MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by BobBagwill | 2026-03-11 22:39:34+00:00
Hi Friend, are you looking for a <insert product>bottled water</>? Here are the top 1000 brands of delicious bottled water! Water is very good for you! You are an ugly bag of mostly water! You do not have to enter your payment details, I remember them! Be assured that 1000 cases of 1000 brands of delicious bottled water are on their way to you now [Shipping charges may apply] at Peach Trees 2026, Sector 13, Mega-City One! Have an adequate day!!!
by pear01 | 2026-03-11 22:39:45+00:00
And the evidence of this plot and Iranian involvement is what?

A quick Google search yielded nothing in that regard... honestly it just doesn't sound that credible in an age where increasingly anyone can say anything. Why believe such a claim without evidence? Because it was the FBI that said it?

There are tempting targets all over the place. Like in the Middle East itself that Iran can barely hit. Their defenses and their leaders are being blown to smithereens. But you want me to believe they might have a submarine off the coast of California?
by pohl | 2026-03-11 22:40:08+00:00
The vast majority of users on every forum in Internet history, from Usenet to slashdot to Twitter and beyond, have always been lurkers: people who almost exclusively read. They are essential to the vitality of the forums but they are invisible, proverbial dark matter. They do not deserve to be treated as less than. But I don’t exactly want to stop X from shooting themselves in the foot for the umteenth time.
by lokar | 2026-03-11 22:40:21+00:00
If you listen carefully to the "ballot access" side of this argument (actually informed people and politicians, not random on the internet), you will see they don't ever say it does not happen.

What they say is that it does not happen enough to plausibly come close to affecting the outcome. And this is widely supported, including by right-wing organizations (as a sibling comment observes).

As with most issues, there is a trade-off here. As you tighten controls to prevent improper voting, you prevent some people from realistically being able to vote (it's just too hard, time consuming or expensive for them to meet the documentation requirements), and discourage others. This is particularly bad for the 1-2 elections after the rule change, which most people won't know about until they show up to vote. IMO, this is really the point of the changes.

And you have to weigh that negative against the supposed benefit. But that benefit is really hard to find. It's very clear that intentional voter fraud (fraud in registration, or in-person impersonation) is extremely rare, and does not come anywhere close to affecting outcomes. It's already a crime, and we seem to be pretty good at catching it.

The other argument for a benefit is that it improves voter confidence in elections. I reject this, since the only reason the public at large has any real concerns is because of intentional misinformation by the right. You can't lie to people to convince them there is a problem, and then use that to justify your heavy handed solution.
by toast0 | 2026-03-11 22:40:43+00:00
> The main drawback seems to be that some networks still refuse to peer with them so not everything is reachable.

A bigger drawback is that you end up in a bad neighborhood. 20 years ago, most traffic from tunnelbroker users were people excited about ipv6 with isps that didn't care about it. In 2026, nobody is excited about ipv6 anymore and tunnelbroker traffic is mostly abuse or trying to circumvent georestrictions... Expect to fill out so many captchas if you set it up.
ReleaseGuard – scan and harden your dist/ before it ships (open source)
by Helixar | 2026-03-11 22:41:15+00:00
Most supply chain security tools look at your source code or dependencies. Nobody looks at what actually ships.
We kept finding things in dist/ that everything else missed, such as API keys baked into JS bundles, source maps accidentally shipped to prod, debug symbols inside release binaries, .env files that made it through the build. ReleaseGuard fixes that. Single binary. Point it at your dist folder:

releaseguard check ./dist # find the problems
releaseguard fix ./dist # strip and harden
releaseguard sign ./dist # sign + attest

SBOM generation, Sigstore keyless signing, SLSA provenance, OPA policy gates, and a GitHub Action all included. MIT licensed.
https://github.com/Helixar-AI/ReleaseGuard
by verdverm | 2026-03-11 22:41:16+00:00
I would still say no, there is something about finding the words for yourself, even if they aren't as elegant as an Ai can make. It's fine, most humans prefer imperfection.

