MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jb_hn | 2026-03-14 16:12:53+00:00
I didn't notice any signs of AI writing until seeing this comment and re-reading (though I did notice it on the second pass).

That said, I think this article demonstrates that focusing on whether or not an article used AI might be focusing on the wrong “problem.” I appreciate being sensitive to the "smell" (the number of low-effort, AI posts flying around these days has made me sensitive too), but personally, I found this article both (1) easy to read and (2) insightful. I think the number of AI-written content lacking (2) is the problem.
by chiefgeek | 2026-03-14 16:13:06+00:00
Love it! I had three of these (can't remember if G4 or G5 - I think G4) at the digital photo lab I ran from 1998-2010. I ended up buying the second one because the first one would randomly freeze. Took two trips to Apple to find a fault in the CDROM drive which caused some errors in the OS installation. Was frustrating as hell! Once that was solved, it and the other three ran for years without much hiccup. Agree that the rack mount installation was a PITA.
I also had the XServe RAID fully loaded. I don't even remember what that sucker cost but it was a LOT. Also ran for years and years. Used it for my photo business after I sold down the lab.
by submeta | 2026-03-14 16:13:09+00:00
Why did muslims have to leave their countries? The "cultural clash" didn't appear out of thin air. Muslims are in Europe in large numbers because of wars that Europe and the West either started, fueled, or failed to prevent.

To name a few conflicts incited by the West: The Nakba in 1948 displaced 750,000 Palestinians and created a refugee population that still hasn't been resolved.

The Soviet-Afghan War displaced 6M+ people.

The US invaded Iraq in 2003, directly creating the vacuum that spawned ISIS.

NATO bombed Libya into a failed state.

The US and Israel spent years destabilizing Syria long before the civil war made it the worst refugee crisis since WWII.

Europe's closest allies armed all sides of Yemen's proxy war.

=> Every single wave of Muslim refugees into Europe traces back to a conflict the West had its hands in. Blaming Muslims for being here while ignoring why they had to leave is not a serious position.

And now Iran, a country with 90+m population. And noone stops US/israel. What do you think will cause the next flow of refugees?
by righthand | 2026-03-14 16:13:45+00:00
The Usa does similar things across the world. Here I swapped for the Usa.

> They are supporting and encouraging Israel’s war against Iran and Palestine. They also provide diplomatic cover and economic support for the Israeli regime. They promote nationalist radicalism and harassment of nonconformists on foreign campuses (Columbia protests). They ruthlessly suppress dissent (you must support the troops, using chemical weapons on protestors), or even just non White ethic identity and implement racist policies in their regions (rounding up immigrants without due process).
by Intralexical | 2026-03-14 16:13:47+00:00
> It is sometimes associated with our inability to think of new colors, but I think this is a completely different problem.

As an aside, thinking of a new color is relatively easy. You can sorta actually see new colors just by making a really good pigment[0], or shooting cone cells with lasers[1].

But there's also the possibility of having a new photoreceptor. In which case, you don't just gain 1 new color. You gain 3 new secondary colors, plus an entire new type of 4 "tertiary colors", each of which is as visually distinct as cyan, magenta, and yellow are. And the colorspace itself becomes a 4-dimensional volume, with every existing color able to blend into smooth graduations of the new cone cell signal.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NzVmtbPOrM
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olo_(color)
by mayhemducks | 2026-03-14 16:14:18+00:00
Oooh this is good! So - I agree with part of this.

When a conversational partner chooses to communicate a certain way because of how they want to be perceived, they are living out their values. And I admire that, and I think it is an important component of a healthy organization.

But, if you would, allow me to describe the distress I feel when I have to take in "extra words". Because I personally do not feel it as extremely minor.

