done in the past month I really didn’t think were possible. I was skeptical but I think a new era is upon us and everyone should be hustling to adapt.

My favorite analogy at the moment is that for awhile now we’ve been bowling and been responsible for knocking down
the pins ourselves. In this new world we are no longer the bowlers, rather we are the builders of bumper rails
that keep the new bowlers from landing in the gutter.
by lkbm | 2026-02-14 23:15:32+00:00
It's old, but I suspect we still have pretty widespread agreement among experts:

"If the federal budget is to be balanced, it should be done over the business cycle rather than yearly. (85% [of economics agree])"[0]

A 3% rule doesn't strictly violate this, but it's obviously violating the basic principle: some years you should go higher, and some years you should go lower.

[0] https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/news-flash-economist...
by OptionOfT | 2026-02-14 23:15:49+00:00
> I do take slight offense to the following at the top of my results:

No offense for me, just confusion. One of the status reports started as follows:

> OptionOfT is a very pleasant 36-year-old gentleman 6 weeks status post left anterior total hip arthroplasty done by Dr. _ on _.

I asked my wife whether I was particularly friendly (I sometimes fail to adjust my demeanor in certain situations).

She said: nah, they write that for everybody.
by atleastoptimal | 2026-02-14 23:17:32+00:00
I think most of the issues with "vibe coding" is trusting the current level of LLM's with too much, as writing a hacky demo of a specific functionality is 1/10 as difficult as making a fully-fledged, dependable, scalable version of it.

Back in 2020, GPT-3 could code functional HTML from a text description, however it's only around now that AI can one-shot functional websites. Likewise, AI can one-shot a functional demo of a saas product, but they are far from being able to one-shot the entire engineering effort of a company like slack.

However, I don't see why the rate of improvement will not continue as it has. The current generation of LLM's haven't been event trained yet on NVidia's latest Blackwell chips.

I do agree that vibe-coding is like gambling, however that is besides the point that AI coding models are getting smarter at a rate that is not slowing down. Many people believe they will hit a sigmoid somewhere before they reach human intelligence, but there is no reason to believe that besides wishful thinking.
by daxfohl | 2026-02-14 23:18:08+00:00
Or just wait for things to settle. As fast as the field is moving, staying ahead of the game is probably high investment with little return, as the things you spend a ton of time honing today may be obsolete tomorrow, or simply built into existing products with much lower learning cost.

Note, if staying on the bleeding edge is what excites you, by all means do. I'm just saying for people who don't feel that urge, there's probably no harm just waiting for stuff to standardize and slow down. Either approach is fine so long as you're pragmatic about it.
by smallmancontrov | 2026-02-14 23:18:24+00:00
It's fine. Messages sometimes fail to appear unless you navigate away and back and sometimes they fail to appear at all until 30 minutes later but it's fine. This regularly slows down communication and costs company time, but it's fine. It's 2026, classrooms full of children can vibe code a chat app but a $3T company struggles with basic chat functionality. It's fine.
by imiric | 2026-02-14 23:19:03+00:00
> knowing how to use ai coding assistants productively is a skill like any other

No, it's different from other skills in several ways.

For one, the difficulty of this skill is largely overstated. All it requires is basic natural language reading and writing, the ability to organize work and issue clear instructions, and some relatively simple technical knowledge about managing context effectively, knowing which tool to use for which task, and other minor details. This pales in comparison with the difficulty of learning a programming language and classical programming. After all, the entire point of these tools is to lower the required skill ceiling of tasks that were previously inaccessible to many people. The fact that millions of people are now using them, with varying degrees of success for various reasons, is a testament of this.

I would argue that the results depend far more on the user's familiarity with the domain than their skill level. Domain experts know how to ask the right questions, provide useful guidance, and can tell when the output is of poor quality or inaccurate. No amount of technical expertise will help you make these judgments if you're not familiar with the domain to begin with, which can only lead to poor results.

