MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by estearum | 2026-03-14 19:22:02+00:00
> A monthly stipend probably does more to raise prices than anything useful, unless you also pair it with regulation to stop the wealthy and powerful from taking it all for themselves. And at that point you could have just done those regulations without UBI.

Yes largely correct, but more specifically than "wealthy and powerful," I am referring directly to the landed class, wealthy or not. This type of infusion will ultimately be baked into the cost of land, which will propagate up to rent, then up to wages, then up to goods. The gains will accrue almost entirely to the landed class in the form of higher land rents with no symmetrical increase in costs because land itself does not incur costs.

> Do you think a few lump sum payments over a citizens lifetime would have the same effect? Maybe some large sum paid when you reach age of majority and then again at retirement?

It wouldn't have the same effect but it'd have an analogous effect in the localized markets in which those subsidies are applied. For example, you'd expect the price of land (and so rent → wages → goods) to increase where retiring people congregate. But it'd be less harmful to the exact degree that the subsidy itself is less broadly "helpful."
by aminerj | 2026-03-14 19:22:20+00:00
The seccomp-BPF layer is the right architectural instinct -- blocking at the syscall level means the firewall is independent of whatever the LLM or agent framework does. Even a successful prompt injection can't execute what the kernel won't allow.

The gap I'd want to understand: policy maintenance. The regex allowlist/denylist approach works for known-bad patterns but prompt injection payloads are specifically engineered to avoid pattern matching -- the CVE itself is presumably a novel bypass. How are you handling policy updates when new injection techniques surface that don't match existing rules?
by input_sh | 2026-03-14 19:22:54+00:00
If I may go a step further in history: tearing up the JCPOA (AKA the Iran deal) was like shouting from a megaphone "the US word means nothing now". Even the Palestine situation could've been predicted 6 years before Oct 7th when the US was the very first nation to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, before 5 others followed (none of them "significant").

Things have definitely accelerated in the second term, but it's not like there weren't signs that political leaders definitely noticed were disruptive, even if the wider public weren't as aware at the time.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-14 19:22:55+00:00
> I've never met a single person willing to attest to filling out a BLS survey

I’ve never met a single chicken farmer. Does that mean I should be sceptical about them existing? Like, what sort of metric is this for truth finding?

> to assume benevolent intent

No need. Markets move on these data. The rich and powerful bet their money on what they say.
by cyberpunk | 2026-03-14 19:23:08+00:00
Oh, I didn’t mean it’s the only one.

There are a bunch for sure! Turns out writing concurrent reliable distributed systems is really hard. I’ve not found anything else that makes them easier to deal with than BEAM though.

I’d switch if something better came along and happened to also be as battle hardened. I’ll be waiting a while i think.
by alwa | 2026-03-14 19:24:17+00:00
I agree that it feels like the tiny window of opportunity hasn't quite shut yet, and it's a problem space I know I should take more interest in. What do you see as the viable technical directions? Something along the lines of what Altman was trying to do with his Orb? Something along the lines of the C2PA's Content Credentials?

[0] e.g. https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-tools-for-humanit... and the feature piece at https://time.com/7288387/sam-altman-orb-tools-for-humanity/

[1] https://contentcredentials.org and https://c2pa.org
by jeffbee | 2026-03-14 19:24:18+00:00
> I've never met a single person willing to attest to filling out a BLS survey.

Unless you have introduced yourself with this question to thousands of people, this is a totally meaningless statement. It says more about your social circle, your grasp of descriptive statistics, and the weird online stew you are soaking your brain in than it says about the CPS.
by dahart | 2026-03-14 19:24:39+00:00
Then your point eludes me. You complained about the length. If you don’t want it shorter, then what do you want?

To me, the fact that the tracking code is visible and separate from the video code is evidence of the complete opposite of your conclusion - it’s evidence the ad business does not get to override either engineering nor what’s left of privacy control. Ad execs would surely prefer that the tracking code is not visible nor manually removeable.
by qingcharles | 2026-03-14 19:24:54+00:00
I was involved in recovering some extremely famous movie props that had been stolen many years prior by a studio employee. The studio wanted to restore them and display them, and they are now on loan to a museum.

