MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by roughly | 2026-03-01 00:25:25+00:00
It feels like Sam's playing chess against an opponent who's playing dodge ball. He's leveraged this situation to get OpenAI in with the DoD in a way that's going to be extremely lucrative for the company and hurt his biggest rival in the process, but I think he's still seeing DoD as Just Another Customer, albeit a big government one. This administration just held a gun to the head of Anthropic and (if the "supply chain risk" designation holds and does as much damage as they're hoping) pulled the trigger, because Anthropic had the gall to tell them no. One thing this administration's shown is you cannot hold lines when you're working with them - at some point the DoD's going to cross his "red lines" and he's going to have to choose whether he's going to risk his entire consumer business and accede to being a private wing of the government like Palantir or if he wants to make a genuine tech giant. There's no third choice here.
by ainch | 2026-03-01 00:26:08+00:00
One way of thinking about diffusion is that you're learning a velocity field from unlikely to likely images in the latent space, and that field changes depending on your conditioning prompt. You start from a known starting point (a noise distribution), and then take small steps following the velocity field, eventually ending up at a stable endpoint (which corresponds to the final image). Because your starting point is a random sample from a noise distribution, if you pick a slightly different starting point (seed), you'll end up at a slightly different endpoint.

You can't jump to the endpoint because you don't know where it is - all you can compute is 'from where I am, which direction should my next step be.' This is also why the results for few-step diffusion are so poor - if you take big jumps over the velocity field you're only going in approximately the right direction, so you won't end up at a properly stable point which corresponds to a "likely" image.
by virgildotcodes | 2026-03-01 00:26:11+00:00
I just cancelled my OpenAI $200 sub yesterday because of all this, but sadly I can't agree.

Codex 5.3 Xhigh > Opus 4.6 in my work to this point.

Hoping for Opus 4.7 or whatever comes next to rectify this as I'm a bit annoyed over having to drop to a lower quality model.
by ramraj07 | 2026-03-01 00:26:49+00:00
Anyone who's used both Claude and ChatGPT will instantly agree what is better by a large margin. Theres maybe a brand recognition long tail but its more likely theyre the rare occasional users who use the free tier. Thus ChatGPT is becoming the shitty free AI app while Claude is what you use to get real work done. Time (in months) will tell yow this will go.
by gnerd00 | 2026-03-01 00:27:32+00:00
please recall that 8bit color was the common capability for CRT displays at that time. Simple one bit display was also common. Any smooth transitions in gray or color had to use dithering, or be very clever in the way they chose the palate.

Certainly some historic credit goes to Motif, but, there are "levels to this game" .. Motif did not jump out as "wow that looks good" IMHO. Obviously NeXT was extreme in a different way.. sort of like a symphony orchestra more than an office machine.

It is genuinely entertaining to see people defend the dull and pedestrian UI in Windows 95.
by pulsartwin | 2026-03-01 00:27:39+00:00
Yep, and if you're interested, Rubin doesn't send alerts directly to individuals. The alert stream alone (without full images) is enormous. There are a set of alert brokers who ingest, index, and add metadata before making the streams available in a consumable manner. You can find all the alert brokers here: https://rubinobservatory.org/for-scientists/data-products/al....

Each broker provides an interface with different strengths, and some are still scaling up as operations begin. And yes, most brokers support spatial queries (cone searches / RA-Dec filters), along with a host of other interesting parameters to filter by. You can check out the public Fink portal and API docs as an example (https://lsst.fink-portal.org, https://doc.lsst.fink-broker.org).

Rubin is still very early in survey operations, so only parts of the entire footprint have been observed so far. Depending on the region of interest, it may not have actually been observed yet (also, high quality difference image templates will take quite some time to build up). But it's very exciting to see how much data will be generated over the 10-year survey period, and once the observatory is running at full speed, the entire southern sky will be continuously re-imaged every three nights!
by cucumber3732842 | 2026-03-01 00:27:53+00:00
Other countries can't send armed thugs to my door over petty stuff like my local government can.

