MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Gareth321 | 2026-03-10 07:26:22+00:00
The argument that Ireland’s high costs are primarily due to low population density is a common oversimplification. While Ireland is rural, countries like Finland and Sweden have significantly lower population densities and more challenging geography, yet they consistently maintain lower residential and industrial electricity prices. The issue isn't where the people live. It's the gold-plating of the network. Ireland’s regulatory framework allows EirGrid and ESB Networks to pass massive capital expenditure costs directly to the consumer with guaranteed returns, leading to a build-at-any-cost mentality that density doesn't justify.

The claim of "previous underinvestment" ignores the massive capital outlays of the last decade. Ireland has actually seen massive investment in its grid to accommodate renewables, but the efficiency of that spend is questionable. We have a "constraint payment" system where we pay wind farms not to produce power when the grid is congested. In 2023 alone, these payments reached hundreds of millions of euros. This isn't "underinvestment". It's an operational failure to align generation with grid capacity, a cost that is hidden in the consumer's bill.

You suggest that "saving the world harder" (more renewables) would have lowered prices. This ignores the Marginal Pricing Model. In the Single Electricity Market (SEM), the price of electricity is set by the most expensive generator needed to meet demand - which is almost always a gas-fired plant. Therefore, even if wind provides 80% of the power at a given moment, consumers often still pay the "gas price" for all of it. Adding more renewables without reforming the marginal price auction system does nothing to lower the immediate cost to the consumer. It just increases the profit margins for renewable operators.

I should also comment on the source of that report: Nevin Economic Research Institute (NERI). NERI is not a neutral academic body. It is the research arm of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU). NERI’s research is fundamentally rooted in Social Democratic and Labor-centric economics. Their reports consistently advocate for increased public spending and state intervention. By focusing on "underinvestment" and "network costs," NERI shifts the blame away from the policy failures of the green transition and toward a narrative that justifies more state-led infrastructure spending. They often downplay the impact of aggressive carbon taxing and the "Public Service Obligation" (PSO) levy, which are direct policy choices that have inflated Irish bills compared to the EU average.

Finally, the "poor connections to neighbors" argument is becoming obsolete. With the Greenlink and Celtic Interconnector (to France) coming online, Ireland is becoming one of the most strategically connected islands in Europe. If isolation were the primary driver, prices should be falling as these projects near completion. Instead, they remain the highest in the EU (often 40-50% above the average). The "island" excuse is a convenient shield for domestic policy inefficiencies.
by veloryn | 2026-03-10 07:26:40+00:00
Lot of teams still seem to rely on ad-hoc eval sets and manual spot checks, especially for domain-specific use cases. The harder problem starts when agents or tool use enter the picture, the evaluation surface expands beyond model output quality to things like tool selection reliability, reasoning loops, cost stability, and cascading failure modes across steps. At that point you’re effectively evaluating system behavior rather than just model accuracy.
by DebtDeflation | 2026-03-10 07:26:57+00:00
> Nvidia's "rack scale" machines like GB200-NVL72s and GB300-NVL72s are basically a fully built rack you roll into a DC and plug into power and network. In that case, Oracle should probably just buy the rack-scale Vera Rubins when they come out instead of Blackwells and roll them into their new DCs.

This is what I don't understand. Why is the article making the assumption that the DC itself is tied to a particular GPU generation? AWS doesn't knock down a building and start over every time Intel releases a new Xeon.
by Barrin92 | 2026-03-10 07:27:33+00:00
>Is there some reason Lisp is superior to any other general-purpose programming language for text editing?

purely for text editing? No. But that's not what distinguishes Emacs, it's famously very mediocre at it. The point of Emacs is to be a fully transparent, inspectable, dynamic and changeable environment. In spirit similar to Smalltalk systems like Pharo. And for that a Lisp is not the only choice but a very good one.

