MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CoastalCoder | 2026-03-12 20:11:48+00:00
> Question from a European who doesn’t deeply understand your partisan politics: what specifically should they have done differently?

For what it's worth, I think a lot of us Americans have realized that we don't understand the partisan dynamics either.

Many of us are very confused about the ongoing support for Trump. There's clearly a huge chasm in mindsets, and personally I've made little headway in forming a plausible mental model that explains it all.
by lowbloodsugar | 2026-03-12 20:12:09+00:00
See, you're just making the same mistake, with this assumption "subtract the harmful part about calling individuals bad people over bad work, and you still have an abrasive, decisive leader who calls ideas and work bad when he sees it”.

I once sat in a promo meeting and the consensus was that a particular individual had a "bad attitude". Someone asked for evidence, and another pointed at a ticket, where the person had written:

"This should not have been a ticket".

Everyone agreed this was very much an example of a bad attitude. After several minutes of discussion around how to exit this person, I asked "Was he right?" and, upon review, everyone agreed that in fact this should not have been a ticket. He was not fired.

There's no "calling individuals bad people" here. You just assumed that when I said "often received feedback that my communication is snarky, rude, or tone-deaf" that I am being snarky, rude or tone-deaf, that I am "calling individuals bad people".

This would be hilarious if it wasn't every fucking conversation about the issue. And it's also the fallout of every time an autistic person is reported "Oh, Bob was so rude today", and then is interpreted as "Oh, did you hear, Bob called someone a cunt."

Bob said "This should not have been a ticket."
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-03-12 20:12:43+00:00
I don’t know. I’m making a point that the only people whose sole responsibility is code that they personally write are mid level ticket takers.

I don’t review every line of code by everyone whose output I’m responsible for, I ask them to explain how they did things and care about their testing, the functional and non functional requirements and hotspots like concurrency, data access patterns, architectural issues etc.

For instance, I haven’t done web development since 2002 except for a little copy and paste work. I completely vibe coded three internal web admin sites for separate projects and used Amazon Cognito for authentication. I didn’t look at a line of code that AI generated any more than I would have looked at a line of code for a website I delegated to the web developer. I cared about functionality and UX.
by jacquesm | 2026-03-12 20:12:46+00:00
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall

All the king's horses and all the king's men

Couldn't put Humpty together again

--

It's going to take a lot of glue to try to put the United States together again. Breaking things is easy, and the Trump administration absolutely excels at it. The White House, some buildings (some occupied) in Iran, the economy, the cohesion in so far as there still was any left in the country.

But once broken they are not so easily restored.
by fabio_rovai | 2026-03-12 20:13:07+00:00
Open Ontologies is an MCP server that lets LLMs build, validate, query, and govern OWL/RDF ontologies using 39 tools backed by an in-memory Oxigraph triple store, written in Rust.

Why it exists
LLMs understand ontology theory and can generate valid Turtle/OWL, but they also hallucinate hierarchies, invent properties, and produce invalid ontologies.
Prompting alone doesn’t fix this—tools do.

Open Ontologies implements a generate → validate → iterate loop:
the LLM generates Turtle, tools validate it in a real triple store, lint it, query it, and fix issues.
The LLM orchestrates; the tools are the source of truth.

What it does
The server exposes 39 MCP tools over JSON-RPC. Core workflow:

validate – catch Turtle/OWL syntax errors

load – store data in Oxigraph

stats – sanity-check classes, properties, triples

lint – detect missing labels, domains, ranges

query – run SPARQL on the graph

diff – compare ontology versions

It also supports a Terraform-style lifecycle:

plan – preview changes and risk

enforce – check design pattern rules (e.g., BORO)

apply – safe reload or migration

monitor – SPARQL watchers with alerts

drift – detect schema changes

Extras include data ingestion (CSV/JSON/XML/XLSX/Parquet), SHACL validation, OWL-RL reasoning, terminology crosswalks, and ontology alignment.

