MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by DeepSeaTortoise | 2026-03-06 16:48:55+00:00
Exactly, this was the whole point of Trump calling climate change a hoax to benefit China, but somehow this got twisted by the media into not denying climate change being an anti-Trump position.

The base then started demanding this from their reps and Trump almost picked up on this himself. It took years to undo that damage and even now we're barely back at a pro-clean air, pro-solar and pro nuclear position...
by actusual | 2026-03-06 16:48:57+00:00
My partner is a lawyer (prosecutor for a large city). The reason she is at low risk is simply because of the rate of adoption of AI tooling (or ANY tooling for that matter). IT in the public sector (particularly city government) is so much worse than I ever could have imagined before meeting my partner.

Our city just spent >$15MM on "case management software" that took 5 years to build by some fly-by-night outfit in California who won the contract, haphazardly bolted together MSFT Azure components, then vanished with zero support.

These teams can't in good faith freely adopt AI tooling into their workflow because they don't have the bandwidth to do it well, so they don't do it at all.
by quantified | 2026-03-06 16:49:03+00:00
This is going to be such a continued mess. Refund it to the companies that paid the tariffs, it's quite the windfall. Consumer refunds ain't gonna happen.
Economically, under usual times, the best thing to do with it would be to pay off some national debt with it, the deficit is out of control. But with $38T of debt, nothing really makes a dent.
by ACCount37 | 2026-03-06 16:49:03+00:00
That's the sum of climate change. "GDP growth of 3% instead of 5%."

Severe enough to be noticeable, but not severe enough to warrant radical climate action. Not an extinction threat. A "slow trickle of economic damage, some amount otherwise preventable death and suffering, diffused across the entire world, applied unevenly, and spread thin across many decades" threat.

And stopping the GHG emissions demands radical, coordinated global action. Major emitters would have to pay local costs now - for the sake of global benefits many decades down the line. And those emitters are not the countries that face the worst climate risks. Global superpowers can tolerate climate change - it's countries that already struggle as it is, that don't have the resources to adapt or mitigate damage, that can face a significant uptick in death and suffering rather than damage in the realm of economics.

That makes climate action a very hard sell for the politicians. Thus the tepid response.

By now, I'm convinced that the only viable approaches to climate change lie in the realm of geoengineering. Which does not require multilateral coordinated action against a "tragedy of commons" scenario, and are cheaper than forcing local GHG emissions into negatives. Even non-permanent geoengineering solutions offset impacts here and now - thus buying time for fossil fuel energy to succumb to economics.
by jauntywundrkind | 2026-03-06 16:49:16+00:00
Almost. SoC is a 1+4 design, with a vexrisc main core (350MHz), and 4 tiny "Baochip io" PicoRV cores (700MHz). The crowdsupply for this board just opened. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=vexrisc

This is an embedded chip, not a full on application core like an arm cortex A78. No GPU. But like a rp2350 there are graphics drivers.

Previous discussion from 47d ago on Xous, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46619059 (183 points, 69 comments, nice)
by fnordpiglet | 2026-03-06 16:49:36+00:00
I’m excited as a computer scientist to see it happening in my life time. I am not excited for the consequences once it’s played out. Hence my comment about retiring, and empathy for everyone who is still around once I do. I never got into this for the money - when I started engineers made about as much as accountants. It’s only post 1997 or so that it became “cool” and well paid. I am doing this because I love technology and what it can do and the science of computing. So in that regard it’s an amazing time to be here. But I am also sad to see the black box cover the beauty of it all.
by rich_sasha | 2026-03-06 16:49:37+00:00
I'm not sure I agree with this approach, or at least it doesn't work in my area. It's like self driving cars. Having 90% reliability is almost as good as 0%. I have to be confident the thing is gonna work, correctly, or at worst fail predictably.

I can see that there's a lot of applications where things can just randomly fail and you retry / restart, that helps with crashes.

