MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by steve-atx-7600 | 2026-03-14 05:01:53+00:00
So, I’ve been using opus 4.6 1m since it was fist available to 20x max users daily. What I think has happened is that even in doing so, I have not actually exceeded the plan token limits and therefore haven’t been charged for “extra usage” (just double checked). So, unless there’s a billing mistake or delay, “any usage” != “extra usage” which is what I was always unclear about. I am careful to iterate with claude on plans in plan mode followed by clearing the context and executing. I think I am hovering around the higher end of the smaller window model where I would have otherwise seen auto-compaction run.

Another reason for less token usage is that 4.6 is much better at delegating agents (its own explorer agents or my custom agents) to avoid cluttering the window.
by anonzzzies | 2026-03-14 05:02:28+00:00
Only like 6-7 years ago, I spent working (so this is about commercial work, not play/free time) about 90% of the day on my macbook and 10% on my phone. Then I moved to 80% on my phone with xreal glasses, 10% without and 10% on my macbook. Now it's 90% on my phone without xreal and 10% with. For the same work. AI made that possible because my work (development) went from mostly typing and debugging to basically only reading code and mumbling prompts into my ear buds. I prefer this life a lot more. But this future is already there, also for iphone users although I don't really care: my driver is Android. I WOULD prefer Linux or an open android (my next phone will need Lineage or e/os or something as everything is moving the wrong direction).
Show HN: Chat Daddy – all your LLM chats in a super light terminal
by elijahlucian | 2026-03-14 05:02:47+00:00
Claude kept crashing, stupid electron apps. So I made a super light terminal program in rust. As a plus, it syncs across all your local machines too.

feel free to clone it and make it your own: https://github.com/ELI7VH/chat-daddy
by aeonfox | 2026-03-14 05:03:46+00:00
As pointed out in the OP comment, it's basically 'money for jam' by the point he releases the source code:

> It's an entirely different thing; he made a thing, sold it, and then when he couldn't sell more of it, gave it away. That's nice!

Carmack has extracted as much profit as he could care for from the source code. The releasing of the code is warm fuzzy feelings for zero cost, while keeping it closed source renders zero benefit to him.
by Lama9901 | 2026-03-14 05:03:48+00:00
let me be direct about where i see this going.

right now there's no standard way to verify a
computational result independently. you either
trust the number or you don't. that's true for
ML benchmarks, simulation outputs, pharma pipelines,
financial models — everything.

what this builds toward: any result, any domain,
packaged once, verifiable forever by anyone with
python and 5 minutes. no access to the original
environment. no trust required.

the physical anchor is the part that excites me most —
for materials and engineering, the chain connects to
actual physical reality. not a number i chose.
not a convention. physics.

that's a different category of proof than anything
that exists right now in this space.

if you're working in a domain where results need
to be audited, reproduced, or submitted to regulators —
this is the missing layer. try it:

git clone https://github.com/Lama999901/metagenesis-core-public
python demos/open_data_demo_01/run_demo.py

if it works — let's talk about your use case.
if it doesn't — tell me exactly where it breaks.

proof not trust. that's the whole thing.
by dhruv_ahuja | 2026-03-14 05:04:48+00:00
That library you built sounds great. The kind of things that I love to read the code of, if I'm using it in a project.
I was divided between adding instrument macro, but decided on manual instrumentation for the demonstration.

Regarding monitoring Kakfa execution times, absolutely agreed.
In my previous job, monitoring Celery had helped us understand consumer bottlenecks, because we couldn't see background job traces containing the celery consumer spans.
And when they did appear, they were hours late. So the entire trace took 8 hours instead of the expected couple minutes.

Happy to hear you've been enjoying OTel and Rust!
by chamomeal | 2026-03-14 05:05:11+00:00
Not totally related to your point BUT I’d like to tack on that lisps and generally repl-friendly languages are in an interesting spot in the LLM-enabled world.

