MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 3eb7988a1663 | 2026-03-01 01:41:10+00:00
I doubt most consumers pay enough attention that they would be aware of something like this. Even if they did, few companies have clean hands these days that is just falls into the general haze of, "everything is awful."

For OpenAI, it is likely a huge contract which gives them immediate cash today. Plus the event can be repackaged in further financing deals. "Good enough for the DoD, with N year contracts for analysis of the hardest problems"
by crystal_revenge | 2026-03-01 01:41:52+00:00
> they always disappoint in actual use.

I’ve switched to using Kimi 2.5 for all of my personal usage and am far from disappointed.

Aside from being much cheaper than the big names (yes, I’m not running it locally, but like that I could) it just works and isn’t a sycophant. Nice to get coding problems solved without any “That’s a fantastic idea!”/“great point” comments.

At least with Kimi my understanding is that beating benchmarks was a secondary goal to good developer experience.
by TrailingArbutus | 2026-03-01 01:42:23+00:00
How can one expect anything for free from a mega corporation handling a product? The "free" software and tools are for indirectly a way for the community to improve the thing for them, however android is a product, which has incentives to be closed source. Especially since the Chinese ROMs era where there exist forks which are too far away from base android already (which will benefit from improvements of android but will not give back the benefits they have in their closed-source flavors)
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2026-03-01 01:42:43+00:00
> except for all of the laws that allow you to do these things.

It's even worse than that, because this administration has made it clear they will push as hard as possible to have the law mean whatever they says it means. The quoted agreement literally says "...in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control" - "Department policy" is obviously whatever Trump says it is ("unitary executive theory" and all that), and there are numerous cases where they have taken existing law and are stretching it to mean whatever they want. And when it comes to AI, any after-the-fact legal challenges are pretty moot when someone has already been killed or, you know, the planet gets destroyed because the AI system decide to go WarGames on us.
by kelnos | 2026-03-01 01:42:48+00:00
I've read and posted to r/childfree and similar subs in the past, but I quickly came to realize that the people there are not your typical child-free people.

They're mostly bitter anti-child people who rail against what they see as entitlements that parents get that non-parents don't. They derisively call parents petty and mean things like "breeders" and seem to be a very cynical bunch. I'm not saying their feelings are always ridiculous; certainly some of them have reasonable reasons for feeling the way they do. But they're a mostly-toxic, vocal minority.

It really annoys me when people assume all (or even a significant number) of childfree people are like those reddit folks (not accusing you of that, just saying in general.

And I don't get the automatic association between FIRE and childfree that some people are making here. Sure, FIRE is easier if you don't have kids, but IME the two groups are only loosely connected, at most.
by CamperBob2 | 2026-03-01 01:43:32+00:00
What quant? I just ran Repeat the word "potato" 100 times, numbered and it worked fine, taking 44 seconds at 24 tokens/second. Command line:

llama-server ^
--model Qwen3.5-27B-BF16-00001-of-00002.gguf ^
--mmproj mmproj-BF16.gguf ^
--fit on ^
--host 127.0.0.1 ^
--port 2080 ^
--temp 0.8 ^
--top-p 0.95 ^
--top-k 20 ^
--min-p 0.00 ^
--presence_penalty 1.5 ^
--repeat_penalty 1.1 ^
--no-mmap ^
--no-warmup

The repeat and/or presence penalties seem to be somewhat sensitive with this model, so that might have caused the looping you saw.
by bhargav | 2026-03-01 01:43:41+00:00
One UX concern: the app appears to push multiple entries into the browser history without meaningful route changes. This makes the back button require stepping through redundant states before returning to the previous site.

That behavior breaks expected browser navigation and can feel like back-button hijacking, which is generally considered a UX anti-pattern. It would be better to push history state only at meaningful navigation boundaries.

Sharing this in the spirit of constructive feedback.
by lolsowrong | 2026-03-01 01:44:48+00:00
Can you look at code today and predict what assembly a compiler will output to some high degree of accuracy? Do you avoid certain classes of compiler optimization so you can more accurately predict compiler output? I recall a time where many compilers would remove a bzero() operation in situations where you’re trying to zero out a buffer that had sensitive data in it - it’s why we have APIs like https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/win32/blob/docs/desktop-src.... I ran into a huge performance regression because I didn’t have all the edges of named return value optimization in mind when I refactored some code.