Architecture
Rust

Oxigraph (in-memory SPARQL store)

rusqlite (state, feedback, monitoring)

Single binary, no Python or Java

Run:

cargo build --release
./target/release/open-ontologies serve
Connect any MCP client and the tools appear.

Benchmarks
7.5×–1,633× faster than HermiT reasoning on LUBM scaling tests.

On the OntoAxiom benchmark, tool-augmented workflow achieved F1 = 0.305 vs 0.197 for the best bare LLM.

Key idea
LLMs are good at understanding requirements and generating structure.
Triple stores are good at validation and truth.

The winning pattern is: LLM generates → tools verify.

This approach likely extends beyond ontologies: in real systems, LLMs succeed not by knowing answers, but by calling the right tools.
by esseph | 2026-03-12 20:13:29+00:00
I've been thinking about this a bit more and I think we're actually talking about two (or more) different pronunciations.

There is a VERY hard "I" that Lindsey Graham does. I think that's the specific version you're talking about, and that one is intentionally offputting. It's like "EYEEE RACK", but that does sound different from "AYERAK" or "EYEROQ".
by gbalduzzi | 2026-03-12 20:13:36+00:00
> If a law being enforced 100% of the time causes problems then rethink the law (i.e. raise the speed limit, or design the road slower).

Isn't this the point of the whole conversation we are having here?

Laws on copyright were not created for current AI usage on open source project replication.

They need to change, because if they are perfectly enforced by the letter, they result in actions that are clearly against the intent of the law itself.

The underlying problem is that the world changes too fast for the laws so be fair immediately
by 3rodents | 2026-03-12 20:13:45+00:00
“Actually Indians” is a meme for a reason

https://ia.acs.org.au/article/2025/the-company-whose--ai--wa... The company whose ‘AI’ was actually 700 humans in India

https://www.businessinsider.com/amazons-just-walk-out-actual... Amazon's Just Walk Out technology relies on hundreds of workers in India watching you shop

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/former-nate-ceo-human-worke... Former nate CEO who used human workers instead of AI allegedly defrauded investors lured by new tech of millions
by davesque | 2026-03-12 20:13:56+00:00
The Claude Code TUI app is pretty solid. I use it heavily and I get great results from it. But with the mobile app, Claude Code remote is basically unusable (weird disconnect bugs) and Claude Code cloud has issues as well (UI hides approval confirmations; must reconnect to see them). So yeah, I imagine what you're saying is true. There are at least some major gaps in their QA process. It's ironically a pretty convincing case to keep humans in the loop. It's honestly shocking to me that those features were actually shipped in their current state. You run into the problems immediately.
by nyrikki | 2026-03-12 20:14:49+00:00
Even with classic compilation, it is only the semantic behavior that is preserved.

What the Church–Rosser property/confluence is in term rewriting in lambda calculus is a possible lens.

To have a formally verified spec, one has to use some decidable fragment of FO.

If you try to replace code generation with rewriting things can get complicated fast.[2]

Rust uses affine types as an example and people try to add petri-nets[0] but in general petri-net reachability is Ackerman-complete [1]

It is just the trade off of using a context free like system like an LLM with natural language.

HoTT and how dependent types tend to break isomorphic ≃ equal
Is another possible lens.

[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.02754v3

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.02754v3

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.20822
by mort96 | 2026-03-12 20:14:58+00:00
Well there was a lot of people, especially on the dem side of the spectrum, who weren't a fan of his public unwavering support of the genocide of the Palestinian people. Internal investigations within the party allegedly agree with this analysis.

But yes, people dislike Biden for a lot of things he didn't deserve to be disliked for, such as inflation which was caused by COVID and Trump and which Biden did a fantastic job of controlling, but which parts of the public simply perceived as "inflation went wild under Biden". Still, even though it's not fair, the message "I will do nothing different from (unpopular incumbent)" isn't great campaign strategy, in my opinion.
by hn_acc1 | 2026-03-12 20:14:58+00:00
Right there with you. Sure, I have gained a lot as a software engineer in the valley (I guess I'm upper-middle class now), but I'd give it up and go right back to lower-middle class (1980s) status I was raised in if it meant my kids could also aspire to a similar lower-middle class life.