The calva-backseat-driver vscode extension runs an MCP that lets LLMs manipulate and eval clojure expressions in a REPL. It provides a tighter feedback loop and lets LLMs do much more complicated stuff with much more confidence. They can test functions as they go, read docs, check query outputs, write and eval tests. It’s actually crazy what Claude opus can do with REPL access.

It might be insanity to let an LLM modify your emacs on the fly, but I’m sure people will have some crazy and interesting ideas in that vein!
by Miapi | 2026-03-14 05:06:52+00:00
MIAPI is the most accurate web-grounded AI answers API at the lowest price point. At 89% on the SimpleQA benchmark, it outperforms Perplexity Sonar Large (~87%) and GPT-4o mini (~82%) — while costing $2.50-$3.60/1K queries vs Perplexity's $5-14 and OpenAI's $10-15. One API call returns a sourced answer with citations, confidence score, and source URLs. No RAG pipeline needed. OpenAI-compatible, with streaming, news search, and a free tier. Built by a solo developer. Try the playground.
by orbital-decay | 2026-03-14 05:06:52+00:00
If it was, that line is not an indicator. Distillation is done on useful prompts, not on "Who are you?" - "I'm this model of that company".

Name training is always shallow, Claude itself would claim it's GPT-3, GPT-4, or Reddit (heh) when confused. It's just dataset contamination, because the web is full of slop. Never trust self-reported names.
by DANmode | 2026-03-14 05:08:14+00:00
Interested in making a broader version of this that supports your Netflix/Paramount/HBO titles?

This + that was what my dad asked me for last week.

…and he’d be willing to pay for the luxury!

Just wants to flip up and down between stuff he has a chance of wanting to be seeing.

I wouldn’t mind working on that, if someone else was into it, too!
by eknkc | 2026-03-14 05:10:32+00:00
I find that Opus misses a lot of details in the code base when I want it to design a feature or something. It jumps to a basic solution which is actually good but might affect something elsewhere.

GPT 5.4 on codex cli has been much more reliable for me lately. I used to have opus write and codex review, I now to the opposite (I actually have codex write and both review in parallel).

So on the latest models for my use case gpt > opus but these change all the time.

Edit: also the harness is shit. Claude code has been slow, weird and a resource hog. Refuses to read now standardized .agents dirs so I need symlink gymnastics. Hides as much info as it can… Codex cli is working much better lately.
by throwawaytea | 2026-03-14 05:11:32+00:00
Just the fact that even retail quality hardware is still improving at local LLM significantly is still a great sign.
If AI quality remained the same, and the cost for local hardware dropped to $1000, it would still be the greatest thing since the internet IMO.
So even if the worst happens and all progress stops, I'm still very happy with what we got.
by toraway | 2026-03-14 05:11:46+00:00
Haha, reminds me of an unbelievably aggravating exchange with Codex (GPT 5.4 / High) where it was unflinchingly gaslighting me about undesired behavior still occurring after a change it made that it was adamant simply could not be happening.

It started by insisting I was repeatedly making a typo and still would not budge even after I started copy/pasting the full terminal history of what I was entering and the unabridged output, and eventually pivoted to darkly insinuating I was tampering with my shell environment as if I was trying to mislead it or something.

Ultimately it turned out that it forgot it was supposed to be applying the fixes to the actual server instead of the local dev environment, and had earlier in the conversation switched from editing directly over SSH to pushing/pulling the local repo to the remote due to diffs getting mangled.
by dcre | 2026-03-14 05:11:54+00:00
Personally, even though performance up to 200k has improved a lot with 4.5 and 4.6, I still try to avoid getting up there — like I said in another comment, when I see context getting up to even 100k, I start making sure I have enough written to disk to type /new, pipe it the diff so far, and just say “keep going.” I feel like the dropoff starts around maybe 150k, but I could be completely wrong. I thought it was funny that the graph in the post starts at 256k, which convenient avoids showing the dropoff I'm talking about (if it's real).
by foobar1962 | 2026-03-14 05:12:30+00:00
I worked in a broadcast company archive (doing database work). Tapes were often reused. Fragments of previous recordings -- sometimes just a few frames, occasionally many minutes -- may remain at the beginning or end of the tape. AFAIK tapes were never completely erased before recording over top.