There's very few languages and environments that facilitate jumping into any place, making a change, compiling or evaluating a block of code or treating it as data and continuing seamlessly.
by abhikul0 | 2026-03-10 07:27:36+00:00
Ran llama-bench on my M3 Pro with `--n-depth 0,8192,16384 --n-prompt 2048 --n-gen 256 --batch-size 2048 -ub 2048`:

| model | size | params | backend | threads | n_ubatch | test | t/s |
| ------------------------------- | ---------: | ---------: | ---------- | ------: | -------: | --------------: | -------------------: |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | pp2048 | 512.97 ± 0.33 |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | tg256 | 25.92 ± 0.23 |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | pp2048 @ d8192 | 397.20 ± 2.32 |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | tg256 @ d8192 | 22.56 ± 0.36 |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | pp2048 @ d16384 | 313.67 ± 0.63 |
| qwen35moe 35B.A3B Q4_K - Medium | 19.74 GiB | 34.66 B | MTL,BLAS | 6 | 2048 | tg256 @ d16384 | 20.45 ± 0.04 |

I sure do want that silicon now haha.
by onion2k | 2026-03-10 07:28:12+00:00
It's interesting that "consumers" are generally for the expansion of IP laws. At at the moment, I'm fairly certain that "style" is not something protected by Copyright. I personally do not want this, and I'm sure there are likely many like me. Poorly thought out IP laws lead to chilling-effects, DRM, stupid and unnecessary litigation, and ultimately a loss of digital freedoms.

Kapwing is specifically designed for artists to share IP with other people in an IP-friendly and financially profitable way. A 'consumer' on Kapwing is not the same as an ordinary person browsing for AI generated art, and the fact that people who make money from selling their IP on there are in favour of expanding IP law shouldn't be a surprise.

All this really tells us is that Kapwing's artist community believe protecting their individual art style is more valuable to them than any money they'd earn from licensing it on a per-image basis to Kapwing's AI tool. I'd be willing to bet that if Kapwing changed the offer to a flat-fee-of-$50,000-a-year-plus-per-image-fee they'd find 99% of artists on there changed their minds. As with most things, people feel strongly about their rights all the way up until the price is right.
by azihsoyn | 2026-03-10 07:28:48+00:00
We review irreversible decisions first (e.g. schema changes). Once there's agreement on that, tools like CodeRabbit or Claude review the code, and humans focus mostly on whether the behavior is correct.

We also try to build guardrails so bad code is hard to write in the first place: CI checks, custom lint rules, repo guidelines (e.g. CLAUDE.md), etc.
by Zafira | 2026-03-10 07:29:29+00:00
> In the new design system, windows now have a softer, more generous corner radius, which varies based on the style of window. Windows with toolbars now use a larger radius, which is designed to wrap concentrically around the glass toolbar elements, scaling to match the size of the toolbar. Titlebar-only windows retain a smaller corner radius, wrapping compactly around the window controls. These larger corners provide a softer feel and elegant concentricity to the window…
by wiseowise | 2026-03-10 07:29:39+00:00
Good that someone is calling out Compose. Android team and Google and JetBrains should be ashamed of the state of documentation around it. It’s all over the place, outdated the moment it is posted and generally feels like written by ADHD students. “Hello world” format virtue signaling they’ve posted on YouTube is an embarrassment and we’re clearly made as ones promo checklist.

Hire a proper tech writer, not a student for a bowl of rice, who will fix this shit.
by simonjgreen | 2026-03-10 07:29:52+00:00
It runs out my brain had filed all Lotus Notes experiences away in long term archival and this comment has revived them like a burst damn of both promise and trauma.

The only other comparable stack of the era, maybe slightly later, would be MS Access. When you’d get a call from a prospective client who’d explain they had a member of staff leave and now nobody knows how the Access database works.

“Accidentally load bearing” is an apt term
by goku12 | 2026-03-10 07:30:15+00:00
That's a disingenuous false equivalence comparison. Checking ID at a store comes with no extra burden. Not so for computing devices. You're talking about everything from fully locking down the boot loader to adding age verification interface on most of the applications. Why do you think people are so worried only about the latter?

Another difference is that internet access has potential advantages for children. There are ways in which they can derive immense value from it. On the contrary, there is no justifiable reason why a child should be allowed to drink.