Nobody in the history of ever has been concerned that the agents of some foreign country may know what they read, who they associate with or what kind of penis pills they buy or whatever, the threat has always been that those local enough to do violence on you might come into that information.
by TrainedMonkey | 2026-03-01 00:29:21+00:00
No, what he is saying is that benchmarks are static and there is tremendous reputational and financial pressure to make benchmark number go up. So you add specific problems to training data... The result is that the model is smarter, but the benchmarks overstate the progress. Sure there are problem sets designed to be secret, but keeping secrets is hard given the fraction of planetary resources we are dedicating to making the AI numbers go up.

I have two of my own comments to add to that. First one is that there is problem alignment at play. Specifically - the benchmarks are mostly self-contained problems with well defined solutions and specific prompt language, humans tasks are open ended with messy prompts and much steerage. Second is that it would be interesting to test older models on brand new benchmarks to see how those compare.
by gylterud | 2026-03-01 00:31:46+00:00
I did not realise there are ads for LLMs. Of course if I thought about it, I would conclude that there must be. But somehow the concept seems strange to me. What do they advertise? The LLM can do so many different things… I guess they are all “welcome! To the world of tomorrow!”

Then again, I know nothing about ads these days. Last time I had any ad exposure was twenty years ago, when I lived at home with my parents.
by FridgeSeal | 2026-03-01 00:31:48+00:00
I have this conversation (or a variation threof) with some friends: I suspect that the vast majority of “mainstream commercial software development” is flat out just cooked. We won’t be writing code, nor debugging it. It’ll will just be people throwing more LLM compute at everything.

Open source, hobbyist and personal projects will probably remain the last bastions of “human in the loop” and human-written code, and I suspect these circles will retract into smaller, tighter circles.
by alephnerd | 2026-03-01 00:31:50+00:00
Then UMich - a notably Dem leaning govt program - wouldn't be included.

Personally, I remember taking Fairbanks Center associated classes and noticing how we have the children of Chinese VVIPs sitting next to active duty members.

It sparked interesting conversations, but seeing someone who was a test pilot at Hanford sitting next to a scion of a Red Family was interesting to say the least.

The program also absolutely did used to publicly give advice to the CCP at the time, and on the listservs I'm still on I do still see publicly pronounced UFWD members responding and posting events.

Ofc, if I noticed this then it was absolutely known to three-letter agencies and State, and this is part of a larger culture war, but there is a kernel of truth - too many children of various countries dignitaries attended the program, and they were given some privileges and leeway (eg. different names).

Edit: can't reply

> I think isolationism amongst the war party is less helpful than some degree of interaction

UMich isn't an isolationist program though - it's a program which imo is the closest to how foreign policy was managed under the Obama admin.
by enraged_camel | 2026-03-01 00:32:00+00:00
Yep. For the past month I’ve been doing this thing where every time I need something from AI, I give Opus and Codex the same prompt. Opus is just better by a wide margin, especially on complex tasks. It uses tools quite a lot, taps into available MCP servers when it makes sense, and can think about repercussions down the line much better. Codex I feel is optimized for brevity, approaching terseness. Hard to put my finger on it but it’s never as thorough and it always misses important details.
by lumirth | 2026-03-01 00:32:14+00:00
Weirdly enough, I agree with both sides. Opus beats every version of GPT 5 as a chat interface, hands down. ChatGPT, at this point, is mostly me correcting its output style, cadence, behavior, etc, and consistently remaining dissatisfied, meanwhile Opus one-shots things I didn’t even think it could (Typst code).
All that said, I do my programming in OpenAI’s Codex app for Mac. It has completely dominated Claude Code for me. I’ll only ever use Opus to check 5.3-Codex’s work.
Very weird world we’re living in. I hope it gets even weirder once Deepseek does whatever they’ve been cooking.
by Hammershaft | 2026-03-01 00:32:25+00:00
Is $130k a year 'scraps'? If you're making the average dev salary you're richer than %99.9 of people across the world [1].

The only reason we make this much is because of sustained productivity growth.