I was invloed in a digitisation project, the scanning companies were instructed to process the whole tape in case there were fragments of older programs at the end. A 30 minute tape may have 15 minutes of program, then a period of blank/black, then the remains of an older program for several minutes after that.
by gabrielee | 2026-03-14 05:13:51+00:00
This seems more or less my story... I had a 10-year relationship and lived together, and now I've been alone for almost two years... I understand very well how you can feel lost sometimes, or have negative thoughts like having wasted so much of your youth with the wrong person. In reality, those journeys together and this one you'll have to do alone for now are always useful for learning different things... Remote working in this sense doesn't help you have new opportunities. I think one of the few things that doesn't make me feel isolated at all is being able to talk to neighbors, and by randomly taking the dog down, you can have a minimum of conversation. I try to see the few friends I have left and try to focus on my work and also cultivate hobbies or try to learn new things. I don't actually think it's good for me to be single for long, and I think if it's hard for you too, the only advice I can give you is to find time to go out, to cultivate that time so you can meet new people, in the hope of even starting a friendship... I know it's not always easy, or that we want to do it, especially because investing your life for a long time in a relationship that then breaks up is truly like mourning, I think. Everyone has their own time, but you also have to give yourself the chance to find happiness again, with other people. I can tell you that after two years, I still have feelings for my ex-partner, but I know that life goes on, and we must give ourselves the chance to find other paths to happiness and serenity.
by labcomputer | 2026-03-14 05:14:02+00:00
> It's also why the SSD is slower than a MacBook Pro or MacBook Air;

It's actually not that much slower, at least if you compare machines with the same amount of storage. The M2 and M3 MacBook Air with 256GB comes in at 1700 MB/s[1], while the Neo with 256GB is... drumroll... 1700 MB/s[2].

Yes, Air and Pro machines with more storage are faster. I have not seen any benchmark of the Neo with 512GB, so maybe it lags behind the Air and Pro there. But I've not seen anyone publish a benchmark which actually demonstrates that.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/mac/comments/1gvovdt/the_ultimate_g...

[2] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macbook-neo-has-up-to-8...
by muyuu | 2026-03-14 05:14:08+00:00
I don't consider myself anti AI at all, but I find relicensing concrete solutions by supposed AI rewrites to be completely callous and an attack on human work. I don't think this can be just dismissed as being against using a particular technology.

From my PoV, pretending you can feed outputs, test suites or APIs from existing code and have AI "rewrite it" so you can call it your own is just theft. If instead you want to simply make it public domain, and this for some reason becomes acceptable, then it becomes the end of code as IP. The end of potentially any IP, which by the way I know plenty of people who would be happy about - "IP is theft" crowd - but which I think is unfair on those who had no real opportunity to build any equity on their work.

Precisely because I strongly believe in the potential of generative AI to eventually carry out entire projects with little technical guidance, I think it's important to establish the property of both what exists and what is achieved by humans with AI augmentation. This is a much more immediate concern than "runaway AI" or any form of singularity. As is today, generative AI has proven capable to replicate the results established projects with improvements (establishing how much is just parroted from the very replicated project and similar ones is academic in practice).
by edmundsauto | 2026-03-14 05:14:24+00:00
For use cases where the increased value ~= 20%, the cost of the distraction with that low of a margin is a hard sell. (Just based on your intro, that was my read)

No disputation of the core idea, I think you are on the right track, but the pitch isn't compelling. People looking for these kinds of AI solutions tend to favor simplicity and ~80% is fine, because the overall perceived productivity improvement is 5-10x, with such wide error bars that the approximate gain is just not worth maximizing for right now.