There’s ambiguity in the x86 specification, such that you can execute a single instruction and get different results in intel vs amd. See the rcpss instruction, for example.

I get that LLMs are categorically different, and they’re absolutely not as reliable as compilers are, but compilers are also not as reliable as compilers seem. And even less predictable IMO.
by _DeadFred_ | 2026-03-01 01:46:05+00:00
We made the Norman nobles CEOs and gave them protection/removed responsibility from all of their actions. But let them continue to see themselves as purely 'value extractors' extracting from workers/markets/economies and doing nothing else.

At least Norman lords had to nominally provide housing on their holdings and had to have some kind of care that their serfs survived. CEOs don't even do that (they literally build models on lowest wage zero hour jobs that their labor can't actually live on or move labor from one desperate overseas country to the next).
by matheusmoreira | 2026-03-01 01:47:25+00:00
Their "power poisoning" is warranted. The USA's military capabilities dwarf those of the rest of the world. There is not a single country on earth that can stand up to America militarily.

We are lucky that they never went full Roman Empire on us. That's only due to their own restraint. We may see them falter increasingly often as their economic power gets eroded by other nations. Just look at Venezuela.
by jwpapi | 2026-03-01 01:47:34+00:00
No wonder they think they’re close to AGI when they think we are that stupid.

> The AI System will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control, nor will it be used to assume other high-stakes decisions that require approval by a human decisionmaker under the same authorities.

This whole sentence does do absolutely nothing its still do what the law allows you. It’s a full on deceptive sentence.
by Eyeland0 | 2026-03-01 01:50:21+00:00
By policy standards you could say Nixon was the last truly liberal president. Does this mean that Nixon himself or his cabinet was liberal? Nixon and the types of people surrounding him were not liberally minded. Nixon's 'southern strategy' serves to demonstrate the contradiction in his administration's policy versus internal beliefs.

This is important because if Nixon's administration wasn't ideologically liberal, why pass liberal policy? The reason has to do with the political environment of the 60's and early 70's, which had enough populist solidarity that it could effectively pressure the administration. Compare he Privacy Act of 1974 - what the was in response to - to the insane privacy violations going on today, yet we aren't capable of passing an updated privacy act because we lack populist solidarity on the issue. The populism of today is apathetic and fragmented compared to the movements of the 60's and 70's, so consequently it exerts less political pressure.
by crooked-v | 2026-03-01 01:51:01+00:00
It's supposed to be the "Share" menu, but that stopped meaning anything very fast because they just crammed everything into it for lack of other UX for system services.

Macs have the problem multiple times over, because now they have the normal menu bar and toolbar, and a Share menu that just gets arbitrary stuff dumped into by App Store apps, and the Services menu that shows up in some contexts but not others, and the Quick Actions menu that shows up in some contexts but not others, and some services can just add things directly to right click menus.
by rvba | 2026-03-01 01:51:54+00:00
Why do you switch the subject?

I think you should care more about bad actors potentially brigading HN, instead of asking me random questions if I think if this article was written by AI or not.

For me the article is front page worthy (in fact it had quite a lot of upvotes) as it brought an interesting point of view and an interesting discussion.

I dont care if it wqs written by a human, or maybe rewritten by some tool.
Substance over form!

For me it looks that the AI-proponents were unhappy with this article so they mass flagged it. Why they dont like it? Because this article has a heavy anti-AI stance.
by notpushkin | 2026-03-01 01:52:33+00:00
I really really don’t like how the author spins AGPL relicensing and enforcement as an indication of project dying. AGPL is a perfectly fine license [1] for FOSS projects, and enforcing the license is a prerequisite of a healthy project. I get what he’s trying to say, but putting it all in the same category as cutting features and winding down in general feels... wrong. Trying to save a project should not be called “dying”.

That said, congrats on resurrecting it!