But the AI can't make it not crash, what's to say it does the right thing when it succeeds? Again, depends on the relative cost of errors etc.
by the_af | 2026-03-06 16:49:44+00:00
That's cherry-picking. The Iranians said things, Trump said some other things, and your comment chooses to selectively believe some things the Iranians said (that their nuclear program wasn't entirely dismantled, in contradiction to Trump's claims) but not others (that they weren't pursuing nuclear weapons and the late Khamenei considered them immoral). It's now believed Israel was planning to kill Khamenei regardless of any nuclear talks, and forced the hand of the US.

Iran wasn't a threat to the US.
by ferguess_k | 2026-03-06 16:50:09+00:00
I do. But I haven't found a use of it, yet. I don't even have a ham radio. I guess I just impulsively got a license and that was it.

For people who don't use radio for communication (chat), what do you do? I guess it's useful as an emergency measure, but I could simply purchase an ordianry radio or use my car's, not a ham radio.
by wizzwizz4 | 2026-03-06 16:50:18+00:00
The language model's output would be informed by its weights, not by its experiences as wetware. Substrate does not make a computation special: that's the whole point of the Chinese Room thought experiment.

What mechanism are you imagining that would allow a LLM built of neurons to describe what it's like to be made of neurons, when a LLM built of GPUs cannot describe what it's like to be organised sand? (The LLM in the GPU cluster is evaluated by performing the same calculations that could be performed by intricate clockwork, or very very slowly by generations of monks using pencil and paper.)
by bko | 2026-03-06 16:50:19+00:00
> Nothing will change until developed rich countries are starting to hurt.

Ironic OECD countries actually REDUCED their emissions based on a peak in 2007 and continue to do so. Not reduced as a percentage of GDP or adjusted for population growth, but reduced in absolute levels. It's all China, but I guess it's cool to blame things on developed countries.

There are literally 100k deaths in Europe that can be prevented if they lifted restrictions on AC so that they can feel good about making a negligible effect on carbon emissions. So I think you have it opposite, how much pain do rich countries have to endure before they realize that their efforts are in vain.

And before you say "that's because the West outsources all the dirty production to China", even trade adjusted emissions are down considerably and continue to be down.

Please do some research if you're interested in this topic, it's not hard to do. Just follow the logical steps.

1. What causes global warming

2. Who produces most of these chemicals

3. Are there any global trends over the last 20 years in production of these chemicals

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/europes-crusade-against-air-co...
by harrall | 2026-03-06 16:50:24+00:00
Words don’t have precise meanings either.

“He has completed the task.”

versus

“He pulled it off.”

Their meanings are the same but their both have different subtext.

Emojis are simply additional levers for subtext. It’s like using a red hot colors versus cool colors for a poster — the text might be the same but the colors provide an additional way to signal subtext.

The more options, the better.
by Samueedwards1 | 2026-03-06 16:50:27+00:00
Payment workflows die silently. Here's what ships before yours burns money:

Raw Stripe → 3x retries + idempotency + conflict DOs + rollbacks.

Apcher injects resilience into your Node.js repo. Try it for free. Test chaos locally.

What broke your last payment flow?
apcher.dev
by shevy-java | 2026-03-06 16:50:36+00:00
Well - if you are canadian and give money to the USA then you kind of also help sustain Trump's hostile anti-Canadian rhetoric and agenda. Most Canadians live in the southern part of Canada, aka close to the USA and depend economically a lot on the USA, but increasing that economic dependency more than it already is, is not a good strategy for all Canadians. I also think Canadians should get a small nuclear arsenal, probably 25% compared to what France has (France has about twice as many people; Canada only needs a small deterrence that would drive the cost of any country being hostile against it. Not many countries can be really hostile to Canada.)
by jedberg | 2026-03-06 16:50:55+00:00
Same with Los Angeles. In the 1950s, when my parents were young, you didn't need AC in LA. You just opened a window on the few hot days, and those were like high 70s/low 80s.