This suicide-pact of "either AI goes crazy and 100 people rule the world with 99% of the world's wealth" or "AI fails badly and everyone's standard of living drops 3 levels, except for the 100 people that rule the world with 99% of the world's wealth" is not what I signed up for. Nor is it in any way sustainable or wise.

Too much class distinction / wealth between lower/upper classes, and a surplus of unemployed lower-class men is how many revolts/revolutions/wars have started.
by skywhopper | 2026-03-12 20:15:26+00:00
This is slick but the only thing it prevents is agents from directly sharing the credentials through git or something.

But that’s not the biggest risk of giving credentials to agents. If they can still make arbitrary API calls, they can still cost money or cause security problems or delete production.

If you’re worried about creds leakage only because your credentials are static and permanent, well, time to upgrade your secrets architecture.
by antonvs | 2026-03-12 20:15:26+00:00
Classic object orientation is wrong. It conflates things that shouldn’t be conflated.

Look at Rust, Haskell, Go, Elm, Purescript, or Idris. All of them have something like traits or interfaces, and don’t need the rest of the badly designed OO machinery.

OO was basically a wrong turn that was taken some time after the development of CLU. It appealed to some people intuitively - including me, I implemented and sold a commercial OO language product in the early 90s - but it was always bad technically.
by jlarocco | 2026-03-12 20:15:36+00:00
I've never heard of anybody doing it, but in theory it could work.

SBCL (and maybe others) use a "core image" to bootstrap at startup. It's not unheard of for people to build a custom core image with the packages they use a lot from the REPL. It's become less common as computers have gotten faster, and most people use systems like Quicklisp or Roswell to automatically get updates and load from source. Of course the SBCL core image is generated from the compiler source code when building it, and the dependencies are loaded and compiled from source initially, too, so there's still going to be source code files around.

You could, in theory, start with the compiled SBCL image, exclusively type code into the REPL, save the image and exit, and then restart with the new image and continue adding code via the REPL. I really doubt anybody uses that workflow exclusively, though. At the very least most people will eventually save the code they entered in the REPL into a source file once they've debugge it and got it working.
by harrisi | 2026-03-12 20:15:40+00:00
I was curious about this from another video in relation to this case. I have no legal training, but I think there's no reason the witness would refuse to answer when counsel objects. There's no judge in the room as far as I know. The court handles the objections after the fact, I think, which could potentially have implications on how the trial proceeds.

Again, I have never practiced law, so I may be entirely incorrect. Also, I am not defending the witness or their actions.
by namlem | 2026-03-12 20:15:46+00:00
Imperfect enforcement is a feature as often as it is a bug. You can't make "antisocial behavior" in general illegal but you can make certain behaviors (loitering, public intoxication) illegal and selectively enforce against only those who are behaving in an antisocial manner. Of course the other edge of this sword is using this discretion to blanket discriminate against racial or class groups.
by codethief | 2026-03-12 20:16:11+00:00
> I always thought laws would get more just with perfect enforcement

As Edward Snowden once argued in an AMA on Reddit, a zero crime rate is undesirable for democratic society because it very likely implies that it's impossible to evade law enforcement. The latter, however, means that people won't be able to do much if the laws ever become tyrannic, e.g. due to a change in power. In other words, in a well-functioning democratic society it must always be possible (in principle) to commit a crime and get away.
by throw0101d | 2026-03-12 20:16:40+00:00
> The IPv4 32-bit address space should have been included in the IPv6 address space, instead of having 2 separate address spaces.

Like

> Addresses in this group consist of an 80-bit prefix of zeros, the next 16 bits are ones, and the remaining, least-significant 32 bits contain the IPv4 address. For example, ::ffff:192.0.2.128 represents the IPv4 address 192.0.2.128. A previous format, called "IPv4-compatible IPv6 address", was ::192.0.2.128; however, this method is deprecated.[5]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#IPv4-mapped_IPv6_addresse...