My mind operates almost exclusively on language, mostly in text form. I do not absorb input in paragraphs with overarching or underlying emotional content. I don't even absorb it in sentences. I process language word by word - and when reading code it's character by character. Each chunk I take as input explodes into hundreds of possibilities of meaning that each must be thought about in turn, and then dismissed as probably not what the person meant. Some of these are quite funny, and if you are one of the dozen or so people close to me, I might even share them out loud hoping for a laugh. In a real-time conversation, this has to happen in milliseconds. It never turns off - the language parser/analyzer occupies a large chunk of my brain's processing continuously, even when I wish it didn't. If I am under some stress - even normal everyday work stress, and I feel like I need to force myself to process even more words, when they are not hyper-relevant to the stressful situation at-hand, I often find that I have not enough capacity left for managing my emotional state. Fear, uncertainty, risk evaluation all get heightened. Fight-or-flight can kick in too. What if the time I just spent socializing with this person and managing their emotional needs too puts the project over-budget? What if I loose my place on this team because of that? Depending on lots of things, this can either spiral into questioning my very existence and place in the universe, or it can fizzle out and you'd never even notice it.

So just be careful when you evaluate how distressing something is to another person. Unless you know them quite well, you might not have the clearest picture.
by wat10000 | 2026-03-14 16:14:27+00:00
Most of your post discusses communication in general terms. When you say that it’s unprofessional and rude to begin a Slack message with a greeting before getting to the meat of the issue, there’s no indication at all that you only meant this to apply to Slack messages sent to you personally.

At one point you say, “Nobody reads ‘hope you had a great weekend’ and thinks better of the person who wrote it.” Who is going to read that and think that “nobody” only applies to you?

If you really meant this to describe how you want to receive communication, not how everyone should, well, this is an example of catastrophically bad communication. Maybe you’d benefit from some of the mindset that leads people to write and appreciate useless greetings.
by allajfjwbwkwja | 2026-03-14 16:15:02+00:00
It happens to all new accounts. It's known that new account are shadowbanned almost everywhere until they are 30 days old and farmed some karma on a very small set of subreddits that don't shadowban new accounts. It's shocking they ever get any new users, really; as far as a non-technical new user knows, nobody ever reads their comments for some reason.
by tonnydourado | 2026-03-14 16:15:08+00:00
I hate hello-how-are-you-then-wait-before-asking messages as much as the next autistic programmer, but both examples in the "more examples" section still kinda read like an asshole, because they present as fact things that often either aren't, or you couldn't be absolutely sure of it.

For instance:

> "The caching layer is causing a 400ms overhead on cold requests. Here's the trace."

Cool, but how do you know that? Are you sure you're interpreting the trace correctly? How many measurements have you done? Sure that there isn't a historic reason why the caching layer behaves in this way, or a conflicting requirement that lead to choosing this latency over some other, worse consequence?

In the same way:

> "The current error handling swallows exceptions silently, which is making debugging hell. We should propagate errors to the caller"

Agree in principle, but did you check git blame to see if there was a rationale? Or asked someone else? How much change would this require? Could it break consumers of our code?

Granted, the "polite" messages didn't care any of this information either, but at least they didn't almost preemptively shut down the conversation by laying down what is at best an well informed guess and at worse purely personal opinion as if it's irrefutable truth.

Perhaps instead of debating whether to be (too?) polite or direct, it's better to focus on providing as much information as you can, anticipate follow up questions, and close with clear actionable next steps, something which is also missing from both versions of the messages.

"Well, those are hypothetical examples" cool, another evidence that we're all talking out of our asses about the sex of the angels, here. Maybe if the author didn't try so much to characterize themselves as perfectly infallible information delivery machine, then I wouldn't have nit-picked so much their half-assed hypotheticals.
by cmrdporcupine | 2026-03-14 16:16:01+00:00
Sounds like the Parallax Propeller 1/2 as well.

It's a good model for MCU stuff. There were people pushing Chip Gracey (Parallax) to use RISC-V instead of his custom ISA when he designed the P2 a few years ago, but he chose to do his own thing. Which has made compiler development difficult.
by hx8 | 2026-03-14 16:16:17+00:00
I think it's very interesting many people treat physical games of chance as different than purely digital ones, and wanted to explore this topic. To me, that's a more interesting topic of conversation than calling for legislation, or arguing about the merits of such legislation. Especially when it's about legislation in a jurisdiction I do not fall under.

