MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by WesDuWurk | 2026-03-06 17:37:03+00:00
I’m interested in starting a discussion around the paper “ConsciOS v1.0: A Viable Systems Architecture for Human and AI Alignment” (SSRN link in the title). The authors present ConsciOS as a systems-level architecture meant to make both human institutions and AI systems align around shared coherence metrics rather than narrow user objectives. From what I can tell, it is positioned as part of a broader “consciousness operating system” stack and claims to be implementable with relatively simple algorithms that can in principle scale alignment strength by increasing derivative order of certain internal feedback processes.

A few aspects I’d really like to hear expert opinions on:

Architectural novelty and rigor

Does the ConsciOS architecture introduce anything genuinely new compared to existing alignment proposals (e.g., scalable oversight, constitutional AI, debate/IDA, corrigibility, cooperative AI)?

Are its control-theoretic or systems-theoretic claims (about stability, scalability, and “infinite derivative order” feedback) well-specified enough that you could imagine actually implementing and stress-testing this in current ML systems?

“Machine morality” vs. human instructions

The framework explicitly suggests shifting from user obedience to an embedded “machine morality” that can override both synthetic and human-generated harmful actions.

How does this compare to more mainstream discussions about value learning, norm-following, and corrigibility, where human input remains central?

Do people see this as a promising direction (baking in a universal constraint layer) or as a recipe for opaque, possibly uncorrectable behavior?

Human–AI co-alignment and civilizational scope

ConsciOS is described as part of a larger “consciousness civilization” stack, where AI systems supposedly align with measured human coherence indices and operate as “coherence amplifiers” rather than just capability amplifiers.

Is this sort of civilization-scale framing useful for current alignment research, or does it introduce too many speculative assumptions at once (about consciousness measurement, biochemical interfaces, etc.) to be actionable?

Practical pathway from today’s models

If you were to try to instantiate even a minimal version of ConsciOS on top of current LLM-based systems, what would that look like?

Would this reduce mostly to: (a) a particular modular system design, (b) a set of training objectives/auxiliary losses, (c) a governance layer wrapped around existing models, or something else entirely?
by skandersab | 2026-03-06 17:37:05+00:00
I’d really appreciate it if some of you could test it and share constructive feedback.

A bit of background: I have about *7 years of experience in ecommerce*, and I previously worked as an *analyst for Lowe’s, RONA, and Reno-Depot*. In those roles, I spent a lot of time analyzing sales data and building reports to understand product performance, trends, and revenue drivers.

One thing I saw repeatedly is that many companies simply *don’t have the budget to hire a full-time analyst*, even though they still need insights from their sales data.

This tool is essentially the kind of solution I wish many teams had. I integrated the formulas, calculations, and common analyses I used in my work so that instead of building dashboards manually, you can simply *upload an Excel sales file and instantly get the analysis*.

Once the file is uploaded, the platform automatically generates:

* key business metrics
* visual charts and dashboards
* product and sales trends
* performance insights

The goal is simple: *drop an Excel file and get the same type of analysis an analyst would typically prepare*, without needing technical skills.

If you try it, I’d love to hear:

* what worked well
* what was confusing
* what insights or features are missing

Any honest feedback would be extremely helpful while I continue improving the product.
by Aachen | 2026-03-06 17:37:05+00:00
A failure of management can still lead to a successful business for a variety of reasons, ranging from an in-demand product and lucky timing to great employees. Bad parenting with a great child or a great school might, too, lead to positive outcomes

I'd call an approach suboptimal or bad depending on how likely it is to lead to bad outcomes, given what the parents know about the child at the time of course (sheltering or other special approaches may be needed in some cases, depending on behavior or health circumstances). It doesn't have to turn out bad in every single case, or even a majority, there just has to be consensus about the evidence and the parents must have been able to know of it. It would have to be really bad (like complete neglect) before I'd call it a failure though
by _aavaa_ | 2026-03-06 17:37:17+00:00
The argument isn’t that the whole earth becomes inhospitable. But that certain regions do, and the rest will have their climate differ drastically.