> might be useful now or in the future

How will this skill be useful in the future? Isn't the goal of the companies producing these tools to make them accessible to as many people as possible? If the technology continues to improve, won't it become easier to use, and be able to produce better output with less guidance?

It's amusing to me that people think this technology is another layer of abstraction, and that they can focus on "important" things while the machine works on the tedious details. Don't you see that this is simply a transition period, and that whatever work you're doing now, could eventually be done better/faster/cheaper by the same technology? The goal is to replace all cognitive work. Just because this is not entirely possible today, doesn't mean that it won't be tomorrow.

I'm of the opinion that this goal is unachievable with the current tech generation, and that the bubble will burst soon unless another breakthrough is reached. In the meantime, your own skills will continue to atrophy the more you rely on this tech, instead of on your own intellect.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2026-02-14 23:19:55+00:00
This seems like a record for number of projections per sentence.

You do not have any reason to think I've (1) "arrested emotional development" nor (2) an "ideological blind spot"; (3) my "defense of harmful technologies" was not even presented, let alone (4) does it have anything to do with old men shaking their fists at clouds; and you do not have any reason to say I've (5) not been open-minded.

The only thing I said is that there have been some happenings to be entertained by, that is not exclusive to other feelings about them. I can think whoever set up MJ Rathbun has been irresponsible while also laughing at the dumb thing their irresponsible decisions caused.

These feelings are not mutually exclusive and hostility towards the ones I expressed because you made assumptions about other feelings I must have is an indication of arrested emotional development and certainly doesn't herald open-mindedness. Obviously (this is from my perspective, let's remember our emotional development and open-mindedness), you must fear these things in some manner and you are projecting said fears onto my statements in these comments.
Show HN: Lore
by daave | 2026-02-14 23:19:57+00:00
I've been using the Edison V3 robot from Microbric (https://meetedison.com/technical-v3/) to introduce my kids to programming.

The provided web-based editor that uses WebUSB to flash programs to the robot, and a REST API to produce MicroPython bytecode to run on the device, works just fine (https://www.edpyapp.com/v3/) -- but I wanted to give my kids a fully offline experience with no web browsers (or GUI) involved.

So with a bit of help from Claude and Gemini, I was able to port the USB flashing mechanism to Python and reverse-engineer the interned strings embedded in bytecode from the API. Now they can use a local editor and command-line util to upload their programs.

Since my own very first programming experience involved using LOGO in 90s to control some LEGO Technic sets and draw turtle graphics, I wanted to re-create this experience for them, so I built a LOGO to Python transpiler, leaning heavily on the Lark parser.

There's plenty more to do to make all of Edison's features available from LOGO, and to tighten up the workflow for USB uploads and diagnostics, and to have a more unified build system - but it works as is, and I hope Edison owners will try it out! PRs welcome.

-

A reflection on this project: making a LOGO-based robotics environment has been on my backlog of side projects for more than 5 years, and while I certainly have mixed feelings about and experiences with AI-assisted coding, these tools definitely helped me overcome the cold-start problem for this project. The code may not be exactly how I would've chosen to write it, but it exists, and the debug cycles have been fast, I've spent maybe two hours total on it so far.
Show HN: Silo – Every Git branch gets its own localhost
by junhsss | 2026-02-14 23:20:49+00:00
I've been enjoying worktree managers like vibe-kanban and quickly realized I cannot run multiple dev servers, which is a huge no for me. Changing ports for each branch kinda works, but isn't the most efficient way.

Turns out 127.0.0.0/8 gives 16M loopback IPs and they're being wasted, so I decided to put them to work and change IPs instead of ports :3 the usage is quite simple

silo <whatever>

then each worktree/branch gets a deterministic IP, so you don't have to think about it.

it's not 100% functional (and full of unsafe lol) but wanted to share this first
by skydhash | 2026-02-14 23:21:03+00:00
Not GP, but the most impactful one I read was Learning DDD from O’Reilly

https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Domain-Driven-Design-Alignin...