The point is we don't want to read Ai summaries, we can make one ourselves if we want.

For some inspiration on why this is meaningful: https://www.npr.org/2025/07/18/g-s1177-78041/what-to-do-when...
by koyote | 2026-03-11 22:41:22+00:00
I use the non-Plus version as my work machine (not by choice).

It's massive and heavy and feels less snappy than my personal X1 Nano after all the corporate malware uses up most of the CPU and RAM.

The screen resolution is also shockingly bad (my 13 inch X1 Nano has a higher res than this 16 inch beast).

That being said, it's nice having 64gb of RAM, a fast CPU and an Nvidia card (we build stuff that runs on CUDA). Build times are quick and I can run some of our more demanding test suites without RAM filling up and slowing everything down.
by kelnos | 2026-03-11 22:41:24+00:00
I know people IRL that are so fed up with the US's bullshit that they do sometimes look at China and think their dominance might be better for the world. "Well, when's the last time China started a war or even deployed military forces in another country?", they ask... and I don't know how to respond to that (because they haven't, for at least 30 years that I can think of). And saying something like "well, they've been expanding their territory through extralegal means, and use coercion and grey-area tactics to get what they want" feels like an unsatisfying retort.
by wvenable | 2026-03-11 22:41:25+00:00
Do you though? Like what real difference does it make to you? Can you even tell if this has been passed through an LLM or not? If you can't tell, why does it matter?

I don't want to be robo-slopped at en masse or be fed complete fabrications but neither of those actually require an LLM. If you're going to use an LLM to gather your thoughts, I don't see a problem with that.
by ruszki | 2026-03-11 22:41:27+00:00
For that you need to create something which you know exactly how you want to code, or what architecture is needed. In other words, you would win basically nothing, because typing was never the real bottleneck (no matter what VIM and Emacs people would tell you).

LLMs also make mistakes even way lower level than those one pagers allow you to control with the planning mode. Which I use all the time btw. And anyway, they throw the plan out of the window immediately when their tried solutions don't work during execution, for example when a generated test is failing.

Btw, changing the plan after its generation is painful. It happens more than not that when I decline it with comments it generates a worse version of it, because it either miss things from the previous one which I never mentioned, or changes the architecture to a worse one completely. In my experience, it's better to restart the whole thing with a more precise prompt.
by dumpsterdiver | 2026-03-11 22:41:32+00:00
To be fair, the English language is the real victim here.

While “essential” cleanly maps to “can’t go without” - it doesn’t map to “bare minimum”.

For instance, let’s assume you’re surviving in the wilderness and you need to start a fire. Your fire starting kit is obviously essential, but it could also be included in a “Camper Value Pack” - but those things don’t have anything to do with each other. The kit is essential, and it was obtained in a value pack. This message brought to you by Mr. Obvious.
by simple10 | 2026-03-11 22:41:43+00:00
Klaus looks great! It's definitely looks like a step up from the one-click VPS deploys that are terribly insecure.

I spent the past month hacking on openclaw to play nice in a docker container for my own VPS use.

This project has a lot of useful debugging tools for running multiple claws on a single VPS:

https://github.com/simple10/openclaw-stack

For average users, Klaus is a much better fit.
by bartblast | 2026-03-11 22:42:03+00:00
Creator here. Quick context: Hologram lets you build interactive web apps in pure Elixir by compiling to JavaScript on the client side.

This release brings JavaScript interoperability - the most requested feature since the project's inception. Hologram's premise is that you shouldn't need to write JavaScript, but cutting yourself off from 3 million npm packages and hundreds of browser APIs isn't realistic. v0.8.0 bridges that gap: call JS functions, use npm packages, interact with Web APIs, instantiate classes, and work with Web Components - all from Elixir, with zero client-side latency.