If you live on the coast and the water level rises, your home is inhospitable, even if someone 100mi inland is fine.

If you live in a region that usually was 90F in the summer and is now >110F regularly, that’s going to cause problem.
by bdangubic | 2026-03-06 17:37:30+00:00
> If you genuinely want Trump to go to jail , get Congress to create actual laws that he’d be breaking, with actual clear unmistakable language about its consequences. Trammel up the votes in the midterms. SCOTUS will enforce it: they have done so, every time, when Congress is clear and decisive. They have indicated as much! The judicial branch is the only one left doing its job. The law applies. You don’t like how it looks, and you’re not alone, but it applies.

So much good will here but oh so misguided. First of all, the judicial branch is not doing its job and hasn't done so in quite some time. The SCOTUS in particular is just an extension of a political party now and not judicial branch in any way. You give me a case and 99% of Americans will tell you exactly how each judge on SCOTUS will rule, 99% of the time. This is not "judicial branch is the only one left doing its job" - they are currently (not a recent thing though but now it has become comical) just an extension of a political party, nothing more and are absolutely not doing any job at all other then rubber-stamping shit based on their political dogma.

The "get Congress to create actual laws he'd be breaking" is even more comical. You think they can write laws that clearly state where the power of the Presidency stops in some sense and then legal ramifications of going over that power? C'mon mate...
by jfalcon | 2026-03-06 17:37:35+00:00
>The real question is why would anyone want, or want to help build, such an obscenity.

Power Saws and CNC mills have no autonomy. They have to be guided every inch or instruction by hand. Autonomous AI agents remove the hand. So if we don't define the role of humans in the process of creation, we get AI building things we didn't ask for or need.

AI is coming regardless. There are advantages that we all accept it can do. But the machine is a 'slave' only if we refuse to be 'masters'.

There is a term called social ecology.

It is based on the conviction that nearly all of our present ecological problems originate in deep-seated social problems. In effect, the way human beings deal with each other as social beings is crucial to addressing ecological crisis.

The point of social ecology emphasizes is not that moral and spiritual persuation and renewal are meaningless or unnecessary; they are necessary and can be educational. But modern capitalism is 'structually amoral' and hence impervious to moral appeals.

Power will always belong to the elite and commanding strata if it is not institutionalized in face-to-face democracies, among people who are fully empowered as social beings to make decisions in new communal assemblies. Power that does not belong to the people invariably belongs to the state and the exploitative interests it represents.

What is obscene is measuring outputs by 19th century standards. As long as we believe that "being born doesn't entitle you to food", we will stay on the hedonic treadmill until the planet or our psyches break.
by Henchman21 | 2026-03-06 17:38:38+00:00
> like no shit people are going to be ...

Yep. I still need to say it. I still need this audience, at least time tiny fraction, to hear it. This "community" specifically is so high on it's own supply that these things should be shouted from the rooftops:

- You're a fallible human and your ideas aren't always good
- Disruption isn't always good
- Moving fast and breaking things is a great way to leave a path of destruction in your wake and piss off everyone around you, and isn't always good
- Change for the sake of change isn't always good

Let's boil that down to: the shit you come up with isn't always good. Or to put it another way, rarely does it seem "should we?" is ever considered alongside "could we?".

Finally, as if it weren't obvious: I am not here for fake internet points.
by bko | 2026-03-06 17:38:50+00:00
I'm pointing out the hypocrisy and the focus people have on developed countries is just signaling. A weird anti-west sentiment from people who almost exclusively live a wealthy life in the west.