We knew who had them because (almost) all the people that stole these kinds of pieces ended up not being able to keep it to themselves and would mention it one day on a forum etc. The studio's lawyers sent letters which they ignored. In the end someone realized that the guy lived very close to the writer of the movie in LA, so we called them and had them knock the on the guy's door. That worked.
by pron | 2026-03-14 19:24:55+00:00
> But the problem is that Church–Rosser Property[0] (proofs ~= programs) and Brouwer–Heyting–Kolmogorov Interpretation[1] (Propositions at types) are NOT binary SAT, and you have concepts like mere propositions[3] that are very different than just BSAT.

The computational limits imposed on program verification are independent of the logical theory used, and depend only on its expressive strength. Many if not most interesting program properties require interleaved properties (forall-exists or forall-exists-forall etc.) which are intractable to verify.

> But CodeSpeak doesn't have formal specifications, so this is irrelevant.

The lack of formalism also doesn't matter to the limitations on correctness. If you wish to know, with certainty, that a program satisfies some property, that knowledge has a cost. But both humans and LLMs write programs at least in part based on inductive rather than deductive reasoning, which cannot be rigorously given a level of confidence. That may not be what we want, but that's what computational complexity says we can have, so we're forced to work in this way.

We should complain about what we don't have, but demanding things we can't have isn't going to help. There's no fundamental reason why AI shouldn't, someday, be able to program as well as humans, but there are fundamental limitations to producing the software we wish we had. Humans can rigorously use deductive methods, with mechanical help, and AI could possibly use it, too. But there's no reason to believe AI could break the size barrier of such problems. People have been able to rigorously verify only very small programs, and maybe AI could do a little better if only because of its tenacity, but if we expect to produce perfect programs by any means, we'll be waiting for a long time.
by estearum | 2026-03-14 19:25:25+00:00
No the argument is that the landlord will raise rents, but they will not keep them. The gain generated by UBI, by virtue of raising the value of the land underneath the unit, would be recouped by the LVT at tax time.

UBI is passed from the tenants to the landlord in the form of higher prices, but is recouped by the LVT, which cannot be passed in reverse from the landlord back to the tenant.
by liorwn | 2026-03-14 19:26:24+00:00
I built this after noticing a $65 charge for what felt like a $10 session. Turns out, context compaction was hiding 80% of my token usage. Real cost, no visibility.

claudetop is a status line for Claude Code that shows your burn rate, cache efficiency, model cost comparison, and smart alerts (like "TRY /fast" when Opus is overkill for the task). Plugin system for extensibility — Spotify, CI status, calendar, etc.

Single bash script, zero dependencies beyond jq. One-command install.
by ssl-3 | 2026-03-14 19:26:27+00:00
GFCI works correctly either way. Their operating mode doesn't care at all about ground: Whether bonded, not bonded, or not even present (look, ma! only two wires!), they still perform the same way.

They respond to an imbalance in current flow betwixt line and neutral. What goes out must return; if it doesn't, then switch off.

Ground is not part of the equation at all.
by cyberpunk | 2026-03-14 19:26:35+00:00
Generally agree, all the problems i’ve had with erlang have been related to full mailboxes or having one process type handling too many kinds of different messages etc.

These are manageable, but i really really stress and soak test my releases (max possible load / redline for 48+ hours) before they go out and since doing that things have been fairly fine, you can usually spot such issues in your metrics by doing that
by AnimalMuppet | 2026-03-14 19:26:47+00:00
Community ownership does share across sectors if the community owns both sectors. Why would it not?

Also, you haven't really answered the point. You may be able to get this established. But how do you keep it established? How do you keep the elite ownership class from dismantling it? (Based on historically observed behavior, the default assumption is that they will try.) If you don't have a plan that accounts for that, you don't really have a workable plan.
by consumer451 | 2026-03-14 19:27:23+00:00
> There's absolutely a time and place for wireless headphones and I probably use them more at this point.

I've had a pair of Sony MD-7506s ever since I assisted in an analog recording studio, years ago. 7506s were the standard then, not sure about now. I am on my 5th set of cushion replacements.

