MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by spopejoy | 2026-03-08 19:51:35+00:00
I'm saying that cancer treatments are some of the most scientifically-validated procedures out there, because there's essentially unlimited money to pay for them. They have eliminated or modulated any negative side effect they can, via improved anti-nausea drugs, careful dosing+timing, etc.

Still, you can experience all sorts of discomforts during the tmt. I nearly fainted and got horrible chills when getting oxaliplatin for the first time. You're saying I should have _fasted_ for this?
by BoxFour | 2026-03-08 19:51:37+00:00
It’s pretty obvious that professional photography takes real skill if you’ve ever experienced the disaster of someone trying to cut costs by hiring an amateur photographer for a major event like a wedding but expecting professional results (the mismatch in expectations being the key cause of disaster here).

I’m not saying it turns out bad 100% of the time, but it’s easy to forget because good professionals make it look effortless. When the skill isn’t there, though, and you're used to only seeing professional photos it becomes very obvious (and again, that's perfectly fine if you're not expecting professional photography).
by Trasmatta | 2026-03-08 19:51:55+00:00
> Meds can work wonders, AND you can still be depressed. Medicine resolve biological depression. It doesn't resolve situational depression.

It's not quite that simple. You seem to be hinting at the "chemical imbalance" theory of antidepressants, which has been largely debunked. The reality is much more nuanced and complicated.
by remus | 2026-03-08 19:51:56+00:00
> As such it’s unclear what the prize at the end of the present race to the bottom is.

It's a market worth many billions so the prize is a slice of that market. Perhaps it is just a commodity, but you can build a big company if you can take a big slice of that commodity e.g. by building a good product (claude code) on top of your commodity model.
by Lerc | 2026-03-08 19:52:01+00:00
I have an old aluminium 17" MacBook. It got retired fairly early because it suffered from a design flaw but was outside the free replacement window.

Its screen is nice, and there looks to be plenty of room inside. I have been keeping an eye on options for putting something else inside. Its mostly the power delivery for the display that I think is beyond my skill that's holding me back.
by ufmace | 2026-03-08 19:52:17+00:00
> nothing actually passes the Turing test

Says who? I had already found this study, published almost a year ago, saying that they do: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.23674

There doesn't seem to be a super-rigorous definition of the Turing Test, but I don't think it's reasonable to require it to fool an expert whose life depends on the correct choice. It already seems to be decently able to fool a person of average intelligence who has a basic knowledge of LLMs.

I agree that we don't really have AGI yet, but I'd hope we can come up with a better definition of what it is than "we'll know it when we see it". I think it is a legitimate point that we've moved the goalposts some.
by ghywertelling | 2026-03-08 19:52:21+00:00
Let me explain a possible moat with an example.

I have curated my youtube recommendations over the years. It knows my likes and dislikes very well. It knows about me a lot.

The same moat exists in interactions with Claude. Claude remembers so many of preferences. It knows that I work in Python and Pandas and starts writing code for that combination. It knows about what type of person I am and what kind of toys I want my nephews and nieces to play. These "facts" about the person are the moat now. Stackoverflow was a repository of "facts" about what worked and what didn't. Those facts or user chat sessions are now Anthropic's moat.
by RealityVoid | 2026-03-08 19:52:29+00:00
> On a microcontroller, you can control the timing with a PWM, which runs independently of the processor and its timing foibles.

That is not really true. You usually have a couple of clock sources on a MCU, but the clock gets propagated down the clock tree and the source, and most of the times, the PWM has the same source clock as the CPU. Indeed, I think if you're before the PLL the clock is more accurate as in you get less jitter but the overall drift is the same. You might have distinct clock sources but you need a specific hw and a specific configuration.
by pluc | 2026-03-08 19:53:15+00:00
Well it's not just that... picture a community group talking among themselves and then some rando shows up, yells "I built this thing that you all might like", hangs out for an hour and then is never heard from again.

I think that's great in moderation as it stimulates ideas and discussions, shows us what folks are working on, etc... but this can't become Product Hunt. The reasons for posting here should be vastly different than posting on Product Hunt.
by andai | 2026-03-08 19:53:36+00:00
If I'm reading this right, the core thesis is that the main value in consulting is not in the correctness of the advice, but the ability to avoid taking responsibility. (And that this therefore cannot be automated by definition.)