This forum is a branching conversation pattern. I'm not derailing anything because this isn't a linear conversation. If you want to discuss something else that the parent comment said then make a post against that conversation.
by cherndon222 | 2026-03-14 16:16:23+00:00
I built CASA to explore a simple problem with agent systems.

Today most agents run like this:

model → tool call → execution

Which means an LLM decision can directly trigger things like
deleting data, transferring funds, deploying code, or sending emails.

CASA inserts a deterministic gate between the proposed action and execution.

The agent action is converted into a Canonical Action Vector and evaluated before anything runs. The gate returns one of three outcomes:

ACCEPT
GOVERN
REFUSE

Latency is ~53 ms on commodity hardware and the decision process is deterministic (no second model calls).

The repo has adapters for LangChain, OpenAI function calling, and CrewAI so existing agents can route actions through the gate.

Interesting early signal: the repo was cloned ~180 times by ~87 unique developers in the first ~60 hours after release.

Curious what people building agent systems think about the idea of a deterministic execution control plane.
by dathery | 2026-03-14 16:17:32+00:00
It essentially depends on how many back-and-forth calls are required. If the model returns a request for multiple calls at once, then the reply can contain all responses and you only pay once.

If the model requests tool calls one-by-one (e.g. because it needs to see the response from the previous call before deciding on the next) then you have to pay for each back-and-forth.

If you look at popular coding harnesses, they all use careful prompting to try to encourage models to do the former as much as possible. For example opencode shouts "USING THE BATCH TOOL WILL MAKE THE USER HAPPY" [1] and even tells the model it did a good job when it uses it [2].

[1] https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/blob/66e8c57ed1077814c...
[2] https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/blob/66e8c57ed1077814c...
by mancerayder | 2026-03-14 16:18:18+00:00
Side point, but you'll find plenty of anti semitism on HN in the Israel articles that have many comments - it comes in the form of conspiracy comments that people reply with, that use mossad, pedophilia, Netanyahu and the US in the same sentence. Any replies calling it out become greyed from downvotes.

It's just not viewed as anti-Semitism, probably in the same way that the posts on X aren't viewed as far-right or extremist.

Extremists usually don't experience their views as extreme, but as rational and important.
by rahimnathwani | 2026-03-14 16:18:20+00:00
"But OP isn't suggesting preamble is unpleasant, they are saying there is little or even no value and to remove it altogether."

I'm not sure about this. OP said:

"When you ... [SNIP] ... you are making the recipient wade through noise to get to signal."

So it seems like OP wants other people to:

- not waste their time and energy, but

- is happy to take any emotional cost that comes with that.
by SloopJon | 2026-03-14 16:18:32+00:00
I held my nose and bought an RTX 5070 Ti for $100 over MSRP in January. The very next week the same model was up $200. It turns out that NVIDIA had been subsidizing retail graphics cards with its Open Pricing Program. Not the whole story, but it may help explain the relative flatness of the graph until the end of January.

The other part of it is that the MSRP already baked in a substantial increase from the previous generation. While RAM was near rock-bottom pricing when this hit, current-gen GPUs definitely were not.
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-03-14 16:18:40+00:00
> Most flash memory will happily accept writes long after passing the TBW 'limit'.

That's the problem, isn't it? It does the write, it will read back fine right now, but the flash is worn out and then when you try to read back the data in six months, it's corrupt.

> If write endurance would be that much of a problem I'd expect the second hand market to be saturated with 8Gb M1 MacBooks with dead SSDs by now.

