MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tedsanders | 2026-03-05 18:41:14+00:00
Yeah, long context vs compaction is always an interesting tradeoff. More information isn't always better for LLMs, as each token adds distraction, cost, and latency. There's no single optimum for all use cases.

For Codex, we're making 1M context experimentally available, but we're not making it the default experience for everyone, as from our testing we think that shorter context plus compaction works best for most people. If anyone here wants to try out 1M, you can do so by overriding `model_context_window` and `model_auto_compact_token_limit`.

Curious to hear if people have use cases where they find 1M works much better!

(I work at OpenAI.)
by bigyabai | 2026-03-05 18:41:30+00:00
There are much better games for PvE looting, honestly. My recommendation is the STALKER: Anomaly modpacks like EFP and GAMMA, both of which are free downloads.

Trying to make ARC Raiders into a PvE shooter would require every map and enemy to get reworked for low-population gameplay. The game just isn't built for it, and their effort is better invested in catering to the preexisting playerbase.
by GuB-42 | 2026-03-05 18:41:52+00:00
> if Wikipedia vanished what would it mean …

That someone would need to restore some backups, and in the meantime, use mirrors.

Seriously, not that big of a deal. I don't know how many copies of Wikipedia are lying around but considering that archives are free to download, I guess a lot. And if you count text-only versions of the English Wikipedia without history and talk pages, it is literally everywhere as it is a common dataset for natural language processing tasks. It is likely to be the most resilient piece of data of that scale in existence today.

The only difficulty in the worst case scenario would be rebuilding a new central location and restarting the machinery with trusted admins, editors, etc... Any of the tech giants could probably make a Wikipedia replacement in days, with all data restored, but it won't be Wikipedia.
by mrexcess | 2026-03-05 18:42:05+00:00
>I'm not saying it was entirely intentional or there was an agenda, it's just unprofessionalism over and over and over again.

A few things here:

1) I'm not seeing the "over and over again" part at all, can you help me there?

2) The more scrutiny we give to this claim, the more the strength of it seems to fade. We went from BBC critically misinforming the British public by uncritically reporting Hamas statements, to the BBC misattributing an attack in a war full of misattributed attacks on both sides, which was corrected within hours.

3) Do you think there are similar examples of BBC reporting or publication that could be used to make the opposite case - that BBC holds a pro-Israel bias?
by Arainach | 2026-03-05 18:42:06+00:00
The users aren't the ones getting trillion dollar valuations. And for most of them the answer is "they don't have a choice, it's bundled into Microsoft 365 / Google Workspace / Meta / everything" or "they're not, their employer is paying for it".

The answer to "why do businesses pay for stupid things of questionable hard-to-prove value based on hype cycles" would take many books.
by exceptione | 2026-03-05 18:42:12+00:00
Well, I have bad news for the FCC Chair: Europe simply and strategically has to step in if it wants to stand on it own feet in an age of hybrid warfare. Especially Starlink is a weapon in the hands of `surveillance industry left join private military` against Europe.

It is increasingly clear that US vision on Europe is pretty much comparable to how Kremlin and associated oligarchy perceive neighboring countries. Nothing more than resource pools to be exploited.

There is a slippery slope from 'good business requires killing competition' to the 'might makes right' thinking, which you can openly hear from the mouths of the current administration. That is also why you wouldn't hear about the tens of thousands Ukrainian kids being kidnapped and brainwashed but instead see them repeatedly berating the victim; it isn't 'holding cards' and as such should just surrender to raping savages.

The worst that could happen now would be if the public gets distracted from the nature of this beast. And unfortunately, it isn't named 'Trump'. It's way bigger, way more pervasive than the distractor in (optical) command.