A few years ago I bought a high-ish quality bluetooth adapter I can put in my pocket and walk around. The one I bought is the Boltune BT-BA001. Looks like they are only $30 on eBay now, but there may be better ones out there. That little box is probably my most used piece of inexpensive electronics.
by alcomatt | 2026-03-14 19:27:37+00:00
AI or more precisely the way it is being sold to us is the most responsible factor here. People by nature are lazy and will take shortcuts given an opportunity. AI is the ultimate shortcut these days, a "mental crutch" majority of the people using it are leaning on. Humans just did what they always do, be lazy - AI should never have been used for processes with this level of life-altering impact because what happened here was bound to happen.
by ModernMech | 2026-03-14 19:28:09+00:00
You don’t really, and why a lot of people become researchers only to discover they hate it. But that’s true with all things.

I think the way to know if you want to be a researcher is more along the lines of: do you like finding the answers to questions no k e has thought to ask let alone answered? If so then it doesn’t really matter the training you’ve or the amount t of the field you’ve experienced, you can focus on that bit as your guiding force.
by autoexec | 2026-03-14 19:28:31+00:00
People don't usually pay for automated stores or rides because of the automated aspect. They just want to get the items or get to their destination. I think waymo was mostly upfront that humans are working behind the scenes, but if amazon lied to investors and shareholders by claiming that their stores were automated when it was "Actually Indians" I think they could/should have been sued.
by CamperBob2 | 2026-03-14 19:28:50+00:00
For the benefit of those like me who haven't heard of Roderick, some further digging leads to this: https://rickroderick.org/max-roderick/

Major, major rabbit hole warning. You think you're about to read something about a philosophy professor, and what you get is an Alice Munro/Larry McMurtry mashup. His son seems to be a pretty amazing writer in his own right.
by keeda | 2026-03-14 19:29:13+00:00
> What about universal health care?

I haven't thought this through, but I don't see how you could have UBI without universal healthcare. If the point of UBI is to ensure the most basic necessities are covered, and "basic necessities" includes healthcare, and healthcare is the Luigi-inducing travesty it is in the US right now, how is it UBI without universal healthcare?

The alternative is that UBI is high enough to cover healthcare, which is extremely (maybe unfeasibly so) expensive and creates all kinds of other incentives for abuse. Or we fix the systemic, profit motive-driven problems in the current system by nationalizing healthcare.

Yes, nationalized healthcare is also problematic, but I think UBI will indirectly alleviate a lot of the systemic problems there as well.
Tell HN: Free speech has consequences' is a nonsensical statement
by piratesAndSons | 2026-03-14 19:29:19+00:00
I always find this statement stupid and nonsensical. The entire point of why freedom of speech was created is to manage consequences from speech. That is the raison d'être of freedom of speech.

It is like saying: just because you wore a high quality parachute does not mean you managed gravity. The entire point of a parachute, para (alongside) plus chute (to slide through), is to manage gravity while falling from the sky.

If freedom of speech was not created to manage consequences, there would be no point for it at all. Things that have no consequences require no "freedom" to or from them. To accept the sentiment that freedom of speech ought not to protect controversial opinion is to render the concept meaningless. In that reading, literally every government in the world could claim it upholds freedom of speech, just not freedom from consequences for that speech.
by estearum | 2026-03-14 19:29:38+00:00
If "we" means everyone, yes. But the reality is there is a sufficient number of people willing to work more to earn more, and therefore they will raise prices of everything which destroys your purchasing power.

Your purchasing power is defined in a competitive equilibrium with your peers.

If you're assuming you can band everyone together to all decide to work fewer hours for the same pay, fine, but you just invented a union, not an improvement to UBI.
by mschuster91 | 2026-03-14 19:29:54+00:00
Electrical engineers know the theory but lack the practical knowledge which grid form is used at your specific address (yes, here in Germany we have a few towns where one half side of a street runs TT and the other one is already migrated to TN-C or TN-C-S).