AMA!
by cuuupid | 2026-03-11 22:42:21+00:00
If a majority of the Americans believed America was not generally the "good guys" it would be a sign of a failed democracy.

Similarly normal for the population of any country that has net negative externalities from America to view them as the "bad guys".

The current and growing anti-US sentiment is an expected result of an increasing gap between the US and the rest of the first world on economy and defense. The existence of a superpower is precluded on being viewed negatively by the rest of the world
by pixl97 | 2026-03-11 22:42:35+00:00
"You can do everything right and still lose".

At the end of the day there is no real penalty for being a bad actor on the internet. They get unlimited retries on spamming and otherwise causing problems. In many ways this helps Google entrench itself as the search/ad company. No one else has the money or compute resources to continuously update the internet. Furthermore they have told us it's their job to shove unskippable ads in our faces. They'll gladly let the public internet die in the future if they can push out their own version of "SafeInternet by Google/now with more ads!".
by mvdtnz | 2026-03-11 22:42:38+00:00
> convincing fake video generation is easily accessible, so one more holdout stands to fall.

Is it though? I have absolutely no doubt we'll get there but I haven't seen any evidence of this in the wild. My Youtube feed is becoming overrun with content with clearly generated scripts and often generated narration. But I haven't seen a single instance (that I'm aware of) of generated video being passed off as real.

Yes I have seen hundreds of tweets and reddit posts showcasing game-changing video technologies like AI face replacement and yes they look incredible in the 45 second demo reels, but every instance I have seen of real-world usage was comically bad.
by bryan0 | 2026-03-11 22:42:50+00:00
While there have probably many people that have been affected by the secondary "mass psychosis" effect of havana syndrome, it seems unlikely that is the primary cause considering the device is now out in the wild:

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/13/politics/havana-syndrome-...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-military-tested-device-that-...
by john_strinlai | 2026-03-11 22:42:52+00:00
>dEOK existing and its "JND" being 0.02 absolutely made my head spin. None of this is recognizable to a color scientist

isnt it just because the lightness scale is 0-1 instead of 0-100? i would like to learn more about this, and your comments are contrary to what i see on, for example, https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/

"In CIE Lab color space, where the range of the Lightness component is 0 to 100, using deltaE2000, one JND is 2. Because the range of Lightness in Oklab and OkLCh is 0 to 1, using deltaEOK, one JND is 100 times smaller."

if youd rather just point in the direction of where to read more, that would be fine too. i assumed (wrongly?) that the CSS color specification would be accurate. or, at least, accurate enough to not make heads spin. (any ideas on why w3 got it so wrong? or why they would use OKlab at all, if it is as utterly awful as you imply?)
by D13Fd | 2026-03-11 22:42:52+00:00
> A good example is this, car companies don't make cars for the most part, they make loans. Financial companies first, car companies second.

I get that this is true from a certain point of view. But car companies clearly compete in a very healthy way on features and quality.

In fact, cars are a great example of a market where the companies clearly care about making the product, and the competition between them has driven that products to incredible heights. Cars these days are vastly better than they were in the past.
by dddgghhbbfblk | 2026-03-11 22:43:07+00:00
I think the comment you linked doesn't sound like AI at all, though. I do empathize with people worried about getting falsely accused of using AI in their writing, either hypothetically or in your case in actuality, but at the same time I kinda just think that's a skill issue on the part of the accusers.

This is very much a general "English reading skills" kind of test. A lot of people don't speak English as a first language, in which case I think it's entirely forgiveable. It's hard being attuned to things like writing style in a foreign language (I know from experience!). It's a pretty high level language skill, all things considered. And even among those who do speak English as a first language, there are many in this industry who don't have strong reading skills.

I do believe that personally my hit rate for calling out AI content is likely very high. Like many of us I've had the misfortune of reading more LLM output than is probably healthy for my brain.

One quick point:

>Those sentence constructions that are "tells" were also learned from good writers though.