[1] https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i
by notepad0x90 | 2026-03-01 00:32:31+00:00
> This is just incoherent. You can't have US companies fix an unhinged US government.

Which part? No one expects them to fix the government, matter of fact they should stay far away from it. However, they have a duty to obey the law and to be patriotic. All companies must resist attempts by the government to betray its people, because the government derives its authority from the people, therefore in its betrayal it has become an illegitimate enemy of the people instead of their legitimate government.

> because if the government can de fact do what it wants regardless of legality the next thing that this government does could simply be pointing increasingly non-metaphorical guns at individual AI company functionaries.

It feels like you and half the country never even at least watched movies surrounding nazi germany. The government can do whatever it wants, but whether it is companies, individuals working for it, or soldiers under orders, the government's authority does not excuse their participation. The government can't do anything at all on its own, it needs people to do it. If Obama wanted to get Anthropic to let their models aid al-qaeda with attacking America, should Anthropic say "oh well, since you're the government, go ahead?" This is the same thing. Ever heard of the phrase "enemies foreign or domestic" in the swearing of oaths? Company executives are beholden to the laws of the country they operate in. I mean, with Nazis at least their orders, and the orders of companies under their regime was lawful, even then it was not an excuse but they just changed the laws to make their orders lawful. Right now, we have laws and the government is breaking it, even "i followed lawful orders" isn't an excuse. Sam Altman is complicit in the violation of the American constitution and the betrayal of its people.

If all else fails, I expect the government to just train their own models. In which case, I'd say the engineers working in that effort should have resisted.
by XorNot | 2026-03-01 00:33:09+00:00
It's the surface details problem: people post nice sounding things on the internet but don't think about them and do the nostradamus thing of predicting everything because caused by everything.

If you predict a corrupt cartel in "the US" will do a thing, then on a long enough timescale you'll eventually be right in general but wrong about every significant detail.

(also the people with this opinion don't seem to do anything with it - it doesn't appear to motivate them to vote, organize, think critically or come up with compromises - they simply turn out to belittle people on the internet while actually acting to normalize new excesses).
by Aurornis | 2026-03-01 00:33:45+00:00
> No, what he is saying is that benchmarks are static and there is tremendous reputational and financial pressure to make benchmark number go up.

That's a much better way to say it than I did.

These models are known for being open weights but they're still products that Alibaba Cloud wants is trying to sell. They have Product Managers and PR and marketing people under pressure to get people using them.

This Venture Beat article is basically a PR piece for the models and Alibaba Cloud hosting. The pricing table is right in the article.

It's cool that they release the models for us to use, but don't think they're operating entirely altruistically. They're playing a business game just like everyone else.
by swat535 | 2026-03-01 00:34:33+00:00
As another Iranian living the West, I wish he would have been captured alive and stood trial.

He should have answered for every single drop of blood on his hands.

My 21 year old cousin was captured during the Mahsa uprising, she was sent to Evin prison, tortured for months. After she was released, we brought her to Canada and she was hospitalized for over a year. She will never be able to live a normal life again.

Death was too merciful for Khamenei.
by lumirth | 2026-03-01 00:36:05+00:00
I wonder how much certain models have been trained to avoid asking too many questions. I’ve had coworkers who’ll complete an entire project before asking a single additional question to management, and it has never gone well for them. Unsurprising that the same would be true for the “managing AI” era of programming.

The thing I struggle most with, honestly, is when AI (usually GPT5.3-Codex) asks me a question and I genuinely don’t know the answer. I’m just like “well, uh… follow industry best practice, please? unless best practice is dumb, I guess. do a good. please do a good.” And then I get to find out what the answer should’ve been the hard way.
by rdiddly | 2026-03-01 00:37:08+00:00
Us bribing them: fine

Us taking the contract, working for them and enabling them: fine

It being renamed the Dept. of War in the first place: totally fine, we loudly and bootlickingly repeat it

Anthropic being blacklisted: whoa there, we have ethics!