An electrician specializing in lightning protection, uninterruptible power installation or in radio installations can sort out all of that far better than an engineer can.
by zozbot234 | 2026-03-14 19:29:56+00:00
The Frankfurter Schule was politically conservative, the "leftism" of present-day identity politics is a rehash of radical 1970s Maoism that simply coopts the Frankfurter Schule lexicon in agitating for a new "Great Cultural Revolution" throughout the West, consequences be damned. This is the "counter-enlightenment" part: the Maoist "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" saw Enlightenment values as reflecting "bourgeois privilege", and identity politics has wholly inherited this point of view. Frankfurter Schule members would have disagreed quite sharply with that position, their outlook was defined by a whole lot of nuance.
by doublerabbit | 2026-03-14 19:30:17+00:00
> This is misguided. Maintenance of LLM code has a far greater cost than generating it.

In corporate reality they don't care. They have their product, requirement. As it starts to rot it's easier to rebuild than to maintain.

If you can ask for an LLM with a skeleton crew team now they can do it all again in five years time with the next level of LLMs.
by pjmlp | 2026-03-14 19:30:23+00:00
That has been a thing forever, many "Python" libraries, are actually bindings to C, C++ and Fortran.

The culture of calling them "Python" is one reason why JITs are so hard to gain adoption in Python, the problem isn't the dynamism (see Smalltalk, SELF, Ruby,...), rather the culture to rewrite code in C, C++ and Fortran code and still call it Python.
by giancarlostoro | 2026-03-14 19:30:28+00:00
At some point websites will just have to start charging an entry fee just to make it so if you really are yet another bot, at least you are paying for your stay. If you're not rate limiting your websites in 2026 on a per user level, you really need to, and figure out how to do it meaningfully. Raise limits for known human power users, especially if they pay to use your website.

I wonder if the "short-term" "fix" is people will start to migrate off the web and into mobile, though none of this stops agents from using phone emulators, so kind of pointless, but I imagine crawling the web is easier for AI.
by RRRA | 2026-03-14 19:30:32+00:00
I'd be curious to see people give their opinion on embedded models for less tech focused needs, say what's that bug killing spray chemistry like or what is the history of this or that...

I'd also be curious to see if people have started doing censorship analysis of various models, like Qwen differing Tiananmen square to government documments while Llama straights up answers the question.
by gambiting | 2026-03-14 19:30:41+00:00
I honestly don't even understand what you mean by that. Europe has accepted an extraordinary number of refugees from Ukraine giving them immediate and full rights to live and work within its territory, keeps donating billions of dollars worth of goods to keep Ukraine going, provides training to Ukrainian military personal and ramped up its military production specifically to bolster Ukraine.

How has Europe failed here? Did you expect Poland to start shooting missiles towards Moscow, or something else?
Show HN: Karpathy's Autoresearch with Evolutionary Database
by hgarud | 2026-03-14 19:30:42+00:00
Integrated an evolutionary database to Karpathy's [autoresearch](https://github.com/karpathy/autoresearch) project that replaces the simple tsv file based logging in the original project.

Evolutionary algorithms have shown to be a powerful tool for autonomously discovering optimal solutions to problems with large search spaces. Famously, Google DeepMind's [AlphaEvolve](https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.13131) system uses evolutionary algorithms to discover state of the art matrix multiplication algorithms. The implementation of the evolutionary database itself is based heavily on the implementation in [OpenEvolve](https://github.com/algorithmicsuperintelligence/openevolve).

Would love thoughts and suggestions from the community.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-14 19:30:46+00:00
This reminds me of a trading incident decades ago. We were unwinding a portfolio of correlation trades. The trades basically bet on continued correlation between assets. Unwinding those trades means assets which typically correlate now correlate less. When we fucked we they sometimes anticorrelated. Anyway, some of these price movements were noticed and incessantly commented on by CNBC pundits. Theories abounded. All wrong. Most amusing.
by sc68cal | 2026-03-14 19:31:13+00:00
Jazzband maintained some incredible Django packages and tools that made it possible for me to build a system at my $JOB that would have been impossible to do on my own. It is a true tragedy of the commons situation where I was expected do more with less, and I didn't have the ability to contribute back/donate anywhere near the value that these projects provided to $JOB or myself. I did contribute personally, but it's very clear how all of this value has been extracted and used by large companies to build higher and higher walls for themselves, and none of the people that actually make any of this work get more than crumbs.
by supernovalabs | 2026-03-14 19:31:13+00:00
All orbits are true Keplerian
ellipses from TLE elements.
Burns at perigee/apogee.
6 thrust vectors per node.