There is no way Europe can have their intel and general communication being grabbed by the likes of Musk, Thiel and Miller. The longer Europe waits, the more difficult it gets (think consumer backlash). For those who paid attention, the war on Europe didn't start kinetically: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46915567
by stackghost | 2026-03-05 18:42:13+00:00
As in any complex system, failures only occur when all the holes in the metaphorical slices of Swiss cheese line up to create a path. Filling the hole in any of the layers traps the error and averts a failure. So, perhaps yes, it could have been solved that way.

My personal beef in this particular instance is that we've seemingly decided to throw decades of advice in the form of "don't allow untrusted input to be executable" out the window. Like, say, having an LLM read github issues that other people can write. It's not like prompt injections and LLM jailbreaks are a new phenomenon. We've known about those problems about as long as we've known about LLMs themselves.
by tzs | 2026-03-05 18:42:13+00:00
The Supreme Court has not ruled on this issue. An appeal of a lower court's ruling on this issue was appealed to the Supreme Court but the Supreme Court declined to accept the case.

The Supreme Court has "original jurisdiction" over some types of cases, which means if someone brings such a case to them they have to accept it and rule on it, and they have "discretionary jurisdiction" over many more types of cases, which means if someone brings one of those they can choose whether or not they have to accept it. AI copyright cases are discretionary jurisdiction cases.

You generally cannot reliable infer what the Supreme Court thinks of the merits of the case when they decline to accept it, because they are often thinking big picture and longer term.

They might think a particular ruling is needed, but the particular case being appealed is not a good case to make that ruling on. They tend to want cases where the important issue is not tangled up in many other things, and where multiple lower appeals courts have hashed out the arguments pro and con.

When the Supreme Court declines the result is that the law in each part of the country where an appeals court has ruled on the issue is whatever that appeals court ruled. In parts of the country where no appeals court has ruled, it will be decided when an appeal reaches their appeals courts.

If appeals courts in different areas go in different directions, the Supreme Court will then be much more likely to accept an appeal from one of those in order to make the law uniform.
by timpera | 2026-03-05 18:42:18+00:00
> Steerability: Similarly to how Codex outlines its approach when it starts working, GPT‑5.4 Thinking in ChatGPT will now outline its work with a preamble for longer, more complex queries. You can also add instructions or adjust its direction mid-response.

This was definitely missing before, and a frustrating difference when switching between ChatGPT and Codex. Great addition.
by mr_00ff00 | 2026-03-05 18:42:40+00:00
Thanks for advice, and yeah that makes sense that I’ll have to learn a whole new skill set, but I enjoy learning.

When talking about a feature, am I doing basically high level system design? Similar to what a senior engineer does (aka this should be a cache, it’s best to change this to streaming so let’s remove the audit db, etc) or is it even more high level than that?

Also lol at the last line, never heard that but I can see why people might make the assumption.
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2026-03-05 18:42:55+00:00
Yes, but we did that over the last 15 years. We just never realized that's what we were seeing.

It only clicked for me a few weeks ago, in one thread or another here when I realized that no one could ever do what Google did once: Cloudflare and other antibot technologies have closed off traditional search-as-the-result-of-web-crawling permanently. It's not that no one will do it because they think there's no money in it, or that no one will do it because the upfront costs are gigantic... literally it can no longer be done.

The internet died.
by JohnMakin | 2026-03-05 18:43:09+00:00
This is goalpost shifting and ignored much of the point of my post. this same thinking can be applied recursively to “well, if you cant do that, it’s just dumb anyway.”

And you’re flat out wrong about banking, there are things and situations that require you physically entering one. And yes it is a situation where society is forcing the decision, that’s my entire point - I as an individual cannot apply the non remedy of “just do everything on your computer, ldo” because society has stripped that choice from me. unless the prescription you’re giving is to withdraw from society - which is only proving my point.

I’d also hardly describe my job as a minor inconvenience.

I see these types of arguments a lot on this site and I am very confused where they are coming from. It’s almost like the implication is you have no right to complain about the privacy nightmare if you participate in using things that are necessary to participate in society. You can have reasonable privacy and these tools at the same time, it’s not an impossibility.
by busterarm | 2026-03-05 18:43:11+00:00
I can't respond to tzury's comment because it's already flagged and dead but I honestly don't think that's quite fair on this board.