?
by bayarearefugee | 2026-03-12 20:16:43+00:00
It doesn't seem too bad when you cherry pick an outlier example, but what about when the person making $100k now makes $50k?

I'm sure the retort of the AI optimist will be that AI will make the things that person buys cheaper, and there may be truth to that when it comes to things that people buy with disposable income...

But how likely is AI to make actual essentials like housing and food cheaper?
by zdragnar | 2026-03-12 20:16:47+00:00
The Heritage Foundation's database on fraud was explicitly described as not exhaustive, but merely demonstrating that the potential (and reality) is there. It's not like they've got exhaustive access to both voter registration rolls and votes cast.

In states that bother, millions have been removed from voter rolls who weren't eligible in recent years, but the DOJ hasn't done anything with the data either.
by hinkley | 2026-03-12 20:16:51+00:00
I went to a top ten school. I had one semester of circuit design, one one of EE, and a couple of computer architecture that went over the MIPs and writing assembly.

I think there was some sort of transition of curriculum going on with the introductory classes though because the difficulty from one homework assignment to the next that first year of CS 1XX classes was pretty choppy. A friend and I made a game of one-upsmanship of adding our own constraints to the easier assignments to make them more interesting. Like taking larger inputs than the requirements and counting execution time.

When I left school my first job the application was glacially slow, and I learned half of what I know about optimization in a short stint there through trial and error. It was a couple jobs in before I ever got pushback and had to learn the human factors element. But it (the optimization balanced against readability, robustness, extensibility) was a way I have always made pedestrian work more interesting. There are whole classes of code smells that also contain performance penalties, and at the peak of my restlessness I needed those to keep my sanity without irritating coworkers. I’m just cleaning up this messy code, nothing to see here.

Reading release notes for other tools bragging on their improvements. Dev tools and frameworks are more forthcoming about how and what than consumer apps, but there are standouts from time to time. I read a ton of SIGPLAN proceedings during that era. Fortune favors the prepared mind and you look a lot smarter when you’re confronting a problem or opportunity with a primed pump rather than coming in cold (being friendly with other disciplines in your company also helps there).
by adrian_b | 2026-03-12 20:17:20+00:00
Not everyone craves the flavor/texture of meat, but everyone needs an adequate intake of high quality protein.

Including protein powder as a cooking ingredient does not do much for improving the taste of food (though the food definitely feels more satiating), but it ensures that it is healthy enough.

Even if I liked meat, I never felt any kind of addiction to it. There are many years since the last time when I ate meat and I feel no need to eat again, as long as I have a lot of other options for food that is tasty and healthy.

For several years I have not used any animal protein sources, but this forced too inconvenient constraints on what I could eat, so eventually I gave up and now I use in cooking some whey or milk protein concentrate powder, whenever it is necessary to increase the protein content. This has provided much more freedom in menu choice.

So for me, if instead of having to buy protein extracted from whey or milk (which costs about the same as chicken meat, i.e. many times cheaper than protein concentrates extracted from plants, which must use much more complicated processes than the filtration of whey or milk) there would be the option of buying similar protein from a fungal culture, that would be enough to cover all my needs.

From other comments that I have seen about the fake meat products, I am pretty sure that there are many others like me, who do not care whether they eat meat or not, as long as they eat some good food.
by Havoc | 2026-03-12 20:17:28+00:00
There is also a premium for the human touch. I currently pay $15 fee to my bank a month. Going rate here for a bank account is $0.

But the $15 bank has a call center that is dreamy - reliably connected to a competent focused individual in under 3 seconds.

It doesn't matter how good the tech & automation is I place an economic value on that ability to pick up the phone and talk to a human. LLMs are crushing it but I'm not fuckin paying $15 for an LLM.
by xpe | 2026-03-12 20:18:01+00:00
First, please don't take this as an endorsement of minimum-effort posting (of any kind, whether LLM-assisted or not). I feel the need to say this because people seem to be on hair-trigger alert for anything that seems in any way to denigrate the importance of human-written comments. I want people to "be human" here while also being mindful of how to contribute to the culture and conversation. What that looks like and what that entails is certainly up for discussion. / Ok, with that out of the way, I have four major points that build on each other, leading to a more direct response to the comment above.