I suspect that will change as trust in automated systems increases. (For example the author seems to consider AI a source of "correctness", which implies this trust is already surprisingly high.)
by mihaelm | 2026-03-08 19:53:37+00:00
That's a bit harsh, depending on how a person developed or where they worked they may not have had exposure to other facets beyond basic development. Beyond that, it might as well be magic. They'll have to figure out how to provision a VM, ssh into it & lock all the proverbial doors first. Without going into managing it with IaC tools like Terraform, Ansible, Packer, etc.
by jatins | 2026-03-08 19:53:42+00:00
> They rely on judgement, experience, and trust to set a plausible course and correct it when needed, and don’t hinge on determining a correct answer or providing facts

We need judgement when we can't verify/prove that the answer is correct so we need a human we can trust. For example in author's example the pandas snippet is verifiably correct and I don't really care about judgement in that case. When there is a verification/test that gives a clear pass/fail to AI, the AI can just keep throwing stuff at the wall until it's green and it's good enough for a lot of use cases.
by fortran77 | 2026-03-08 19:53:43+00:00
Piano tunings are also "stretched" so that the harmonics are more in tune. This is especially needed on verticals and short "baby" grands. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stretched_tuning

I have software I use when I tune my Bosendorfer 290 that calculates the strech. Of course, the final tweaks are done by ear.
Show HN: LLM hallucinates its carbon footprint, we measure and plot it on steam [video]
by G_S | 2026-03-08 19:53:55+00:00
Carbon Technostructure traces the material weight of immaterial systems. A modified plotter, glass panel, and steamer work in concert to render visible what typically remains unseen: the environmental cost of computational processes.

Steam condenses on glass, creating an ephemeral drawing surface. An empty marker moves across this temporary canvas, inscribing patterns derived from real-time energy data. These marks exist only as disruptions in condensation, fading as quickly as our attention to digital infrastructure’s environmental impact.

For this iteration, we run a GPU hosting an open-source language model. We prompt it to hallucinate representations of its own energy consumption—a recursive gesture that produces both poetic output and measurable load. The installation monitors this consumption, cross-referencing it with the carbon intensity of the local electrical grid and subsequently plots it.

Each vanishing drawing offers a glimpse of the carbon technostructure we’ve built, one calculation at a time.

Produced during Ohme/BrIAS residency in Brussels, Avec le soutien de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles

More info :
https://guillaumeslizewicz.com/studio/neuralfog/
https://gitlab.constantvzw.org/gijs/carbon-aware/-/tree/main...
by anonym29 | 2026-03-08 19:54:02+00:00
The target audience for malware authors/distributors typically isn't a community full of technically literate software engineers, security practitioners, reverse engineers, malware analysts, etc.

Same reason that burglars don't typically target security camera stores and robbers don't typically target police departments - it's basically a fast-track to early detection, which disrupts the main objective of the adversary.
by brtkwr | 2026-03-08 19:54:17+00:00
We will always need someone to operate AI systems. Or a system that operates an AI system. Or a system that operates a system that operates an AI system. You get the idea — the chain doesn’t end. The universe is vast and we’ve barely scratched the surface. There will always be more to do than we can handle, with or without AI. Saying AI will take over our jobs and that’s the end of civilisation? That’s not an argument. That’s a failure of imagination.

And honestly, a 10x productivity gain isn’t even that ambitious. If we’re serious about going beyond Earth, we need every operator multiplying their output by 100x, 1000x. That’s not a threat to human purpose — that’s the bare minimum for the scale of what’s ahead.
Show HN: kg Food Log: Don't Track Calories; Track Molecules
by emadda | 2026-03-08 19:54:28+00:00
Hello HN,

This is my molecule tracking web app.

It tracks calories like traditional apps, but goes into much higher detail on micronutrients like vitamins and amino acids.

It is powered by Google Gemini, so you can just type a rough list of foods for each meal and it will infer the exact foods you meant. No more scanning barcodes!

I personally built this because the biochemical nature of foods interests me, and it is much faster to use this tool than looking up every food manually.

I hope you will find it useful, and let me know of any feature requests.

Thanks, Enzo
by qnleigh | 2026-03-08 19:55:36+00:00
I wonder if this is actually good for Anthropic. 2.5 million new customers sounds like good news for them, except these are mostly not paying customers. It seemed like they were positioning themselves to make money by selling coding agents with a subscription fee. If that free tier mostly exists to advertise their paid tiers, then this would be kind of a drag.
by refulgentis | 2026-03-08 19:55:40+00:00
I'm honestly surprised how well it's going.

From the perspective of usually just swinging into a post from the front page, when I do see green, it's usually overtly political trolling, and dead from the start. So I had assumed new account = no one sees your post in gray, at least for a week or two.

I don't envy the "Show HN:" case. It can be intractable, story time:

Last week, there was a "Show HN:" post for a GitHub link, made it all the way to #2. It was a Flutter app, written up as if it did all the stuff you'd want from an open source LLM client. I said to myself "geez, I knew I took to long to deliver the thing I've been working on for 2 years. the MVP version is insanely popular."

-- only after digging into the repo for 10 minutes, with domain expertise, did I realize it was a complete Potemkin village, built by Claude. And even then, I was afraid to post something pointing this out because it required domain expertise, and it could have read as negative rather than principled.