Footnote: any time the winning team tries to speak well of or defend the losing team I always think of this standup routine: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg6wBwhuaVo
by virgildotcodes | 2026-03-01 00:37:34+00:00
I use Codex purely for coding, and that's 90% of my use case for AI in general (10% using ChatGPT web for misc stuff). I pop out to Opus in Claude Code regularly to try to stay up on their relative performance, but so far the primary value I've been able to derive from CC is as a second set of eyes for code review / poking holes in plans. For primary planning / debugging / implementation Codex outclasses it atm sadly.
Show HN: GitPop – open-source AI Git context menu for Windows (OS X coming soon)
by vinzify | 2026-03-01 00:37:52+00:00
Hi everyone,

I built GitPop, an open-source, lightweight Windows File Explorer extension that brings a fast Git interface right to your context menu.

The problem: I got tired of opening heavy IDEs (like VS Code) or bulky GUI clients just to make a quick commit, but I also wanted the nice visual diffs and staging checkboxes that terminal workflows lack.

The solution: When you right-click any folder with a .git repository and select "GitPop Here", it instantly launches a sleek, dark-mode UI overlay. You can view your changes, stage files, and commit directly from your desktop.

To speed things up even more, I added an AI "Sparkle" button that reads your git diff and auto-generates a conventional commit message.

Technical details:

Stack: I built this using Tauri v2, React, and Rust. I specifically chose Tauri over Electron because a context-menu popup needs to open instantly and use minimal RAM.

Privacy First (Local AI): By default, the AI feature hooks into a local Ollama instance (like llama3.2), meaning your proprietary source code diffs never leave your machine. I also added support for OpenAI, Anthropic, and Gemini for those who prefer cloud models.

Git Backend: Instead of wrestling with libgit2, the Rust backend spawns hidden child processes to execute native Git CLI binaries. This means it automatically respects your existing global Git config, SSH keys, and GPG signing.

A fun engineering challenge: Building a transparent, glassmorphism UI on Windows 11 using Webview2 was surprisingly tricky. Combining "transparent": true with a hidden startup state ("visible": false) caused the rendering engine to completely panic and crash. I also had to write custom OS-level Rust code to suppress the background CMD terminals from flashing every time a Git command ran.

What's next (macOS): Right now, the release is heavily optimized for Windows File Explorer, but I am actively working on the macOS version to integrate this exact same experience directly into Finder.

I’d love for you to try out the Windows version while I wrap up the Mac build. The installers (.exe/.msi) and source code are available on GitHub.

Repo: https://github.com/vinzify/gitpop

I'll be hanging around the comments to answer any questions about the tech stack, Tauri v2, or the implementation!
by xmddmx | 2026-03-01 00:37:53+00:00
See my other note about bugs in Ollama with Qwen3.5.

I just tried this (Ollama macOS 0.17.4, qwen3.5:35b-a3b-q4_K_M) on a M4 Pro, and it did fine:

[Thought for 50.0 seconds]

1. potato
2. potato
[...]
100. potato

In other words, it did great.

I think 50 seconds of thinking beforehand was perhaps excessive?
by davesque | 2026-03-01 00:38:12+00:00
i.e. Combing through public forums on the internet looking for evidence of thought crime, however, is fair game. The Trump admin will undoubtedly use tools like this to compile a list political enemies or undesirables, which they will then use to harass people or selectively restrict individual rights. They're already doing this and this is just going to make it easier for them.
by xmddmx | 2026-03-01 00:38:32+00:00
See my other note [1] about bugs in Ollama with Qwen3.5.

I just tried this (Ollama macOS 0.17.4, qwen3.5:35b-a3b-q4_K_M) on a M4 Pro, and it did fine:

[Thought for 50.0 seconds]

1. potato
2. potato
[...]
100. potato

In other words, it did great.

I think 50 seconds of thinking beforehand was perhaps excessive?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47202082
by notepad0x90 | 2026-03-01 00:39:20+00:00
if you call all betting gambling, then sure. but gambling in legal terms has definitions like "a game of chance". For example, poker is gambling but it isn't necessarily a game of chance, you can win it by skill (some consider it a sport). Rolling dice isn't the same as sports betting. It is similar to sports betting, except even in sports betting there are enough variables for outcomes to be very unpredictable. This is more like insider trading, except it insider trading is a feature, except you can also roll dice and play a pure game of chance.