I'm not an expert, but from what I have read I believe humans do have an effect on climate. However this doesn't mean that any draconian measure that would essentially impose one world government and population control (which is the inevitable outcome of all of this) is preferable. But more importantly I'm anti stupid measures like restricting air-conditioning because they make a negligible impact and literally kill 100k+ people a year.
by squidleon | 2026-03-06 17:39:02+00:00
hank you! That separation was a very deliberate choice I've seen firsthand how quickly things degrade when packet handling leaks into game logic.

You're touching on a real pain point. Right now the Lua boundary does show measurable overhead under load, especially with per-tick callbacks across many entities (doors, spawners, etc.). MoonSharp's interop
cost adds up when you're calling into Lua thousands of times per tick.

I'm actively looking at batching script invocations per tick and capping the budget so a heavy script wave can't blow up tail latency. The goal is to keep the game loop deterministic if Lua eats too much of the tick budget, defer the rest to the next tick rather than letting the whole loop stall.

It's one of those problems where the architecture gives you a clean place to solve it (the boundary is explicit, so you can meter it), but the solution still needs work. Appreciate you calling it out — good toknow others think about the same tradeoffs.
by pdimitar | 2026-03-06 17:39:05+00:00
> suddenly we are in the situation that every single bit of code out there is supposed to put memory safety as a chief concern

I don't know why you are clumping together fanatics with the pragmatic folk who finally pioneered, in practice, the idea that memory safety is objectively valuable. Different groups.

> Empirical evidence that static typing makes some real difference in terms of bugs or safety is inconclusive at best

Literally 99.9999% of everything out there is inconclusive. You'll only extremely rarely find something that is objectively 100% true. So this is a disingenuous argument on your part, seemingly used to undermine something that you might not like. As such, it's an unfair discussion technique.

I worked nearly 9 years with Java a lifetime ago. I could not ever see any actual evidence that OOP and global mutability have ever improved any project.

See? This can go both ways.

> This industry pretends to be driven by technical considerations, yet, with some exceptions, is mostly driven by fads, folk knowledge and aesthetic choices.

Always has been, and it goes for almost all industries except those that are heavily regulated.
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-03-06 17:39:07+00:00
You're assuming that everything not mandatory is prohibited. If the device is required to provide every service with the flag, every service gets the flag, even if it contains no adult content or adult content that the user agent could display or not without the service having a way to know about it.

The service would then have to deduce the information instead of getting it explicitly and may be able to do that some of the time instead of all of the time, which is an improvement. And then people can work on anti-fingerprinting technologies with the premise that if they succeed it actually does something, instead of the information being required by law to leak to the service.
by ToucanLoucan | 2026-03-06 17:39:09+00:00
> (and eventually planets!)

This particular point is remarkably optimistic on the part of our ruling elites who genuinely seem to think they'll be abandoning Earth like the Titanic and running off to Mars or whatever. I wonder if it's just wishful thinking or if they genuinely believe living off-terra would be a luxury experience, and not what it far more likely would be, which is hurtling through a void separated from instant death by nothing more than sheet metal, and after months of that, living inside a specially pressurized biosphere on an alien world that is, at all times, trying to kill them. And is almost guaranteed to succeed if nothing else by attrition.

I wonder if any will think as they prepare to die whichever death comes to them first that maybe just paying taxes and not having a private jet wasn't that steep of an ask after all.
by gcanyon | 2026-03-06 17:39:13+00:00
> Nothing will change until developed rich countries are starting to hurt.

There are two clear parallel points to this:

1. Over the time frames we're discussing (even the next 50 years) how many "poor" countries will there be left? We're seeing substantial progress on economic, educational, and other fronts over the past 50 years.
2. Will there ever be a time when the change occurring is direct and over a short enough time frame to matter to "rich" countries? Yes, it will suck if most of Florida is underwater, but this process has already started, and has been going on for 20, 30, 50 years? And most people care very little. If it takes a century for the state to completely submerge, that apathy will continue.

Disclaimer: none of the above is saying we should or shouldn't take a particular course of action about warming, just to speak to the way people deal with very slow-moving issues.
by boramalper | 2026-03-06 17:39:18+00:00
> only b is worth speaking of. In b, isn't having someone in a position to make a choice much better than no one?