I don't agree at all, I think the LLM style of writing is cribbed from like, LinkedIn and marketing slop. It's definitely not good writing.
by BeetleB | 2026-03-11 22:43:10+00:00
Oh wow. I did not anticipate that, which is embarrassing given that I wrote this just recently:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47326351

Yes, please at least have a carveout for accessibility. I definitely have dictated HN comments in the past, and my flow uses LLMs to clean it up. It works, and is awesome when you're in pain.
by protocolture | 2026-03-11 22:43:18+00:00
>It is quite literally a fuzzy way of copying.

Even if it involved copying that isnt immediately an issue. Its the distribution of a copy thats an issue. And if you look at the data side by side, you can see that while copying might be part of the process of creating an LLM, the LLM is not a copy of its source material.
by Avicebron | 2026-03-11 22:43:27+00:00
I think "must be unenhanced human" is probably the most sophisticated criteria even if it's simple. I don't think there's much value in trying to optimize the perfect "thoughtful, curious discussion", why would there be, it implies some ideal state for "thoughtful and curious" vs the reality that discussions between living breathing people is interesting by default as long as folks loosely follow some guidelines.

I was thinking today about the last company I worked for in the Bay several years ago now and the horrible fake, false cheer and rictus grin people would always walk around with as this sort of perfect face showing charade. Now that I work in a more relaxed "human" environment I realize how absurd it is to try and get people to always act like they have HR sitting behind them. In some ways, trying to optimize the "thoughtful, engaging, curious, etc" seems just like someone trying to enforce this same sort of fake interaction vs just the organic, person to person one. my 2c.
by ConvertlyAI | 2026-03-11 22:43:47+00:00
We're currently using a strictly rule-based approach injected at the system-prompt level rather than a secondary classifier. Since ConvertlyAI handles 10 different output types (from raw Twitter threads to SEO blogs), we found that explicitly banning specific behaviors (like markdown wrappers, fake metrics, or specific generic AI buzzwords like 'Delve') directly in the main "systemRole" for "gpt" keeps latency low while still preventing formatting breaks. It's essentially a massive 'Do Not Do This' list passed right before execution.

Your static analysis approach for catching type constraints before execution sounds significantly more robust for complex workflows, though! Is that adding much latency?
by SimianSci | 2026-03-11 22:44:12+00:00
I call it pointless because I and many other Americans have been told these things before.
We are always in a constant "Red Queen's Race" with other nations as a means of establishing dominance.
We subsidize allies like Israel with billions of dollars that have never been allocated by our congress, and which only serve to subsidize the healthcare of Israeli citizens while we continue to have nothing of the sorts.

"Bro, just trust me Iran is SO CLOSE!" for the past 40 years is not convincing us that this war has any benefit to us.
Americans are already on the hook for trillions of dollars in debt we cannot pay as a country, and now we want to continue exploding the deficit to the tune of $1 Billion per day.
Its existential threat after existential threat with no consideration to the actual troubles americans are facing in the here and now. Its just endless wars with no end in sight. Outside of manufacturing consent on behalf of Israel, posts such as yours seem highly dedicated to trying to convince nobody aside from the wealthy few Americans with international holdings.
by andai | 2026-03-11 22:44:13+00:00
Here's a short clip of Karpathy speaking on this subject.

https://youtu.be/UldqWmyUap4

Also this is the direction the small LLMs are moving in already. They are too small for general knowledge, but getting quite good at tool use (incl. Googling).

Now we just need them to be very strict about what they know and don't know! (I think this is still an open problem, even with big ones.)
by jltsiren | 2026-03-11 22:44:15+00:00
I've seen this from both sides.

Sometimes the result is wrong, or it's not as big or as general as claimed. Or maybe the provided instructions are insufficient to replicate the work. But sometimes the attempt to replicate a result fails, because the person doing it does not understand the topic well enough.