You might be a few months-years early, or target people who have maxxed out because they cannot retrieve from their second brain effectively. Most folks I've talked to are just trying to keep up, optimization/efficiency is not on their radar.
by devmor | 2026-03-14 05:14:51+00:00
I personally vastly prefer directness when I’m spoken to - but it’s important to recognize that most people do not have the emotional conditioning to handle that.

This is not something that will change within our lifetimes. Learn soft skills, learn how to be indirect. You don’t have to be as verbose with it as some of the examples in this article.

“Gassing them up”, “Letting them down gently”, “Little white lies”, etc - these are all examples of how benign emotional manipulation is essentially the crux of pleasant social interaction in most of the Western world.

It’s not my personal preference but it works because most people have unhandled insecurities.
by sjeiuhvdiidi | 2026-03-14 05:15:46+00:00
It's all nonsense. It's just better search, intelligence in not artificial. They are trying to convince everyone that they don't need to pay programmers. That's all, all it is. It'll work on the ignorant who'll take less money to make sure it works and fix the bugs, which is mostly what they were paying for anyway. They just want to devalue the work of the people they are reliant on. Nothing new.
by travisjungroth | 2026-03-14 05:16:02+00:00
> “It looks like” concisely signals that you have a good faith belief in your diagnosis but are not certain.

A lot of people never get past this level of sureness, so the signal is lost (or at least compressed). You can ask them for a number from a digital display and they’ll say it “looks like 54”.

One way to rectify the idea that these messages have signal (which I agree with) and what the article says is that it’s declaring bankruptcy on additional context. The extra text has so little value it’s worth removing as a rule.
by jhatemyjob | 2026-03-14 05:16:09+00:00
Similar experience. I use these AI tools on a daily basis. I have tons of examples like yours. In one recent instance I explicitly told it in the prompt to not use memcpy, and it used memcpy anyway, and generated a 30-line diff after thinking for 20 minutes. In that amount of time I created a 10-line diff that didn't use memcpy.

I think it's the big investors' extremely powerful incentives manifesting in the form of internet comments. The pace of improvement peaked at GPT-4. There is value in autocomplete-as-a-service, and the "harnesses" like Codex take it a lot farther. But the people who are blown away by these new releases either don't spend a lot of time writing code, or are being paid to be blown away. This is not a hockey stick curve. It's a log curve.

Bigger context windows are a welcome addition. And stuff like JSON inputs is nice too. But these things aren't gonna like, take your SWE job, if you're any good. It's just like, a nice substitute for the Google -> Stack Overflow -> Copy/Paste workflow.
by toast0 | 2026-03-14 05:16:16+00:00
You can get phones with headphone jacks still. You have to shop carefully, because it eliminates a lot of options. My current phone is a moto g stylus 5g 2023... to get a headphone jack, snapdragon cpu, and reasonable cost, I had to also accept a stylus that I only use to fidget.

Probably need to start shopping again soon cause updates stop in June.
by holden_nelson | 2026-03-14 05:17:29+00:00
I feel like the author is either embellishing the examples of frivolous communication they give or they work with some absolute headcases.

On my team we all trust each other to be fairly direct. On the flip side, “softening” a remark can signal to the recipient that you’re open minded to other solutions. “We should do X.” and “how would you feel about doing X?” accomplish the same thing but the second one fosters more psychologically safe discussion in my opinion.
by nahkoots | 2026-03-14 05:18:38+00:00
Then your bank is garbage and you should switch to a better one. My main bank (USAA) lets me use a one time code sent to my email as a second factor (or SMS, or a code from their app). If they started requiring me to use the app I would drop them immediately. Why is "but my banking app" treated like a valid objection every time user freedom comes up?
by toast0 | 2026-03-14 05:19:21+00:00
AirPods seem pretty nice; but if you use them primarily with Android and connect them to Find My, they will claim to be lost all the time. Seems like you have to choose between annoyance or not being able to find them if you drop them.