It presents the main concepts like a good lecture and a more modern take than the blue book. Then you can read the blue book.

But DDD should be taken as a philosophy rather than a pattern. Trying to follow it religiously tends to results in good software, but it’s very hard to nail the domain well. If refactoring is no longer an option, you will be stuck with a non optimal system. It’s more something you want to converge to in the long term rather than getting it right early. Always start with a simpler design.
by lbreakjai | 2026-02-14 23:21:23+00:00
I'm not sure how confident I'd be, moving to a country that runs a constant 5% deficit. I work remotely, so my employer wouldn't care, but wouldn't cover the difference in employer contributions, which are substantial. That'd mean lowering my gross salary by something like 40k.

Spain is actually the place I'm considering, especially with the Beckham law and the fact that I speak the language.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-02-14 23:21:32+00:00
"All but unnoticed last month, a bipartisan group of legislators introduced a resolution calling for Congress to keep budget deficits at no more than 3% of gross domestic product."

It went unnoticed for good reason. This Congress cannot bind a future Congress except through (a) rules, which the majority can change and (b) Constitutional amendments.

Second, voting for deficit-busting legislation every moment it comes up in one's politial career isn't undone by before go-nowhere messaging resolutions.
by rsynnott | 2026-02-14 23:21:38+00:00
Okay, but during the NFT period, HN was trying to convince me that they were The Future. Same with metaverses, same with Bitcoin. I mean, okay, it is Different this time, so we are told. But there’s a boy who cried wolf aspect to all this, y’know?

Baseline assumption: HN is full of people who assume that the current fad is the future. It is kind of ground zero for that. My HN account is about 20 years old and the zeitgeist has been right like once.
by gambiting | 2026-02-14 23:22:05+00:00
I get the aspect of "shiny things are shiny and I like shiny things so I buy them" but the things that piss me off, like actually genuienly make me mad at the whole thing are actual scams like "audio tuned" ethernet switches or "designed for music" SSDs. These are actual products that sell for a lot of money, and they physically cannot make any difference to the audio played from/through them. It's worse than snake oil.
by ncruces | 2026-02-14 23:23:26+00:00
> I’ve found also AI assisted stuff is remarkable for algorithmically complex things to implement.

AI is really good to rubber duck through a problem.

The LLM has heard of everything… but learned nothing. It also doesn't really care about your problem.

So, you can definitely learn from it. But the moment it creates something you don't understand, you've lost control.

You had one job.
by atleastoptimal | 2026-02-14 23:23:42+00:00
Well there are models that Anthropic, OpenAI and co. have access to that they haven't provided public API's for, due to both safety, and what you've cited as the competitive advantage factor. (like Openai's IMO model, though it's debatable if it represented an early version of GPT 5.1/2/3 or something else)

https://sequoiacap.com/podcast/training-data-openai-imo/

The thing however is the labs are all in competition with each other. Even if OpenAI had some special model that could give them the ability to make their own Saas and products, it is more worth it for them to sell access to the API and use the profit to scale, because otherwise their competitors will pocket that money and scale faster.

This holds as long as the money from API access to the models is worth more than the comparative advantage a lab retains from not sharing it. Because there are multiple competing labs, the comparative advantage is small (if OpenAI kept GPT-5.X to themselves, people would just use Claude and Anthropic would become bigger, same with Google).

This however may not hold forever, it is just a phenomena of labs focusing more on heavily on their models with marginal product efforts.
by dahart | 2026-02-14 23:23:45+00:00
No, that’s a straw man. For the fifth(?) time, whether it’s foreign or not is irrelevant, and only you suggested they’re evil. The criteria proposed was whether it’s targeted based on personal content or not, and I’m not alone in not liking where we already are in terms of privacy. Are you suggesting that we need to protect foreign advertiser’s rights to your personal content so they can target ads personalized for you? Why? Are you a foreign advertiser?
by Jerrrrrrrry | 2026-02-14 23:24:14+00:00
It is a good test now, for reasoning models.