The very same people who would be flagging that comment wouldn't bat an eye at saying they won't read or support anything by folks like DHH, or a hundred other prominent tech figures who have committed some ideological-wrong.

It's just a similarly heavy-handed reaction from the other side of the divide.

I don't find anything wrong or downvotable about people voicing perfectly valid criticisms about pg, his opinions, who he associates with and signal-boosts...unless these standards you all want to apply wrt cancellation are "for thee and not for me".
by Kiboneu | 2026-03-05 18:43:31+00:00
> the comment you are replying to is a hypothetical, which correctly points out that even a day or two of lost edits is fine (not ideal, but fine). your reply doesnt engage with their comment at all.

I did engage, by pointing out that it wasn't relevant nor a realistic scenario for a competent sysadmin. (Did you read the OP?) That's a /you/ problem if you rely on infrequent backups, especially for a service with so much flux.

> what is the actual snapshot frequency? like, what is the timestamp of the last known good snapshot?

? Why would I know what their internal operations are?
by jurgenburgen | 2026-03-05 18:43:40+00:00
> EU's proposed Space Act, which would force companies like Elon Musk's SpaceX, Amazon's Leo and European satellite company Eutelsat to curb space debris and pollution, and tighten safety and cybersecurity protections. The draft law would also require U.S. firms to appoint a legal representative inside the EU.

> The U.S. administration has criticized the draft rules before, claiming they would place "unacceptable regulatory burdens" on American champions.

Oh the horror! Little Musk can’t afford to clean up his mess.
by tadfisher | 2026-03-05 18:43:44+00:00
The default mode that untrained people enter when thinking about mental illness is denial, as in, "thank <deity> that will never happen to me". Appallingly, that is ingrained in AI product safety; why would we sacrifice double-digit effectiveness/performance/whatever to prevent negative interactions with the single-digit population who are susceptible to mental illness in the first place?

We just aren't comfortable with the idea that all of us are fragile, and when we think we could endure a situation that would induce self-harm in others, we are likely wrong.
by angry_octet | 2026-03-05 18:43:44+00:00
Rogue-like games use the most simple randomisation to generate the next room, and I burnt hundreds of hours in Mines of Moria before I forced myself to quit.

Now with an LLM I could have AD&D-like campaigns, photorealistic renders of my character and the NPCs. I could give it the text of an AD&D campaign as a DM and have it generate walking and talking NOCs.

The art of those great fantasy artists is definitely being stolen in generated images, and application of VLMs should require payment into some sort of art funding pool. But modern artists could well profit by being the intermediary between user and VLM, crafting prompts, both visual and textual, to give a consistent look and feel to a game.

The essay author is smoking crack.
by 7777777phil | 2026-03-05 18:43:51+00:00
Nike is a useful test case (1) here. Brand was the whole competitive moat for them and once athletic gear commoditized, then management spent five years cutting the things that sustain it: athlete relationships, premium positioning, product development. Each cut looked (somewhat) rational on its own but none of them were, taken together.

(1) https://philippdubach.com/posts/nikes-crisis-and-the-economi...

EDIT: Nevermind comments are apparently just a pg meta discussion..
by oersted | 2026-03-05 18:43:55+00:00
I believe you are looking at GPT 5.4 Pro. It's confusing in the context of subscription plan names, Gemini naming and such. But they've had the Pro version of the GPT 5 models (and I believe o3 and o1 too) for a while.

It's the one you have access to with the top ~$200 subscription and it's available through the API for a MUCH higher price ($2.5/$15 vs $30/$180 for 5.4 per 1M tokens), but the performance improvement is marginal.