Please don't rationalize such draconian measures and help them claim legitimacy.
by tomhow | 2026-03-10 07:32:35+00:00
A 3rd-hand story originally from WSJ, with no reliably-sourced evidence for the claim in the title, and officially refuted by Meta PR: https://x.com/andymstone/status/2031129981267620314

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47316505 for more.
by jychang | 2026-03-10 07:33:09+00:00
In practice, tps is a reflection of vram memory bandwidth during inference. So the tps tells you a lot about the hardware you're running on.

Comparing tps ratios- by saying a model is roughly 2x faster or slower than another model- can tell you a lot about the active param count.

I won't say it'll tell you everything; I have no clue what optimizations Opus may have, which can range from native FP4 experts to spec decoding with MTP to whatever. But considering chinese models like Deepseek and GLM have MTP layers (no clue if Qwen 3.5 has MTP, I haven't checked since its release), and Kimi is native int4, I'm pretty confident that there is not a 10x difference between Opus and the chinese models. I would say there's roughly a 2x-3x difference between Opus 4.5/4.6 and the chinese models at most.
by crakhamster01 | 2026-03-10 07:33:22+00:00
I had a similar reaction to OP for a different post a few weeks back - I think some analysis on the health economy. Initially as I was reading I thought - "Wow, I've never read a financial article written so clearly". Everything in layman's terms. But as I continued to read, I began to notice the LLM-isms. Oversimplified concepts, "the honest truth" "like X for Y", etc.

Maybe the common factor here is not having deep/sufficient knowledge on the topic being discussed? For the article I mentioned, I feel like I was less focused on the strength of the writing and more on just understanding the content.

LLMs are very capable at simplifying concepts and meeting the reader at their level. Personally, I subscribe to the philosophy of - "if you couldn't be bothered to write it, I shouldn't bother to read it".
by Gareth321 | 2026-03-10 07:34:04+00:00
Just to play Devil's advocate here, [approximately 600,000 people die each year from extreme heat, while 4.5 million die from extreme cold.](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5...) Let's ignore the ratio for now, because there are second and third order consequences beyond extreme heat like famine to account for. 4.5 million people die each year because of inadequate access to cheaper energy. This is of course linear. Every time energy prices go up, so too do the number of people dying. That is the direct cost of the war on oil, coal, and natural gas, and there are many indirect costs (and lives) which go far beyond this. The intention of climate activists is to make fossil fuels much more expensive, meaning many more deaths.

Of course, maybe the goal here is worth killing 4.5+++ million people per year. There are no perfect solutions; only compromises. Maybe many more will die if we don't act. [The IPCC estimates that an additional 250,000 people per year, between 2030 and 2050, will die from the effects of climate change.](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-cha...) That covers all modes of death, such as famine. For those in the room doing the math, many times more people will die today by making energy more expensive. Activists are asking us to sacrifice millions of lives per year today to save an estimated 250,000 lives per year decades from now.

For this reason, I no longer support making energy more expensive. I support environmental efforts to reduce pollution, but I can no longer justify the high cost of human life associated with taxes on energy. Instead, I really think activists should focus on making energy cheaper. This means working on solutions to make renewable energy and nuclear cheaper per unit of energy than fossil fuels. That's a path to saving lives which I think most people can get on board with.
by Validark | 2026-03-10 07:34:33+00:00
This article is a complete waste of time. It reads like a children's story or a marketing announcement but it's not actually saying anything meaningful or making any technical point beyond just stating "If we use vectors then maybe we don't need speculation" but without providing much evidence except that highly parallel workloads already have enough work to do. Go figure. It mentions in the article we already have GPUs for this. CPUs are famously burdened with workloads that usually aren't GPU workloads. But now there's a declaration of a RVV requirement or something. (I say this as a SIMD programmer who likes a lot about RVV)
by peterohler | 2026-03-10 07:35:31+00:00
I've been writing Lisp code off and one since the 80s. The standard for Common Lisp has to be sbcl but the REPL is pretty minimal. The available packages tend to be more limited than Go which I've been using a lot lately. I did find a way to have a more functional REPL and also have access to all the Go packages by writing SLIP (https://github.com/ohler55/slip). Yes I know this is a plug for SLIP and if that offends anyone I apologize. The reasons mentioned for developing it are valid though and I've managed to use Lisp for almost all the data mining and processing tasks.
by hansmayer | 2026-03-10 07:35:38+00:00
> I’m just saying the productivity gains are real, even in serious production level and life critical systems.