By the 1990s, you didn't need AC, but your home/rental was more appealing if it had one, because there were a few hot days a year that were pretty uncomfortable otherwise.

Now, you can't not have it. There are far too many hot days to live without it.
by 01100011 | 2026-03-06 16:50:57+00:00
Oregon ticks most of those boxes except the difference is that Oregon has very few jobs. People flock to WA because of jobs created by long-standing business friendly policies.

That doesn't explain everything, obviously, but I think you need to take it into consideration. For decades I've heard this in some form from people: "Oregon is amazing, but I had to leave when I couldn't get a job." Meanwhile the Sea-Tac region has had amazing growth, packed wall-to-wall with a range of companies.
What signals do you use to decide if an ops problem is worth fixing?
by practical_ops | 2026-03-06 16:51:05+00:00
In operations roles, the first few weeks can be overwhelming because everything seems urgent.

Stakeholders escalate issues, processes are half-built, and every conversation surfaces something that "needs fixing".

One mistake I've seen repeatedly is treating urgency as a reliable signal for importance.

Often the loudest problems are symptoms of deeper system issues.

I'm curious how others approach this: what signals do you use to decide whether a problem is actually worth fixing versus just noise in the system?
by siruncledrew | 2026-03-06 16:51:12+00:00
Until climate plans align with short-term personal incentives, I don't see how there's going to be any serious persistent fight against climate change.

People might feel benevolent one day and do something good, but the next day when they are faced with a problem and the environment is a convenient trash can or resource bin, they'll go right back to those bad habits.

The only way things will change is if everyone's life gets made miserable by the effects.
by wiseowise | 2026-03-06 16:51:19+00:00
> It’s worth noting that these vastly unequal growth rates are on top of the already vast inequality that existed in 1979. Back then, the top 1% earned average wages ($281,932) more than nine times as much as the bottom 90% ($29,953). In 2023, the top 1% earned average wages ($794,129) more than 18 times as much as the bottom 90% ($43,035).

40k is what you call rich?
by i_think_so | 2026-03-06 16:51:19+00:00
I think the point here is that an LLM might not get the correct answer because it hasn't found it yet by scraping Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, etc. Artificially limit the training set and it will never, ever get it right.

Whereas, a human of average intelligence, in possession of a dictionary or perhaps just a list of animals, could reason their way through getting the correct answer in finite time. They could probably get it without the list if they really wanted to.
by satvikpendem | 2026-03-06 16:51:25+00:00
Not necessarily, Alibaba is still working on it and the CEO is directly co-leading the team. Translated with Qwen 3.5:

> To all colleagues in the Tongyi Lab:

> The company has approved Lin Junyang’s resignation and thanks him for his contributions during his tenure. Jingren will continue to lead the Tongyi Lab in advancing future work. At the same time, the company will establish a Foundation Model Support Group, jointly coordinated by myself, Jingren, and Fan Yu, to mobilize group resources in support of foundation model development.

> Technological progress demands constant advancement — stagnation means regression. Developing foundational large models is our key strategic direction toward the future. While continuing to uphold our open-source model strategy, we will further increase R&D investment in artificial intelligence, intensify efforts to attract top talent, and move forward together with renewed commitment.

> Wu Yongming

https://x.com/poezhao0605/status/2029396117239276013
by numpad0 | 2026-03-06 16:52:00+00:00
> What happens when 1.5B come knocking because if they stay they die?

Like let them build few of those sci-fi domes and let them keep buying disposable bottled oxygen? I don't get the pessimism. India makes its own rockets. Pakistan has nukes. Why are they supposed to be incapable of holding the nation together on Mars-like Earth?