Not sure what it is exactly, I assume it's probably the non-quantized version of the model or something like that.
by ynac | 2026-03-05 18:44:10+00:00
I hope you don't go! It's clearly a minority position you hold, but that doesn't mean it's a bad one. Or wrong. I've been perplexed by this and many other related issues. I wonder and hope every year, every step in the wrong direction that gets attention, we'll get to that magic 3% that stands up and corrects things for citizen good. No matter how your up or down votes end up in a few hours, know you aren't alone or wrong. At least from my point of view.
by Waterluvian | 2026-03-05 18:44:26+00:00
I think there's possibly more to it. Many, many years passed and the people asking for it changed over time. There's a big difference between, "I wish I could go back 4 years and re-experience it all" and "I wish I could go back 20 years and re-experience it all."

I also wonder if maybe they were generally correct. What percentage of people asking for WoW Classic back in the day actually ended up there?

It's kind of like if my dad encouraged me at 17 to get a minivan because I'm going to want a minivan. And then I'm 35 with kids and I get a minivan and he says, "see? I was always right!"

Another way of reasoning about it is to reframe it as a shared problem: "What should we do with the resources we're committing to WoW?" "Do WoW Classic!" probably was a wrong answer for a long time if the goal is to make the most people happy (and make the most money) rather than make the loudest people happy. This quickly gets into how users (especially tech savvy ones) generally have no clue how things work and have zero sense of the associated cost. WoW was constantly full of people with quick opinions on how hard it should be for a multi-dollar company to do certain things. No appreciation for the mythical man-style difficulties associated with distractions and pivots and whatnot.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-05 18:44:47+00:00
> Not anywhere close to a level playing field

But still, ultimately, turnout was turnout. Media saying mean things about your side isn’t a real excuse, Trump has been saying the same for a decade.

> they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media

Of course they must. In the meantime, the issues I care about seem decently reflected (outside privacy and war, where I concede most Americans who share my views are lazy, delusional and nihilistic). I’ve even had the opportunity to help write some state and federal legislation. So I guess I should be okay with the lack of political competition.
by metalman | 2026-03-05 18:45:13+00:00
tire dust is one of the primary causes of mass juvinile salmon death, as it contains a biocide to prevent tires from rotting, that acumulates in roadside ditches and can be washed into rivers and streams in aerly spring whem the salmon smolts are vulnerable.
Jet fuel also contains a biocide to prevent it bieng degraded by certain algae, along with, well, I'm thinking just about everything else at this point.
Oh, wait, sorry, I get it, this about trying to deamonise cars in "urban" "environments"
nevermind.
Show HN: LLM Price to Performance Tool
by StratusBen | 2026-03-05 18:45:56+00:00
tldr: We launched https://vantage.sh/models - a price to performance comparison tool for LLMs. If you're familiar with ec2instances.info....this is basically the LLM version of that.

- - - -

I'm Co-Founder and CEO of Vantage posting on behalf of our team that shipped this. Vantage is a cloud cost management platform. We also maintain https://ec2instances.info/ after buying the site a few years back. We've been hearing rumblings from the community looking for something similar for LLMs...so we built it.

The site is free and open-source and provides a centralized view of LLM model specifications, pricing, benchmarks, and hosting information. We're shipping early and looking for feedback. Give it a peek and let us know what you think.
by simianwords | 2026-03-05 18:46:11+00:00
Do you maybe want to give us users some hints on what to compact and throw away? In codex CLI maybe you can create a visual tool that I can see and quickly check mark things I want to discard.

Sometimes I’m exploring some topic and that exploration is not useful but only the summary.

Also, you could use the best guess and cli could tell me that this is what it wants to compact and I can tweak its suggestion in natural language.