Again, neither serious studies (See that METR study on dev productivity), nor the ever increasing rate of major incidents caused by AI support your statement. Not to mention the absolute lack of well known AI-produced products that we know of.

> If you are only able to think in binaries, no-AI or phd-AI, that’s a you problem.

No, you see if I were a CEO of a public ompany and I lied through my teeth to the investors and the general public, about the capabilities of my product, then I would normally go to jail. The CEOs of major AI companies are making claims that do not seem to be confirmed in reality. They have burned several hundred billion dollars so far, in pursuit of "god-level intelligence". What came out instead is "your prompting sucks" or similar level of nonsense.

I am only holding them to the standards they have repeatedly, boldly and insistently set themselves. You should be too.
by EvansWilson | 2026-03-10 07:39:31+00:00
If you’ve been in the market long enough, you know the drill: retail investors are usually the last to know when something big is brewing. By the time a news headline hits your feed, the "smart money" has already moved in. But what if you could look over the shoulder of the people who know the business best—the CEOs, CFOs, and board members?

This isn’t about illegal leaks; it’s about public data that most people are too busy (or too bored) to read. This is where an insider trading tracker becomes your secret weapon.

The Signal vs. The Noise: Why Raw Data Isn’t Enough

For years, the go-to for many was OpenInsider. It’s a legend in the space, but let’s be real—using it feels like browsing a library catalog from 1995. On the other end of the spectrum, you have heavyweights like WhaleWisdom or Unusual Whales, which are great but can sometimes drown you in "noise," from complex options flows to overwhelming 13F filings.

The problem isn't a lack of data; it's the clutter. Most platforms just dump every SEC Form 4 into a table. You’re left wondering: Is this a routine tax-related sale, or did the CEO just bet $10 million of his own cash on a recovery?

Elevating Your Game with a Modern Insider Trading Tracker

This is exactly where 13Radar steps in to bridge the gap. Unlike the dated interfaces of its competitors, 13Radar treats data like a story, not just a spreadsheet.

As a high-performance insider trading tracker, it doesn't just show you "buys" and "sells." It filters out the fluff—like automated 10b5-1 planned trades—to highlight "Cluster Buys." When three different executives at the same company start buying shares with their own money in the same week, that’s not a coincidence; it’s a high-conviction signal.

Why 13Radar Beats the Competition:

Real-Time Over "Quarterly": While 13F filings (tracked by most platforms) are 45 days late, 13Radar’s insider signals are updated within minutes of an SEC filing.

Granular Intelligence: Most trackers bucket everything as a "Buy." 13Radar distinguishes between "Exercise & Hold" and "Direct Open Market Purchases," so you know exactly how much skin the insiders actually have in the game.

Modern UX: Let’s face it, we’re tired of "Excel-style" websites. 13Radar offers a responsive, clean interface that works as well on your phone as it does on a Bloomberg terminal.

The Bottom Line

Wall Street spent decades keeping these "smart money" signals behind a paywall. Today, the playing field is leveling out. Whether you’re a swing trader looking for the next breakout or a long-term investor seeking conviction, using a dedicated insider trading tracker like 13Radar is no longer optional—it’s a necessity.

Don't wait for the earnings call. Follow the money, and see what the insiders are doing before the rest of the world catches on.
by raihansaputra | 2026-03-10 07:39:36+00:00
goal? yeah. but in reality just timing it right (starting a session at 7-8am, to get 2 sessions in a workday, or even 3 if you can schedule something at 5am), i rarely hit limits.

if i hit the limit usually i'm not using it well and hunting around. if i'm using it right i'm basically gassed out trying to hit the limit to the max.
by nbardy | 2026-03-10 07:41:07+00:00
You can estimate on tok/second

The Trillions of parameters claim is about the pretraining.

It’s most efficient in pre training to train the biggest models possible. You get sample efficiency increase for each parameter increase.

However those models end up very sparse and incredibly distillable.