That's assuming it's sufficiently obvious to the typical buyer. You buy the machine with a fresh OS install and only newly written data, everything seems fine. Your 30 day warranty/return period expires, still fine. Then it starts acting weird.
by yubainu | 2026-03-14 16:19:09+00:00
I also suffer from severe tension headaches and go to a chiropractic clinic. I don't fully understand the theory, but they apparently move my spine back into the correct position by gently rocking it. I've been going for about two months now, and I'm gradually getting better. At the clinic, I'm given several types of exercises, mainly focusing on the muscles around the shoulder blades, and I perform these exercises each time until my next appointment.
by flohofwoe | 2026-03-14 16:19:19+00:00
Real-world WAT (WASM text format) looks more like this (e.g. it looks like a 'structured assembly' type of thing):

i32.const 27512
i32.load
local.tee $var1
if
i32.const 27404
i32.load
local.get $var1
call_indirect (param i32)
end

S-expressions are only used outside such instruction blocks for the 'program-structure' (e.g. see: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAssembly/Referen...). IIRC early pre-release-versions of WASM were entirely built from S-expressions and as a 'pure stack machine' (I may remember wrong though).

To see what a complete WASM blob looks like in WAT format you can go here: https://floooh.github.io/sokol-html5/clear-sapp.html, open the browser devtools, go to the 'Sources' tab and click the `clear-sapp.wasm` file).
by lelanthran | 2026-03-14 16:19:50+00:00
> Are you doing that? What have you built?

If I say "doing $FOO is a losing proposition", and I believe what I say, why on earth would I then move on to actually doing $FOO?

I am pointing out that there is nothing to be gained by joining this recursive race - anything you produce using LLMs I can clone using LLMs, but anything I produce using LLMs can be cloned by someone else, using LLMs.

Why would you assume that I want to insert myself into this recursively descending race to the bottom?
by letmetweakit | 2026-03-14 16:19:50+00:00
"Bluetooth does not work," Kravitz said in a recent interview, and it's not just headphones, but Bluetooth connections in general. "It's ruining important moments. Imagine the amount of times that you're with someone on a date, you're trying to set a vibe, and then you have to forget the network. On a date!"

The quote above makes absolutely zero sense to me, it's like ChatGPT 0.3a decided to write something about Bluetooth.
by avilay | 2026-03-14 16:19:51+00:00
Totally agree with this! Being "kindly honest" is way better than being "brutally honest". Being honest and direct is important of course. I have often found that delivering constructive criticism in the so-called sandwich manner often obfuscates the message, so delivering it directly is much better. However, being kind to the receiver of the feedback by having empathy for them and supporting them as they process that feedback will help land that message far more effectively than being "brutal" about it.
by Kim_Bruning | 2026-03-14 16:19:55+00:00
Sure personal feedback is scary, but to be frank it's only a small part of it, and doesn't need to get personal at all. And the machines participating in systems don't have feelings. (mostly at least ;-) )

Just to be sure, I'm talking closed loop control, right?

Observe current state, compare to desired state, figure the difference, act to reduce the difference, repeat until current state is close enough to desired state within tolerance. How else do you close the gap reliably?

Very important concept in tech (lots of control theory), biology (neural closed loop control), business (pdca), and military (ooda, guided weapons) . Some places it does work, FAA has Just Culture with blameless post-mortems; that works. Boyd had to fight for it, but military do have OODA in a lot of their theory now. Demming's PDCA is of course famous because of the japanese companies applying it (and then people started copying the idea and it didn't always work :-P) . But... people do keep missing the secret of tightly monitored closed loops and instead use ritualized open loops.

Agile started out the same way: plan on a short horizon, check how well you're adhering to it, improve both the planning process and the process under control, wash rinse repeat until you're on target.
by wat10000 | 2026-03-14 16:19:58+00:00
The point of communication in general is to alter the recipient’s mental state in certain ways. Maybe you want to alter their mental state such that they understand a technical problem. Maybe you want it to be a state that causes them to explain something. Maybe you want to alter their mental state such that they pick you up from the airport.