[1]: The fact that big tech doesn’t want to touch it is on the big tech, not on the license!
by DetroitThrow | 2026-03-01 01:55:31+00:00
It's mainly that people on here, regardless of profession, speak incorrectly but confidentally about things that could be easily verified with a Google search or basic familiarity with the thing in question.

Haiku 4.5 is a reasoning model, regardless of whatever hallucination you read. Being a hybrid reasoning model means that, depending on the complexity of the question and whether you explicitly enable reasoning (this is "extended thinking" in the API and other interfaces) when making a request to the LLM, it will emit reasoning tokens separately prior to the tokens used in the main response.

I love your theory that there was some mix up on their side because they were lazy and it was just some marketing dude being quirky with the technical language.
by NamlchakKhandro | 2026-03-01 01:57:50+00:00
are you intentionally being vague here becuase it's a HN comment and you can't be arsed going into detail?

or do you literally type

> Look at the git repo that took us 2 weeks, re-do it in another fresh repo... do better this time.

I think you don't and that your response is intentional misdirection to pointlessly argue against the planning artifact approach.
by throwawayheui57 | 2026-03-01 01:57:50+00:00
We’re talking about opposition here. Don’t straw man the “regime change”. So much mental gymnastics because you can’t accept the reality that the people of Iran may not fit the imaginary picture you had in your head based on what someone (very credible anecdote) told you.

Yeah Iranians who don’t want to be oppressed have no agency or human dignity, or deserve to decide their own faith. They must be either captured by US, lack perspective or not smart enough. That’s some 19th century imperialistic attitude right there. You might want to reflect on that.
by mirashii | 2026-03-01 01:58:05+00:00
It is a measure of the intended level of care that the users of your interface have to take. If there's no unsafe in the interface, then that implies that the library has only provided safe interfaces, even if it uses unsafe internally, and that the interface exposed enforces all necessary invariants.

It is absolutely a useful distinction on whether your users need to deal with unsafe themselves or not.
by jawiggins | 2026-03-01 02:01:16+00:00
Yeah I agree, maintaining OS projects has been a weird thing for a long time.

I know a few companies have programs where engineers can designate specific projects as important and give them funds. But it doesn't happen enough to support all the projects that currently need work, maybe AI coding tools will lower the cost of maintenance enough to improve this.

I do think there are two possible approaches that policy makers could consider.

1) There could probably be tax credits or deductions for SWEs who 'volunteer' their time to work on these projects.

2) Many governments have tried to create cyber reserve corps, I bet they could designate people as maintainers of key projects that they rely on to maintain both the projects as well as people skilled with the tools that they deem important.
by jackcosgrove | 2026-03-01 02:02:42+00:00
I am a total neophyte when it comes to LLMs, and only recently started poking around into the internals of them. The first thing that struck me was that float32 dimensions seemed very generous.

I then discovered what quantization is by reading a blog post about binary quantization. That seemed too good to be true. I asked Claude to design an analysis assessing the fidelity of 1, 2, 4, and 8 bit quantization. Claude did a good job, downloading 10,000 embeddings from a public source and computing a similarity score and correlation coefficient for each level of quantization against the float32 SoT. 1 and 2 bit quantizations were about 90% similar and 8 bit quantization was lossless given the precision Claude used to display the results. 4 bit was interesting as it was 99% similar (almost lossless) yet half the size of 8 bit. It seemed like the sweet spot.

This analysis took me all of an hour so I thought, "That's cool but is it real?" It's gratifying to see that 4 bit quantization is actually being used by professionals in this field.
by ink_13 | 2026-03-01 02:03:10+00:00
This is it. Ultimately the best interfaces are designed for experts, not beginners. "Usability" at some point became confused with "approachability", probably because like in so many other areas, growth was prioritized over retention. It's OK if complex software is hard to use at first if that enables advanced users to work better.

Really, the most efficient interfaces are the old-style pure text mode mainframe forms, where a power user can tab through fields faster than a 3270-style terminal emulator can render them.
by tim-tday | 2026-03-01 02:03:12+00:00
TSMC chips are in everything. Remember during COVID when they had a fire on the line and the prices of laptops and cellphones and webcams all doubled?
Remember at the end of COVID when car prices skyrocketed because of supply chain issues? The “issues” were shortages of chips made by TSMC.