Maybe it can fall under gambling laws, but not under securities laws.

I don't agree with any gambling laws whatsoever, so I can't say I'm the right person to comment on the subject of how to classify this sort of betting. The entire concept of individual liberty is a farce if you can't gamble without restriction. People have been betting on who would kill the prey or gather the most fruits since their hunter & gatherer days. Gambling and freely sharing what you posses (copyright is illegitimate) are fundamental human rights.
by soraminazuki | 2026-03-01 00:39:21+00:00
> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/
by isaachinman | 2026-03-01 00:40:45+00:00
The deeper issue here isn't about Antigravity specifically. It's that email is most people's de facto digital identity. Every password reset, every 2FA recovery, every account verification flows through it. When a company can revoke access to your email over a ToS violation in a completely unrelated product, the stakes are disproportionate.

The fix is surprisingly straightforward: own your domain, use a provider that focuses on email, and keep your client separate from your provider. Standard IMAP means all three pieces are interchangeable. If one fails, swap it out.

(I work on Marco [0], an IMAP email client. The number of people looking to decouple from Gmail/Google has been growing steadily, definitely a current trend.)

[0] https://marcoapp.io
by derefr | 2026-03-01 00:41:48+00:00
> I think most of the complaints from the tech circles are completely unfounded in reality. Many non-tech people and younger ones actually prefer using Ribbon.

Well, yes, but that observation doesn't prove the point you think it does.

People who were highly experienced with previous non-ribbon versions of Office, disliked the ribbon, because the ribbon is essentially a "tutorial mode" for Office.

The ribbon reduces cognitive load on people unfamiliar with Office, by boiling down the use of Office apps to a set of primary user-stories (these being the app's ribbon tags), and then preferentially exposing the most-commonly-desired features one might want for each of these user stories, as bigger, friendlier, more self-describing buttons and dropdowns under each of these user-story tabs.

The Ribbon works great as a discovery mechanism for functionality. If an app's toplevel menu is like the index in a reference book, then an app Ribbon is like a set of Getting Started guides.

But a Ribbon does nothing to accelerate the usage of an app for people who've already come to grips with the app, and so already knew where things were in the app's top-level menu, maybe how to activate those menu items with keyboard accelerators, etc. These people don't need Getting Started guides being shoved in their face! To these people, a Ribbon is just a second index to some random subset of the features they use, that takes longer to navigate; and which, unlike top-level menus, isn't organized into categories in any way common to apps for the US (and so doesn't respond to expected top-level-menu keyboard accelerators.)

I think apps like Photoshop have since figured out what people really want here: different UI layouts for new users ("Basic" layout) vs. experienced users ("Full" layout); and even different UI layouts for users with different high-level use-cases such that they have a known set of applicable user-stories. A Ribbon is perfect for the "Basic" layout; but in a "Full" layout, it can probably go away.
by snickerbockers | 2026-03-01 00:42:18+00:00
One nuance I've noticed: the statement from Anthropic specifically stated the use of their products for these purposes was not included in the contract with DoD but it stops short of saying it was prohibited by the contract.

Maybe it's just a weak choice of words in anthropic's statement, but the way I read it I get the impression that anthropic is assuming they retain discretion over how their products are used for any purposes not outlined in the contract, while the DoD sees it more along the lines of a traditional sale in which the seller relinquishes all rights to the product by default, and has to enumerate any rights over the product they will retain in the contract.
by leecommamichael | 2026-03-01 00:42:47+00:00
Interesting. The Odin Programming Language has some primitives that are pretty similar to Absail's macros.

For control-flow we've got the postfix operators: `or_return`, `or_break`, `or_continue`
For alternative values we've got postfix `or_else`.

Considering how much I enjoy Odin I should probably entertain using Absail for my next C++ project.