All that to say, some subsets of The AI Poster problem now require having intimate domain expertise and 10 minutes to evaluate it. :/

Additionally, the Claude 4.6s and GPT-5.4s are better than me at posting on HN now. :/ And I've been here 16 years. The last week pretty much every single one of my comments has been written by Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4, via: 1) dump HN post into prompt 2) say "I feel $X about this, write me an HN post that communicates this but not negatively".

I'm a little ashamed to admit if you look through my post history, you'll definitely see a repeated pattern over 16 years of someone who is very negative and has a hard time communicating it constructively. They're smart enough now to extrapolate observations in the way I want to, while avoiding my own tarpits.
by adventured | 2026-03-08 19:56:02+00:00
It's extremely common for people to be unable to project into the future when there is a bias in the way. Anytime you see a blatant failure to look beyond the tip of their nose by a person, it's almost always due to their own biases getting in the way (ie it's irrationality, they're giving up reason in exchange for not having to challenge their own position/s).

The other side of that irrationality coin is 2D extrapolation: a thing happened (or a context is such N), so therefore I shall extrapolate it happening again (once or many times) into the future on a smooth line, so as to fit my bias.
by keiferski | 2026-03-08 19:56:02+00:00
I don’t think people actually read the article; because it makes a unique point about certain types of queries:

I would have been interested in the experience and thoughts of someone whose opinions I respected, both as a social thing and to learn something.

In other words, some types of questions are aimed at 1) building a social connection with the person you’re asking and 2) because you want to know what they, specifically, think about their topic.

AI can’t really replace either of these. AIs might function as a weak social replacement for some people, but you aren’t really going to advance in your personal or professional life by making friends with Claude.

A good example of the second one are AskMeAnything type forum posts: I don’t care what some generic celebrity/famous figure thinks about something, I care specifically about what George Clooney thinks about it. The AI will always be guessing, building a model on what George has said in the past, but it will never actually say what he thinks right now.

For a more serious and contemporary example: there are dozens of videos on YouTube right now, interviews with various experts and pundits on the situation in Iran. Many of them have hundreds of thousands of views. But why would someone watch this instead of just asking ChatGPT what’s going on in Iran? Because we want to know what this particular person thinks.
by kqr | 2026-03-08 19:56:05+00:00
Did you calculate based on buying cloth nappies second hand and then reselling them? That was a great alternative for my family. Worked out to something like $100 in total nappy costs for one child, including the opportunity cost of tying up the capital up front. That's less than $1 per week. Make it $1.5 if we include electricity and water costs of laundry, compounded over that period.

I would struggle to find single-use nappies for $1.5 per week in my area.
by abtinf | 2026-03-08 19:56:16+00:00
I really wish there was a setting whereby I could simply hide all comments from accounts less than a year old. The correlation with LLM slop is simply off the charts.

It almost feels like new accounts should be treated like new posts -- it is sort of a service that a select few are willing to undertake to upvote interesting stories early on.

I wish even more I could block specific users (there are some highly prolific, high karma users here who are extremely irritating), but that's harder and is probably best handled client side.
by delichon | 2026-03-08 19:56:19+00:00
There is a epistemic silver lining. This is in fact a Red Queen's race that cannot be won. So in the end the only solution is to evaluate the text on its own merits without reference to the writer's status, because that status can no longer be reliably detected. For public feed like this one, the only alternative is to ignore it. The fire hose of data will inevitably become ever more fecal. We can only walk away from it or be more careful about the pearls we pluck out. That requires getting better at detecting the pearls.
by Rusky | 2026-03-08 19:56:25+00:00
Or put another way, a hypothetical feature that you made up in your head is the thing that requires source access. Editions do not let you change the semantics of types.

To be fair, Rust tooling does tend toward build-from-source. But this is for completely different reasons than the edition system: if you had a way to build a crate and then feed the binary into builds by future compilers, it would require zero additional work to link it into a crate using a different edition.
by bmacho | 2026-03-08 19:56:26+00:00
Accounts have to start posting somewhen.

Moderators don't have the capacity (and fairly, it is impossible) to check if they are bots or humans.

There are no good solutions, there are hundreds of thousands of intelligences out there, trained millions of hours on how to scam humans, capable of spitting out text tirelessly and shamelessly, and there will be only more of them, tens, hundreds, thousands times more.
by est31 | 2026-03-08 19:56:49+00:00
From my opinion, the block layoffs were a test, to see how a) a software company manages with only half of its employees now that there's powerful LLMs, and b) how the remaining employees react to the imminent threat of them being laid off as well.

If block succeeds, we'll see more layoffs of that kind, probably even more extreme ones. You are not top senior level employee? Out. You don't single handedly cause 30% of the AI spend on your 15 person team? Out.