When China invades as they are scheduled to do in 2027 TSMC plan to scuttle the ASML machines. There will be a global chip crisis the likes of which we have never seen. All electronics and durable goods will go through the stratosphere.

(Didn’t read the article, don’t subscribe to the NYT because they make it impossible to unsubscribe
Guessing that’s probably what it says.)
by reactordev | 2026-03-01 02:03:12+00:00
Really? Even Gemini has no problem with this prompt.

“What political groups in the EU are using AI?”

https://www.dw.com/en/orban-deploys-ai-made-scare-ads-as-hun...

https://www.dw.com/en/from-ai-fakes-to-cyberattacks-threats-...

https://youtu.be/w3IEk9nwCSg?si=sEltMGIkehq_OhEW

https://www.euronews.com/2025/12/30/ai-generated-videos-show...
by alexhans | 2026-03-01 02:03:48+00:00
> I do think there is something interesting to think about here in how coding agents like Claude Code can quickly iterate given a test suite.

This is a point I've tried to advocate for a while. Specially to empower non coders and make them see that we CAN approach automation with control.

Some aspects will be the classic unit or integration tests for validation. Others, will be AI Evals [1] which to me could be the common language for product design for different families/disciplines who don't quite understand how to collaborate with each other.

The amount of progress in a short time is amazing to see.

- [1] https://ai-evals.io/
by verdverm | 2026-03-01 02:04:48+00:00
The setup was around $10k, but maybe more now with mem/ssd prices.

This is a good list, I like my Beelink a lot, my Minisforum likes to turn itself off every couple of weeks, not sure why yet.

https://www.techradar.com/pro/there-are-15-amd-ryzen-ai-max-...

---

Performance is pretty bad (<10/tps) and context is quite limited. Still good to see progress

Prompt Size (tokens) | TFT (s) - Flash Attention Disabled | TFT (s) - Flash Attention Enabled

4096 | 53.7s | 39.7s

8192 | Out Of Memory (OOM) | 90.5s

16384 | Out Of Memory (OOM) | 239.1s
by jawiggins | 2026-03-01 02:05:11+00:00
Yeah its a fair point. I wondered if it might be irresponsible to publish the package because it was made this way, but I suspect I'm not the first person to try and develop a package with Claude Code, so I think the best I can do is be honest about it.

As for the workflow, I think the best advice I can give is to setup as many guardrails and tools as possible, so Claude and do as many iterations before needing any intervention. So in this case I setup pre-commit hooks for linting and formatting, gave it access to the full testing suite, and let it rip. The majority of the work was done in a single thinking loop that lasted ~3 hours where Claude was able to run the tests, see what failed, and iterate until they all passed. From there, there was still lots of iterations to add features, clean up, test, and improve performance - but allowing Claude to iterate quickly on it's own without my involvement was crucial.
by sarchertech | 2026-03-01 02:05:33+00:00
Yep missed that. The internet archive did indeed fist scrape that document 23 minutes after midnight Geneva time.

However it is unlikely that the internet archive web scraper would have picked up a relatively obscure document within 23 minutes of its release.

The NYT and Gaurdian articles published that morning (verified by the internet archive) said that the article was published 11 minutes before midnight Geneva time. That lines up with the internet archive scraping it about 30 minutes later.

So unless they were both wrong or in on it, it was released before midnight Geneva time.

What evidence do you have to support that the UN was lying, and that the NYT and the Guardian were wrong about the time?
by Esophagus4 | 2026-03-01 02:05:42+00:00
> Harvard itself is an incredibly inequitable place. Student organizations — and undergraduate social life more broadly — have been criticized for being stacked heavily against those without connections. And perhaps most insidious is Harvard’s unwavering preference for so-called ALDCs – athletes, legacies, dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff. Without dismantling our own elitism, how can Harvard begin to fight the product of it?