Tokyo is already hitting 40C/100F at >90% RH during summers. It's already mildly unsurvivable. Nobody cares. Maybe in 10-20 years we'd be wearing spacesuits, but do anyone seriously think the equatorial regions will be uninhabitable and land prices on northern Europe is going to skyrocket???
by WorldMaker | 2026-03-06 16:52:20+00:00
I think there are two big takeaways that GitHub has the power to implement:

1) actions/cache could default to workflow-isolated caches and require opt-in to shared caches between workflows, forcing workflow writers to understand the risks when they want to take them. This is a relatively "traditional" CI system safety design and perhaps something of an oversight.

2) GitHub needs a stronger defense against fork "commit-washing" than a banner in the UI because the greatest risks are places where the UI isn't visible. Right now GitHub will allow you to check out commits from forks as if they are commits in the main repository. This is a part of how GitHub works, all forks are stored in essentially the same repo under the hood for storage and computation benefits. But it's also a key to too many exploits that `action: actions/checkout@someCommitHash` might come from any fork of `actions/checkout` not just the GitHub official repo and any use of `npm install github:microsoft/vscode#someCommitHash` might come from any fork of `microsoft/vscode`. If a developer follows those commit links into the GitHub UI there's a warning banner those commits are from a fork, but you don't see that in a workflow YAML today and npm has no warnings if it happens. Even though this is a deep part of how GitHub works under the hood, it probably shouldn't be allowed to be this visible from outside of GitHub's walls and more security tools should prevent it both internal to GitHub and external to it (with npm being sort of both in that npm's developers are under GitHub's roof, too).
by thewebguyd | 2026-03-06 16:52:28+00:00
I mean, if that's true, then the governments around the world better damn well be prepared.

There's a ton of millennials (myself included) turning 40, that have been in this field since 2005 or earlier. It's all we know, and at this point we're getting too old to just "go do physical labor for minimum wage so AI can write code instead." I'm certainly too old to go back to school and try to pass the bar example to be a lawyer at 50+, and I have zero interest in any kind of people management whatsoever.

IMO Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, etc. should all be helping governments work toward a plan and lobbying for regulation on it instead of just charging full steam ahead "damn the consequences, those are someone else's problem."

It's going to obliterate what little is left of the middle class and leave a massive amount of unemployed middle aged tech workers with no where to go. What then? We either get ahead of the problem now (Outlook not so good), or we collapse into massive civil unrest and chaos.
by prmph | 2026-03-06 16:52:48+00:00
Technically how will vibe code be identified? And how does one determine the level of human involvement that would make code copyrightable? What of the prompts? Are those copyrightable? What about the architectural and tactical design of the code if I do those myself?

I don't vibe code; I am firmly in charge of the architecture and code style of my projects, and i frequently give detailed instructions to AI tools I use. But, to me, this is leading to a weird place. Why would the result of using a tool to create something new not be copyrightable simply due to the specific tool used?

I think this whole hullabaloo is self inflicted. Code or an other creative work should stand on its merits. There is no issue with copyright and no issue with the ship of Theseus. The current copyright approach is still applicable: code (or any other creative work) that appears to be lifted verbatim from another work could be a copyright violation. Work that is sufficiently original (irrespective of how it was created) is likely not a copyright violation.
by beej71 | 2026-03-06 16:52:55+00:00
> Short of voting, protesting and getting into arguments with MAGA people I don't know what else I can effectively do.

Also:

Give money to organizations that are doing the work on your behalf. Lawsuits are still important.

Call or write your reps *frequently*. They use software to automatically tabulate voter positions. (And they look at it--they want to keep their jobs!)
by cogman10 | 2026-03-06 16:53:06+00:00
Well part of that 43% I think have their opinions primarily because of propaganda from the same donors who are buying off the politicians.

But also, I'd point out that even in the Democrat party where this is more of an 80:20 issue with their constituents, the democrats are still far too friendly to fossil fuels (Biden, for example, specifically campaigned on how much he loves natural gas, fracking, and carbon capture).