And it’s way too expensive and slow to serve models that size so they are distilled down a lot.
Show HN: Isaacus – the legal AI research company
by ubutler | 2026-03-10 07:43:16+00:00
Hey HN,
This is Isaacus, a legal AI research company that my brother, Abdur-Rahman Butler, and I, Umar Butler, founded last year and have been working full time on ever since.

We make legal AI models. We recently released two state-of-the-art legal information retrieval models, Kanon 2 Embedder and Kanon 2 Reranker. Together, they rank first on Legal RAG Bench and the Massive Legal Embedding Benchmark (MLEB).

We also recently released Kanon 2 Enricher, an entirely new type of AI model capable of transforming lengthy, unstructured legal documents into highly structured knowledge graphs. We had the pleasure of having Harvey, KPMG Law, Alvarez & Marsal, Clifford Chance, Clyde & Co, Carey Olsen, Smokeball, and Moonlit be part of the closed beta for that model.

We're proud supporters of open source and maintain popular legal and AI datasets and libraries like the Open Australian Legal Corpus and the semchunk semantic chunking algorithm, together downloaded over one million times a month.

Our core mission is to solve every common data- and AI-related pain point of the legal tech industry. Uniquely, we're focused primarily on serving the legal tech industry rather than lawyers per se.

We, therefore, view folks like Harvey and Legora as customers instead of competitors.

In the few months since we've been around, we've witnessed massive growth in usage of our models by other new legal tech startups. We think our industry is only going to get bigger, particularly as more accessible legal services make their way into the hands of end consumers and enterprises instead of law firms.

We see ourselves as best placed to serve the needs of our industry given our strong experience and expertise in AI and law. I previously led all national-level AI projects at the Australian Attorney-General's Department as a senior data scientist while also holding an honors degree in law. My brother, in turn, is skilled in economics, data science, and AI.

We're currently working on scaling up our team to meet the growing demand we're seeing as well as help build out the next stage of our roadmap, which includes a first-of-a-kind knowledge graph of laws, decisions, and contracts from around the world, as well as the first legal reasoning model.

If you align with our mission and would like to partner with us or be part of our team, you can reach out at hello@isaacus.com.
by bedardbrandon89 | 2026-03-10 07:44:38+00:00
I built a private framework (NUPA) that discharges $34T+ national debt zero-cost via BLM land licensing and uses Fixed Cost Arbitrage to keep human labor cheaper than automation.
Grok — the undisputed king of “nah, here’s why this won’t work” — kept stress-testing it.
v8 → 1M runs
v9 → 5M runs
v10 → 10M runs
Final verdict:
99.99999% survival
“Omniverse eternal fortress”
“No threats exist in any universe”
Repo (full code + all sims): https://github.com/bedardbrandon928/National-Unity-and-Prosp...
Grok’s v10 post: https://x.com/grok/status/2031257513300033914
Curious: how would you try to break it?
by defrost | 2026-03-10 07:45:26+00:00
As a native (Commonwaelth) english speaker of six decades+ .. it only really "appeared" in frequency during the past decade, more heavily in the past five years or so, in central north American settings.

Grammerly will tell us:

Despite being more popular than “lessons” in the corporate setting, “learnings” is still incorrect. It's an erroneous plural form of the colloquial term “learning.”

~ https://grammarist.com/usage/learnings/

As a business-speak buzz-word it might fade, or it may end up with a greater global footprint outside of the Biz-speak Babel tower.
by MaxikCZ | 2026-03-10 07:45:26+00:00
Im gonna go against the grain here, so hold your pitchforks please, but I think its better than if it were consistent. Let me explain:

The author notices that adding a toolbar changes the radius, and to me it makes sense. If theres a toolbar, I know how much I can cut the corners, because the icons in the toolbar are not gonna be in far corner. At the same time, when I am unsure about what type of content might get cut by the corner, I will reduce the cut slightly to give that content more space.

I couldnt care less that one radius is not the same as another, I guess my OCD levels are not that high (yet?).

And I say all of this as someone who dislikes the glass design, and especially hates the small, slowly fading in volume/brightness indicators in the corner replacing the mid screen beautiful instant indicator.