── PHYSICS MODEL STATUS ──
SGP4 propagation
Full 6-element Kepler
Eccentric orbits
Perigee/apogee burns
Plane change ΔV
Vis-viva velocities
J2–J6 zonal harmonics
F10.7+Ap drag (NOAA live)
Lunar/solar 3-body grav
Solar radiation pressure
Eclipse/shadow model
Lambert solver (Izzo)
Porkchop ΔV optimizer
RK4/5 adaptive integrator
Finite burn arcs
Tsiolkovsky propellant
NRLMSISE-00 atm model
Lunar/solar ephemeris DE440
Multi-leg optimization
by DennisP | 2026-03-14 19:31:35+00:00
I'm surprised you've had three replies so far that didn't notice your sarcasm.

But we've been automating the tedious work since the 1950s. There were probably devs back then complaining about imminent job loss when the first compilers were invented. Maybe some jobs were lost, temporarily, but ultimately we all got more ambitious about what software we could make. We ended up hiring more programmers and paying them better, because each one provided so much more value.

When the machines are able to do the hard stuff better than humans, that's when we'll really be in trouble.
by scoofy | 2026-03-14 19:31:42+00:00
It is a question of who is "We" because all this seems to imply that the market owes "us" this product.

I would lose my mind and switch to Linux for good if Apple every tried to close their laptops. Why? Because unlike my mom, I'm sitting here writing programs for myself.

On my phone however, I don't want to have to do a bunch of research whenever I need to install something like a parking app. I don't want to have to install a random parking app, but when you need an app to park in the MUELLER - MCBEE garage in Austin, and when I'm visiting and am meeting people for tacos, life is going to force me to install that app. When that happens, I'm happy to be in the walled garden. In fact, I want a walled garden.

I'm happy to have two computers, one open and one closed. They're two different products. For folks who want an open phone, yea, it's basically GrapheneOS or nothing, because when the point of the phone is a completely different use case (random app installs) then the point becomes the ecosystem, and you need to always be able to trust the ecosystem.

When you are trying to tinker with your phone, it becomes a completely different product. The market doesn't owe you that product.
by r0p3 | 2026-03-14 19:31:42+00:00
I read this passage on the blog's diary page and I found it beautiful and poignant.

https://lr0.org/diary/

> Last week I had an argument with my Mother of which I was righteous and she was in error. In the end, I managed to convince her of my points. She accepted them. But then she said, “Okay, what about mercy?”. She told me then about a man from town who once had a serious argument with his distant brother. Time passed. And when he finally saw him, he chose to forgive everything. That story stayed with me. After the discussion was over and the house grew quiet, I began thinking about moments in my life, times when I insisted on being right, when I held onto pride, when I could have been softer but wasn’t. And I cried.
by gruez | 2026-03-14 19:31:57+00:00
>But then.. how is it any different from Amazon saying automated stores while a human is watching cameras or waymo having humans operate in some circumstances.

Did amazon/waymo actually claim they were 100% automated? Moreover is the fact that they're 100% automated a material fact to the consumer? The investors might have grounds to sue for securities fraud, but it's going to be much tougher for a consumer, when for all intents and purposes they got what they expected (ie. whatever they bought from the shop).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_fact
by whatshisface | 2026-03-14 19:32:40+00:00
Instead of collecting biometric info from humans and IDing all of their online movements, you could mandate that LLM output be watermarked (using a technology that Scott Arronson was hired by OpenAI to help develop, after which the project was shut down under Altman right after proving that it could work) so that their online movement would be IDed. The implication in this story that it was shut down to keep the Orb around in principle (telling humans they had to be tagged to distinguish them from machines that could more easily be tagged) is very easy to pick up.