Actually, you're right! I thought the proxy can nominate/decide that any other license can be used in the future (i.e. "licensed under GPLv3 or X" where I can chose X to be anything) but it seems that I was wrong. Re-reading more carefully (emphasis mine):

> If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions of the GNU Affero General Public License can be used, that proxy’s public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you to choose that version for the Program.

So FSF creates the future versions of a specific license the work is under (in this case AGPL) and the "founder" chooses whether to allow its usage or not. That sounds reasonable to me.

Thanks for the pushback!
by crystal_revenge | 2026-03-06 17:39:20+00:00
> Ironic OECD countries actually REDUCED their emissions based on a peak in 2007 and continue to do so.

Our economies are built on oil burning somewhere else in the world. You can try to point the blame at China, but the wealth generated in the middle east selling them oil is a major part of the reason why US stock markets keep going up.

If you forced China to use less fossil fuels you would personally feel a much larger hit to your quality of life.

We in the developed world love to outsource the violence and environmental damage we cause. It's one thing to wash your hands, but quite another to then try to point the finger.
by ACCount37 | 2026-03-06 17:39:25+00:00
Climate change is not the great equalizer people want it to be.

Nuclear superpowers are among the least likely countries to actually collapse from climate damage.

US isn't Syria, and it's Syria that's at risk.

First world countries like France can absorb a +30% spike to food prices. Countries where the same food price spike would come with a major death toll don't have the tools to kick off WW3.
by notepad0x90 | 2026-03-06 17:39:53+00:00
it did not go that way, the problem is not difficulty of doing anything, a private corporation offering a free product has the right to do whatever it wants with that product. their reasoning behind GSB is not for you to debate.

Free speech in general is a legal concept. rights in general are not moral concepts, when you say you have a right to do something, it is always in the context of a rules based framework. When you say something is right (same word, different meaning) or wrong, that is morality. Speech can be right or wrong. prohibiting someone from speaking can also be right or wrong, but it isn't called "freedom of speech" or "censorship". If you can't articulate why something is morally wrong without referring to a right under some rule based framework, then you're not talking about morality, you're talking about not liking some rule.

When you are in someone's house, they have the right to decide what you can talk about or not talk about, because it is their home and your presence there is a privilege. Replace home with business, and then replace business with a free product that you're not even paying for and that's this situation.

"I don't like it" is not a moral reasoning. You need to be able to articulate why something is immoral if you're going to use morality as a reason. Similarly, you need to explain what specific laws grant you an entitlement if you feel like a legal entitlement is violated.
by thebuilderjr | 2026-03-06 17:40:01+00:00
Fun project. I tried encoding a short sample and the shareable m/#... URL plus WAV export makes it easy to reproduce and share specific payloads.

A feature that would make this even more useful as a debugging or teaching tool would be a decoder inspector: recovered bytes, framing errors, and maybe a small waterfall or discriminator view while decoding. For acoustic transfers especially, that would make it much easier to see whether a failure came from timing, levels, or just picking the wrong protocol.
by CamperBob2 | 2026-03-06 17:40:06+00:00
But the important thing is that Trump has restored gender integrity in girls' high school sports, he has bombed 7 countries instead of 5 like Biden did, and he has been deporting... uh, well, about the same number of undocumented people as Biden.

I guess that's three important things, not just one, but you get the idea.
Google Gross violations of the ToS and transformation into an "Evil" corporation
by falkerdev | 2026-03-06 17:40:28+00:00
Google is deceiving users.
Not long ago, I tried their new "Antigravity" project out of curiosity and experimentation with their special paid Google AI Pro subscription. Everything was fine for a couple of days, with model quota updates as expected. But just recently, my quota updates were delayed for several days! Without any explanation, yet the Google Antigravity (Plans) documentation literally states that quotas are updated every 5 hours.