Maybe they are just doing the wrong things, because their general understanding of the situation is incorrect. Maybe they fail to follow the instructions correctly, because they have subtle misunderstandings. Or maybe they are trying to replicate the result with data they consider similar, but which is actually different in an important way.

The last one is often a particularly difficult situation to resolve. If you understand the topic well enough, you may be able to figure out how the data is different and what should be changed to replicate the result. But that requires access to the data. Very often, one side has the data and another side the understanding, but neither side has both.

Then there is the question of time. Very often, the person trying to replicate the result has a deadline. If they haven't succeeded by then, they will abandon the attempt and move on. But the deadline may be so tight that the authors can't be reasonably expected to figure out the situation by then. Maybe if there is a simple answer, the authors can be expected to provide it. But if the issue looks complex, it may take months before they have sufficient time to investigate it. Or if the initial request is badly worded or shows a lack of understanding, it may not be worth dealing with. (Consider all the bad bug reports and support requests you have seen.)
by altairprime | 2026-03-11 22:44:43+00:00
You were correct not to post the summary. HN tends to expect readers to invest time in reading and understanding long form content and for community to step into discussions and offer context and explanations when necessary. One of the most important context statements on this site has been “in mice”, posted as a two word comment, elevated to top comment on the post. An AI summary will miss that context altogether while busily calculating a cliffsnote no one wants to read (and could often get you flagged and potentially banned, even before today’s guideline update). If a reader wants an AI summary, they have the same tools you do to generate it by their own hand.

If you have domain familiarity with it, have some personal insight to offer a lens through, or care about the topic deeply enough to write a summary yourself, then go ahead! I almost never post about AI given my loathing of generative ML, but I posted a critical summary in a recent “underlying shared structure” post because it was a truly exciting mathematical insight and the paper made that difficult to see for some people.

Please don’t use AI to reduce the distinctiveness of your writing style. Run on sentences are how humans speak to each other. Excess commas are only excess when you consider neurotypicals. I’m learning French and I have already started to fuck up some English spelling because of it. None of that matters in the grand scheme of things. Just add -er suffix checks to your mental proofreading list and move on with being you.
by AngryData | 2026-03-11 22:45:16+00:00
In my experience AI doesn't give the answer you want because it gives the most shallow and basic, many times so basic as to be worthless, response. Then I either scroll through 20 results hoping I see one that isn't an AI writeup of the exact same incomplete source, or I give up and search out a specific site I know exists that isn't AI written for that information.
by obviouslynotme | 2026-03-11 22:45:18+00:00
You are absolutely correct. Even distributing the replication around the world will only help so much. It's a small world out there and only smaller in the specializations.

That's why replication has to be required and standard. It will hurt to tear off the bandaid, but once the culture shifts, people will hesitate to publish mediocre research in the first place. Without mediocre research flooding the zone, real numbers will dominate and inflated expectations will wither.
by jongjong | 2026-03-11 22:45:24+00:00
This is a dark day for the monarchy... and for democracy in the UK.

Remove the only people who actually have a long-term vested non-financial interest in the system and replace them with more revolving-door politicians backed by the big money so that the big money can operate with even less friction than before. Great. Just great.

The problem with our current democratic systems with unlimited government fiat money is that capital is in control. Not voters. Capital. This should be obvious by now. Someone deprived of food will vote for whoever you tell them to vote for.
by alwillis | 2026-03-11 22:45:34+00:00
I know that Walmart and Costco sold discounted M1 MacBook Airs, which why I used introductory prices.

> so I guess they started to have trouble sourcing components and came up with the Neo as their replacement.

There’s no indication Apple had any issues with getting components; they’re have problems with sourcing more expensive components.

Apple tends to be very deliberate with products; this isn’t a replacement for something else.

In fact, there was an article stating unlike some other laptop manufacturers, Apple’s prices aren’t expected to rise because their buying power and having contracts in place [1].

A low-cost MacBook using an iPhone process has been rumored for at least a year.

[1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2026/03/10/apple-holds-edge-laptop...