Context is going to be super important because it is the primary constraint. It would be nice to have serious granular support.
by grzelazny | 2026-03-05 18:46:14+00:00
It all started with my own frustration. I’ve always struggled to wrap my head around large system architectures. My brain just couldn't process it all, and even if I figured it out for a moment, I’d quickly forget how things were connected.
I searched for tools countless times. Unfortunately, they were either ridiculously expensive enterprise monoliths, or they just didn't work for my projects. The diagrams were messy, overly complex, or failed to render properly. I wanted to build my own tool back then, but it felt way too difficult.
And then the AI era hit, and the problem… got so much worse.
Today, AI agents can write 100% of the codebase. Sounds great, right? The problem is, it’s getting harder and harder to understand it. Honestly, you don't even want to read the massive wall of text they spit out. I realized that I had become the bottleneck in Code Review. I’d blindly approve a PR, only to spend hours later trying to figure out how it works and failing to fix bugs.
But then I connected the dots. Since AI doesn't just look at syntax, but actually has to understand the semantics of the code to write it, it makes AI the ultimate expert for generating diagrams—ones that were impossible to create before.
I spent many sleepless nights coding, and that’s how ArchToCode.com was born.
Thanks to this app, I can finally understand the code my AI agent creates.
What exactly can I do with it?
Generate any type of diagram from any code.
Go from a high-level overview down to deep details (drill-down sub-diagrams).
Click on visual elements in the diagram and instantly see the underlying source code.
This completely changed my workflow. Now, I can take a screenshot of the architecture, feed it to Claude during planning, and keep building. When doing "vibe coding" (e.g., on Lovable.dev), I don’t have to stare at the code constantly. I look at the diagram, see the logic of what I’ve built, and precisely steer the AI's decisions without introducing regressions. It’s so much faster.
I finally have peace of mind. I know exactly what’s going on in my project, even if AI rewrites it daily.
I’m looking for developers who work with AI to test ArchToCode.com. Try it out and let me know if it helps you understand your projects faster too.
I’m waiting for your honest feedback—what else should I add to make it even better?
by modeless | 2026-03-05 18:46:43+00:00
A world where AIs use APIs instead of UIs to do everything is a world where us humans will soon be helpless, as we'll have to ask the AIs to do everything for us and will have limited ability to observe and understand their work. I prefer that the AIs continue to use human-accessible tools, even if that's less efficient for them. As the price of intelligence trends toward zero, efficiency becomes relatively less important.
Ask HN: Pricing model for internal OpenClaw agents others now ask to buy?
by liaai0630 | 2026-03-05 18:46:50+00:00
We built OpenClaw agents internally for two growth tasks:

- keyword research + SEO post generation (auto-opens a PR for 5 posts daily, human reviews before merge)

- surfacing Reddit threads worth engaging with plus drafting responses for human review.

Demoed this setup at an AI event last week mostly to share what's working for us but a solid number of founders came up afterward asking if we could set it up for their startups.

Now I'm genuinely trying to figure out the right pricing structure before saying yes to anyone. Should we 1) charge a one-time setup fee like we configure the agents for your stack and hand it off? 2) charge a monthly subscription where we host and maintain the agents for you? or 3) hybrid with setup fee + lower monthly for hosting/maintenance

Any advice would be appreciated! There might be aspects I'm not even thinking of!
by cratermoon | 2026-03-05 18:46:51+00:00
The best feature of the Smalltalk browser is that there's no such thing as a 'file' in the organization of the code.
I get that we have to have files and directories as operating systems use that concept,
but it really doesn't make sense to be constrained organize code that way.
In particular,
tying visibility and module organization to "what file is in what directory" introduces an abstraction useless for source code.
by oldskultxo | 2026-03-05 18:47:05+00:00
Hey!Author here.

This started as an experiment while writing an interactive novel.
The real problem I ran into wasn't writing the story, but keeping the structure understandable as the number of branches and conditions grew.

That's what led me to experiment with a declarative format where the prose stays separate from the runtime logic.

The reader runtime is intentionally simple (vanilla JS modules + DOM rendering) and the editor works locally in the browser using IndexedDB.

Happy to answer questions about the architecture or the Codex workflow if anyone is curious.