Is this really a corporate scam and a violation of their own ToS? I've contacted support numerous times with this request, and each time my request was rejected with the excuse, "We don't have the tools to solve your problem."
However, I think this is a blatant lie from the company.

Is this the new "Don't be Evil"? Selling a service with a "5-hour refresh" guarantee while locking users out for days without any technical recourse or manual override capability? This feels less like a "Preview" bug and more like a corporate scam.

Haha - Google

It seems like you need to think twice before implementing any hidden restrictions. Maybe you need to notify your users instead of being dismissive and blaming it on "making things equal for everyone."
by h2zizzle | 2026-03-06 17:41:21+00:00
>There is a separate issue where for the last 2-3 years, the BLS's later revisions to jobs numbers have been almost entirely downward, instead of evenly distributed like they used to be, indicating some kind of systemic methodological issue, maybe some secular change in how labor markets work post-covid

The Biden administration pulled out all the stops (without resorting to outright corruption, like Trump) to get ahead of the fact that we briefly entered a recession in 2022 (which would not have been as brief if it had been correctly identified as the recession that it was). They changed how they calculated inflation around this time, which coincided with headline staying below 10% even though it had been trending higher and likely was much, much higher for parts of the country. I have no issue with the notion that they also changed the way that they calculated job growth and then, surprise, numbers are good (but then get revised down later when no one cares anymore).
by morphle | 2026-03-06 17:41:24+00:00
> We MUST MUST stop burning things.

Yes, we must. It is so rare to see someone saying this in public. Thank you for this simple clarity.

Stop burning everything! Fossil fuel, wood, plastic, garbage.

We only need solar energy at 1 dollarcent or eurocent and a little batteries for the convienience of using electricity when the sun does not shine.

In the north snd south you need more solar panels in the winter than in the summer by a factor of 50. But that pays it back in summer when you have a squanderable abundance of free and clean energy. We can store that surpless energy in purifying drinking water, melting iron ore or aluminum, melting plastics or silicon ingots.

Storing surplus heat or cold in the ground is another luxery, because it is more rxpensive than 1 dollarcent or eurocent solar.

Wind and hydro are also more vostlyvthan solar so they are another luxery with worse enviremental costs than pure solar cells.

We need to build Enernet, a peer to peer electricitynet and internet between all buildings with power routers. for around 100 dollar per building. You buy and sell your house surplus solar electricity to the neighbourhood where it can be stored in car batteries. See my Fiberhood white paper.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Merik-Voswinkel/publica...
by squidleon | 2026-03-06 17:41:35+00:00
Thanks! Yeah, one of the main motivations was exactly that — after years working with legacy UO codebases where networking, persistence, and game logic were deeply intertwined, I wanted to see what a clean-slate approach would look like with modern .NET.

On sector sync bursts — this is something I'm actively tuning. Right now when a player enters a new sector, we sync all ground items and mobiles in the surrounding sectors (configurable radius). For busy areas that can mean a lot of packets at once. The current approach is:

- Sector enter sync only sends the delta sectors the player wasn't already seeing, so a simple move into an adjacent sector doesn't resync everything
- Sectors close to the player (within 1 of center) are always resynced because the UO client silently drops items beyond its visual range (~18 tiles), so you need to re-send them when the player comes back
- The outgoing packet queue handles the actual send, so the game loop isn't blocked waiting for network I/O

That said, there's definitely room for prioritization (mobiles first, then nearby items, then distant items) and spreading the sync across multiple ticks instead of one burst. It's on the roadmap.

On NativeAOT — honestly, both. The single-binary deployment is great for Docker (small image, instant startup), but the real win is predictable performance. No JIT warmup, no tiered compilation surprises
mid-session. For a game server where you care about consistent tick timing, eliminating that variable is worth it. The tradeoff is you lose some runtime flexibility, but source generators fill most of that gap
(packet registration, serialization, etc.).