People say how in five years there won't be seniors because one stopped junior hiring... in five years the seniors won't be needed either. Already today, we have single person billion dollar exits, high schoolers making millions from food apps. This is thanks to LLMs.

The technology is there to replace most of the white collar work, it's just not applied enough yet. The economic system needs to adapt to not having labor being such a big redistributor.
by alexpotato | 2026-03-08 19:57:24+00:00
You have MANY options:

OPTION 1: What ever you are into, see if there is a club in your town for that.

e.g. the suburban town I live in has a:

- rock climbing club

- board game club

- maker lab at the library

- Italian speaker's club

- and more

OPTION 2: Start a club

If you don't find a club you like: start one!

I did this with the town rock climbing club. I went on the town dad's Facebook and asked "anyone want to go rock climbing?", multiple people responded and now we have a club.

Fun fact: me starting the climbing club directly inspired the founder of the board game club to start that club too

OPTION 3: Host a cocktail party

If that sounds daunting, I can assure you it's not that hard and there is even a n EXCELLENT book by Nick Gray called The Two Hour Cocktail Part [0]

It lays out, step by step, all of the steps from invite to scheduling to name tags etc etc. It's like cookbook for how to have a great party.

And the idea is to make it less than 2 hours on a Mon/Tue/Fri so setup is easy and pressure to impress etc is low.

OPTION 4: Invite other people you know out for a drink/plate of wings etc

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, is starving for time out away from their life. Whether it be single people, married people, old people, young people etc, everyone wants something to do outside the house.

Don't believe me? Search "dad loneliness" on Reddit. It's post after post of dad's, probably about your age, saying "Man, I wish someone would just call me and say 'hey, what's a good time to grab a beer next week?' "

0 - https://amzn.to/4rpUAhv
by philipallstar | 2026-03-08 19:58:00+00:00
Those share options need excising, which probably incurs income tax on the allocation Vs strike prife. Then they are only worth something to inheritors if that company is doing useful work for its customers over an extremely long period of time. That is likely far more valuable than the tax going towards paying off the interest for a year on some vote-buying spending that happened 20 years prior.
by bombcar | 2026-03-08 19:58:12+00:00
Very likely. A container of formula runs about $25 and contains 1800 calories (my count may be off). Considering the mother is often trying to lose babyweight I think you can find 1800 calories cheaper.

The main thing is that for many, formula is paid for via support programs, but unless you're down on SNAP you don't get diapers AFAIK.
by kantord | 2026-03-08 19:58:20+00:00
interesting, this is basically what Venkatesh Rao pointed out back in 2013: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/07/10/you-are-not-an-artisan...

Basically we do not rationally analyze what work can be automated and what work is forever safe. We just assume that "sexy work" is safe, and work backwards to figure out how to explain this belief to ourselves.
by krapp | 2026-03-08 19:58:29+00:00
Except the quality hasn't been getting higher. Most of those projects wouldn't be considered HN worthy if a human being had made them, they only get the praise they do because they were generated by an LLM and as such they aren't projects so much as demonstrations of the latest model's capabilities.

Also the purpose of Show HN along with HN in general is to spark intellectual curiosity and create interesting conversation, and nothing about LLM generated code does that, because the person who prompted the AI to make it doesn't understand it and can't discuss it in any depth.
by tasuki | 2026-03-08 19:59:18+00:00
> absolutely no one is smart or productive enough to justify $692m in pay.

Upper management isn't paid based on how smart or productive they are. Google has like 400 billion yearly revenue. A CEOs decisions have enormous consequences, if a CEO can make slightly better decisions than another, it'd be easy to justify $692m in pay.

That said, I don't believe Sundar Pichai is a great CEO. He's might be an ok bean-counter, not sure, but I'm pretty sure one can get cheaper bean-counters.

> they could hire thousands of engineers for that money.

Yes and pray what would they do with them?
by mapontosevenths | 2026-03-08 19:59:58+00:00
I am more annoyed by the anti-AI luddites filling the comments with low value complaints than I am by quality content written partially by an LLM.

Those low value complaints add nothing to the conversation, and the content didnt make it to the front page because it was bad. If the sole objection is "AI bad", keep it to yourself....its boring.
by lateforwork | 2026-03-08 20:00:12+00:00
> Google invented the transformer architecture, but simply published it for its competitors to use.

That's how innovation works in this industry. If companies didn't allow researchers to publish their work it would set us back decades. Researchers building on each other's work is how this industry was built.

> It took a code red in 2023 to finally push Google to develop products based on this.

So Google executed. Ability to execute is one of the things that makes a good CEO. Other CEOs have additional qualities such as vision, and getting others to believe in the vision. But not every CEO needs to be a Steve Jobs!

Plenty of innovations are coming out of Google, just look at Nano Banana Pro for example.