It was a terrible test for pure tokenized models, because the logit that carries the carry digit during summation has a decent chance at getting lost.

SOTA models should reason to generate a function that returns the count of a given character, evaluate the function with tests, and use it for the output.
by AshamedCaptain | 2026-02-14 23:25:00+00:00
The "killer" feature is actually that it was rendering traditional websites NOT fine, but in a bunch of hacks that would force a specific viewport width where most websites would render with reasonable font sizes and double tap to zoom to paragraph would fix the remainder.

Specifically this "killer" feature would already break traditional HTML pages with just text (that were 100% responsive even before "responsive" was a thing).

The entire mobile HTML stacks is hack on top of hacks. Like everything else in computing, TBH...
by oneearedrabbit | 2026-02-14 23:25:12+00:00
Cold turkey. More than seven years ago, on my way home, I stopped at T-Mobile and bought a random flip phone. I still own that same phone. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21929194

Just a few minor updates to my original post:

- Low-res photos are perfectly fine for my purposes
- I don't need Google Maps when I'm on the go
- Quick fact checking is not important
- One day, I ripped off the band aid and migrated all auth keys to Yubikey
- Tethering is occasionally useful

Edit: some things never change--I still haven't learned how to format a bulleted list here.
by daxfohl | 2026-02-14 23:25:23+00:00
But as it gets better, it'll also get easier, be built into existing products you already use, etc. So I wouldn't worry too much about that aspect. If you enjoy tinkering, or really want to dive deep into fundamentals, that's one thing, but I wouldn't worry too much about "learning to use some tool", as fast as things are changing.
by y0eswddl | 2026-02-14 23:26:10+00:00
User behavior is shaped by systems just as much as systems are shaped by humans. There's a reason social media has the hold on us it does even though we all hate it.

You can absolutely design apps in a way that doesn't incentivize the worst human behaviors. Tech socially engineers our behavior all the time - just rarely ever in our favor.

We humans are both easily manipulated and often too egocentric to realize and acknowledge that fact.
by zmmmmm | 2026-02-14 23:26:10+00:00
yeah, they should really have a think about how their behavior is harming their future prospects here.

Just because you have infinite money to spend on training doesn't mean you should saturate the internet with bots looking for content with no constraints - even if that is a rounding error of your cost.

We just put heavy constraints on our public sites blocking AI access. Not because we mind AI having access - but because we can't accept the abusive way they execute that access.
by jmye | 2026-02-14 23:26:27+00:00
> And you can ALSO voluntarily pay more in taxes while doing so.

You're just repeating the same fundamentally silly thing I argued against like saying it louder will make it somehow less childish and silly. Did you have an actual point here, or do you think "people's respect" has any slight value in the context of the discussion?

> Well let's see, anyone who's lived their entire life on welfare (we have families of multiple generations who have done so at this point) would qualify. So would all the homeless people more content to live on the street and do drugs than go to rehab.

So you have no actual clue, but you think hand-wavy bullshit that feels good will suffice for numbers. Fantastic. I'm glad you have such strong opinions on things you clearly know absolutely nothing about.

> Enough for people with low ambition to live on! And their vote counts just as much as the productive members of society paying for them.

Is "low ambition" angry-posting on social media? Do you think vibe-coding React bullshit, or whatever, is "productive"? Do you think engineers at Meta, busily finding new ways to make teen girls depressed are "productive"? Or is this just more stuff you have convinced yourself is true because it makes you somehow "better" than other people?
by dahart | 2026-02-14 23:28:37+00:00
Nearly all large U.S. corporations adhere to the data retention rules and right to delete GDPR rules for EU citizens because they also operate in the EU, and nearly all of them proactively adhere to the GDPR for US citizens just to keep things simpler. Fixating on cookie banners is naive. Here’s just one example: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/governance/