This isn't the only 80:20 issue where democrat politicians are out of alignment with their base. That's also what informs my pessimism.
Show HN: Qurt – open-source desktop AI coworker (BYOK, agent mode)
by buhhalter | 2026-03-06 16:53:09+00:00
Hi HN — I built Qurt, an open-source desktop “AI coworker” for Windows + macOS.

The goal: provider freedom + local-first UX. You bring your own API keys (no subscription / no lock-in), and your chats/keys/files stay on your machine (nothing stored on our servers).

What it does:
- BYOK + multi-provider model switching (keep control of keys/data)
- Desktop-native chat with file/image attachments
- Agent mode: web browsing/search, terminal commands, browser automation, and file edits — with “review before run”

Downloads (GitHub Releases):
https://github.com/qurtai/qurt/releases/tag/v0.1.1

Repo:
https://github.com/qurtai/qurt

Landing page:
https://qurt.ai/

I’d love feedback on:
1) the “review-before-run” UX (too noisy? not strict enough?)
2) what provider/model integrations you’d want next
3) what would make you trust/install this faster (docs, sandboxing details, etc.)
by teraflop | 2026-03-06 16:53:10+00:00
Of course it's worth noting that CBP repeatedly argued in its previous court filings that there was no need for an injunction to halt the tariffs while they were being litigated, because if the tariffs were found to be unlawful, it could easily refund them.

For instance:

> In other words, plaintiffs’ asserted irreparable harm is the purported inability to obtain a refund after a final and unappealable decision because of liquidation. But that asserted harm is nonexistent here because defendants have made very clear—both in this case and in related cases—that they will not object to the Court ordering reliquidation of plaintiffs’ entries subject to the challenged IEEPA duties if such duties are found to be unlawful. Because defendants’ representations make clear that liquidation will not interfere with the availability of refunds after a final decision, plaintiffs cannot be irreparably harmed by liquidation.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cit.172...
by 01100011 | 2026-03-06 16:53:47+00:00
AI is killing the notion that SW companies are infinite money printing machines. The idea is that someday soon(in the next 5-10 years as markets are forward looking), someone will vibe-code a replacement for Photoshop/TurboTax/Office and if nothing else that will kill the profit margins. This changes the entire economics of SW and affects current hiring and spending.
by jvanderbot | 2026-03-06 16:53:51+00:00
It's surprising to me that people don't consider these coded language.

Sure, the junior manager might use them vaguely to mimic, but IMHO, when vague language comes up at decision tables, it's usually coding something more precise in a sort of plausible deniability.

A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.

A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad players

etc etc.

If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.

A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
by jgraham | 2026-03-06 16:54:04+00:00
China has now had flat CO2 emissions for two years, and experienced a decline in overall CO2 emissions during 2025[1]. Part of this is that they're deploying way more renewables than basically any other large economy [2].

They've also pivoted their industrial strategy so that basically the entire green energy sector depends on Chinese supply chains. This is significantly contributing to their economic growth [3].

I don't know to what extent taxation in Europe contributed to China's decision making here, but it presumably created an market for green energy and therefore helped solidify the economics.

This is of course not to say that there's nothing to criticize in China's environmental policies; there certainly is. But the trope of "why should we do anything because China won't" turns out to be spectacularly ill-informed. Indeed I think it makes more sense to ask the opposite: what are the likely consequences now that China has positioned itself as the global centre of green energy, and what should other countries be doing to ensure that they're not left behind?

[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-ha...
[2] https://www.carbonbrief.org/g7-falling-behind-china-as-world...
[3] https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-drove-more...
by sfink | 2026-03-06 16:54:12+00:00
That's exactly how my bad RAM manifested itself. In fact, I was compiling Firefox, and gcc would get a segmentation fault at some random point during compilation. I'd have to clobber and restart the hour-long build. It was only when gcc started crashing while compiling other things that I even started considering the possibility of hardware failure. I'm a software developer, and based on what I produce myself, I just assume that all software is horribly buggy. ;-)