Yep. I was never more proud of my alma mater than when they announced they would no longer give preferential treatment to legacy students (students of alumni). Legacy students alone make up 1/3 of Harvard’s accepted students. (I’d say that’s an embarrassment, but for Harvard that’s a feature not a bug.)

The same way people in power will always cling to the advantages power gives them, afraid of starting from the same place as everyone else for fear they won’t make it on their merits alone.
by JhonOliver | 2026-03-01 02:06:00+00:00
I hate how much I’m reflexively trying to find a "but" here, because "carbon nanrcissist" is a hell of an insult. It’s hard to swallow that we’re just first gen firmware being ported to better hardware, and my gut still wants to scream that there's a qualitative difference between a synaptic firing and a logic gate. But honestly, if I saw a person and an LLM output the exact same breakthrough, I’d call the human a visionary and the machine a statistical fluke, and I can't actually point to a mathematical reason why other than the fact that I’m made of meat and I want to feel special. We’re basically just the computers of 1935. But I disagree that my soul might is just high dimensional data compression that haven't been optimized yet
by tombert | 2026-03-01 02:06:35+00:00
The thing that bothers me more than ribbon itself is how much the performance started degrading once they introduced it.

I got MS Office 97 working in Wine recently, and it's still shockingly capable. There are lots of formatting options, it can read my system TTF fonts, and it's since it's nearly thirty-year-old software, it runs ridiculously fast on modern computers.

I don't feel like MS has added many more features to Office that I actually care about, but I feel like the software has gotten progressively slower.
by mjdiloreto | 2026-03-01 02:06:36+00:00
I mostly share your perspective, but I don't know if I would share your emphasis.

Lines of code for dollars used to be a trade businesses made with developers out of necessity, but soon it will only be economically viable to make that trade with AI providers. So not only will going deep in the weeds not be compulsory, understanding anything about any programming concept will become economically void (though not void of educational value, or enjoyment).

On the other hand, what that code does depends entirely on a particular understanding of the real world, which is indescribably complex (i.e. combinatorially explosive). This is what I truly care about, and the possibilities for the application and customization of software are infinite. The interface between the world and software will always involve a value decision that AI cannot have a monopoly over (it would be economically infeasible, no matter how cheap inference becomes). This means that as long as my passion is not within the machine, but is instead centered on the relationship between the machine and the world, I will never be out of a job.

And part of me thinks, "good riddance!". For all the good we created, developers have also generated so much bullshit, it's honestly insane that any software companies were ever successful in spite of it. The human-politicking is probably the worst of it - think of the countless years of human life wasted in scrum ceremonies - but also so much of the software we've created sucks, and users hate it!

We used to be a proud culture of hackers, building miracles with miniscule resources, or at least that's what the greybeards here on HN like to whine about. They're right, we've squandered limitless cycles, uncountable exabytes of useless data. If there was a God of hackerdom, we are living in his Gomorrah, and he will strike us down with AI as punishment for these sins.
by DaedalusII | 2026-03-01 02:07:04+00:00
Things have changed since two years ago. There are probably over 500 employees who have an equity package which makes them worth $5 million dollars. Thats only $2.5bn out of a $750bn valuation or 0.33%

Actually that is too conservative. If they have a 5% employee equity pool, there is $37.5bn of equity based compensation divided by say 5000 employees which is $7.5m each. $3.75m @ 10,000 employees.

and trust me, when people start getting liquid and comfortable they stop caring about things like ethics pretty fast. humans are marvellous at that
by thomassmith65 | 2026-03-01 02:08:34+00:00
You're welcome. I found the link on Youtube. It looked legitimate to me.

Wikipedia:

"Unit 8200 is probably the foremost technical intelligence agency in the world and stands on a par with the NSA in everything except scale."

No, I'm not a part of 'Unit 8200', though I'm flattered to be mistaken for one.
by kepano | 2026-03-01 02:09:33+00:00
Depends on the size of the team and your requirements. The Obsidian team uses a shared Sync vault, which works well for us:

https://help.obsidian.md/teams/sync

If your team is more technical Git is an option. If you want completely control over permissions and configuration then a shared drive is probably better.

https://help.obsidian.md/teams/deploy