The key thing is that there is a particular goal, and if you want to achieve that goal, you need to work with people as they are, not as you wish them to be.
by zer00eyz | 2026-03-14 16:20:12+00:00
> As we are seeing with Vibe code projects created by people with no exposure to proper Software Engineering.

And I keep seeing products and projects banning AI: "My new house fell down because of the nail gun used, therefore I'm banning nail guns going forward." I understand and sympathize with maintainers and owners and the pressure they are under, but the limitation is going to look ridiculous as we see more progress with the tools.

There are whole categories of problems that were creating that we have no solutions for at present: it isn't a crisis it's an opportunity.
by staticassertion | 2026-03-14 16:20:16+00:00
It's unclear what point you're even trying to make, other than that AI has been helpful to you. But surely you understand that if you don't know what a unit test is you're probably not in a position to comment on the value of unit testing.

> Snobby programmers would never even return an email offering money for their services.

Why the would they? I don't respond to the vast majority of emails, and I'm already employed.
by Intralexical | 2026-03-14 16:20:27+00:00
I think the idea is that the geometry of straight lines in 4D should be similar enough to picture using the same mental abilities.

How we see is frozen by not only physics, but also biology. We can't actually see in 3D, only in the 2D of our retinae (and the embedded 2D of light-exposed surfaces). That's true for both 3D and 4D objects. I suppose fish, with their electroreceptive abilities, might be the only animals that can sorta "see" in true, volumetric 3D.
by staplers | 2026-03-14 16:20:34+00:00
computation — like speech and property — is a fundamental human right

Computation however requires a vast supply chain where certain middlemen have a near monopoly on distribution of said "fundamental right". The incentives for lobbyists seems clear.

I don't necessarily disagree with the idea, but until profit is shared with taxpayers, this is a one-way transaction of taxpayers bankrolling AI companies.
by dwroberts | 2026-03-14 16:20:37+00:00
I think it is inappropriate in an interview situation 100%. If you can’t hold your tongue on some slight discomfort or perhaps talk about in a more diplomatic way (eg not singling out the specific person but rather just stating your upset at the interview being delayed) how are you going to react if clients/customers make you uncomfortable on conference calls? Are you going to be tactful and polite, or are you going to be direct and rude to them?

Obviously I don’t know the role you were going for etc. this is just an example, but I think doing this gives a bad impression that goes beyond just whether that specific person was irritated for you calling them on their lateness
by manofmanysmiles | 2026-03-14 16:20:42+00:00
Are you implying other people's emotional immaturity is exclusively my problem to solve?

Also when you state an absolute like the word of God, how do you expect it to be received?

The article seems to imply to me: form relationships where direct truth is welcomed while acknowledging that people do have emotions.

Facts can be true and the feelings can be strong at the sam time. Attaching emotions to facts intentionally is intentionally adding a non-factual dimension to the conversation.

If you consider emotions as facts, and are communicating with me, I prefer if you express them as directly and honestly as possible so they can be included in the discussion.

Intentionally not expressing emotions clearly while using them to communicate is inherently without integrity. Specifically the words are not aligned with the emotions. The lack of integrity is structural (as opposed to some ambiguous moral ideal.)
by AStrangeMorrow | 2026-03-14 16:20:42+00:00
Yeah for me the main sell of wireless is mobility/freedom of movement.

I can use them while charging my phone or working out. Can play a video while cooking and moving around the kitchen. Or while watching TV/playing a game in the TV where a cable can’t reach.

However when static I used wired. That’s mostly when on the computer, but like many people here I am assuming that’s a good part of the day.
by heliumtera | 2026-03-14 16:20:43+00:00
Hm. People that know what they are doing prefer to do it themselves. This is not a new thing, not because of llms, but it is how it was always. People that knows more, have heavier opinions. Given the option of accepting new code and new functionality, often, people that knows what they are doing would reject code that functions fine, but fails expectations.

I think who's benefiting the most are people that said that syntax was the least interesting parts but could not program for shit.

Typing into a machine is not the least interesting part. It is the only interesting part. Everything else is a fairy tale