1. Reasonable people may disagree in meaningful ways about what "respecting one's audience" means. There is significant variation in what qualifies as a "good faith participant" in a conversation.

In my case, I strive to seek truth, do research, be thoughtful, and write clearly. Do I hope others share these goals? Yeah, I think it would be nice and helpful for all of us, but I don't realistically expect it to happen very often. Do other people share these goals? Do they even see my writing as striving in those directions? These are really hard questions to answer.

2. It helps to recognize the nature of human communication. It a sloppy, messy, ill-defined not-even-protocol. The communication channel is a multi-layered mess. Participants bring who-knows-what purposes and goals. (One person might care about AI-assisted coding; another might be weary and sick of their employer pushing AI into their workflow; another might be seeing their lifelong profession being degraded; etc.)

3. What do the other participant(s) have in common? Background knowledge? Values? Goals? Norms and expectations? Part of communication is figuring out these "out-of-band" aspects. How do you do it? Hoping to do this "in-band" feels like building an airplane while flying it!

4. How does communication work, when it sort of works at all? Why? Individual interactions (i.e. bilateral ones) often work better when repeated over time. These scale better with the help of group norms. Norms make more sense and are more durable in the context of shared values.

So, with the above in mind, you might start to reframe how you think about:

> It shows a clear prioritization of the author's time over the readers', which fine, you're entitled to valuing your own time more than mine, but if you do, I'll receive that prioritization as inherently disrespectful of my time.

The reframing won't suddenly make the communication a better use of one's time. But it does shed light on the mindset and motives of others. In other words, communication breakdowns happen all the time without malicious intent or disrespect.
by tzs | 2026-03-12 20:18:13+00:00
> Generally when a writer inserts a person's race flippantly like in the parent's quote

It may not have been flippant. There is a contingent of young men, almost always white, who think that minorities now have it easy and white people are the most oppressed group in the US, and that this is why they have trouble getting into the best schools or getting the best jobs. Unqualified affirmative action minorities, they think, took their rightful place.

They never seem to notice that plenty of other white people also got into those school or got those jobs, and that those white people and the minorities who got those admissions or jobs worked very hard for years to get it instead of slacking off like they did and expecting to still make it.

Many of these people have found each other on social media and developed a culture around these beliefs.

In the context of DOGE and its unimpressive staffing I think "culture of mediocre white men" was referring to that group.

As a white man who is mediocre in many things, but blames it on my own laziness or lack of talent in those areas, that is the first thing I thought they were talking about.
by phil21 | 2026-03-12 20:18:13+00:00
I've thought about doing this, but ironically you'd be sued into oblivion where I'm from. Likely prosecuted by the both the state and city attorney for violating privacy laws already on the books. Yet somehow Flock is deploying cameras everywhere.

My system would have been much more open on purpose. Like the private bittorrent tracker of security cams. You stream footage to the centralized cloud for aggregation, and get access to the full dataset in return. Perhaps with some "ratios" built in to incentivize sharing like you do for seeders vs. leechers on the BT network.

It's a fascinating technical problem - but the legal minefield is crazy even if you're doing it as a form of protest.

I also think the lessons would be lost on the general public. If anything, it would result in laws that made such things only legal for private licensed companies or some such - I'd simply be assisting in furthering regulatory capture.
by Gnobu | 2026-03-12 20:18:31+00:00
Interesting perspective on choosing the “right-sized” identity provider. The tradeoff between something powerful like Keycloak and something minimal like Pocket ID is something I’ve been thinking about as well.

While experimenting with Gnobu, I’ve been exploring whether identity itself could act as a more universal access layer across systems instead of just another authentication service sitting on top of apps.

Curious if others here think the future of identity infrastructure will move more toward passkeys and identity-based interactions rather than traditional password/OAuth flows.