I personally prefer wired headphones... they're always charged and ready, even if I only use them with my phone once in a while.
by extr | 2026-03-14 05:19:34+00:00
You probably just don't have the hang of it yet. It's very good but it's not a mind reader and if you have something specific you want, it's best to just articulate that exactly as best you can ("I want a test harness for <specific_tool>, which you can find <here>"). You need to explain that you want tests that assert on observable outcomes and state, not internal structure, use real objects not mocks, property based testing for invariants, etc. It's a feedback loop between yourself and the agent that you must develop a bit before you start seeing "magic" results. A typical session for me looks like:

- I ask for something highly general and claude explores a bit and responds.

- We go back and forth a bit on precisely what I'm asking for. Maybe I correct it a few times and maybe it has a few ideas I didn't know about/think of.

- It writes some kind of plan to a markdown file. In a fresh session I tell a new instance to execute the plan.

- After it's done, I skim the broad strokes of the code and point out any code/architectural smells.

- I ask it to review it's own work and then critique that review, etc. We write tests.

Perhaps that sounds like a lot but typically this process takes around 30-45 minutes of intermittent focus and the result will be several thousand lines of pretty good, working code.
by brokencode | 2026-03-14 05:19:55+00:00
Have you ever wondered why the most educated and scholarly people in the country are left leaning?

I suppose you think they were indoctrinated. But finding and teaching the truth is essentially their job. Learning how to evaluate sources and approach research logically is like academia 101.

So doesn’t it seem strange that so few of them ever manage to see that they’re being indoctrinated?

Or do you think a person’s political beliefs are assigned at birth and lefties just like academia for some reason?
by trinsic2 | 2026-03-14 05:20:11+00:00
Yea sorry I was speaking from the U.S. perspective. But still Europe is still involved in certain things like age gating. That is a clear sign that there are some entrenched interests that want to erode privacy on that front. I hope that moving away from U.S. corps for communication services happens. We (U.S.) really need a kick in the pants. I feel like there is authoritarian agendas everywhere now though.
by tptacek | 2026-03-14 05:20:25+00:00
I've never had a pair of headphones with a cable connection that survived more than 2 years. Can't say that about the Airpods Max.

Like, I have opinions about high-end headphones based on how easy the cords are to replace. That shouldn't be the case.

I was a discrete headphone amp guy, just to situate myself in this market. I didn't expect to get good wireless headphones and think "I'm never going back", but that's precisely what happened.
by FreakyT | 2026-03-14 05:21:26+00:00
> From my PoV, pretending you can feed outputs, test suites or APIs from existing code and have AI "rewrite it" so you can call it your own is just theft.

If you replace “AI” with “a software engineering team”, does that change your argument? It seems like you’re essentially arguing that APIs should be copyrightable, which seems like a Bad Thing to me.
by ActorNightly | 2026-03-14 05:22:05+00:00
>So it seems to me like the problem isn't Bluetooth, it's shitty implementations of it.

Yep, but this is a problem that is present everywhere. For example, electric cars are supposed to be simpler, because its one moving part. In reality, you get essentially vertical integration of all the components like battery management, motor controllers, infotainment, gauge cluster and the software that connects all of that, and when bugs are present you can't even get into your car.
by steve-atx-7600 | 2026-03-14 05:22:34+00:00
Codex doesn't seem that far behind. I use the top model available for api key use and its gotten faster this month even on the max effort level (not like a cheetah - more like not so damn painful anymore). Plus, it also forks agents in parallel - for speed & to avoid polluting the main context. I.e. it will fork explorer agents while investigating (kind of amusing because they're named after famous scientists).
by orbital-decay | 2026-03-14 05:24:20+00:00
They most likely weren't, despite very dubious claims of Amodei and Altman and a certain twitter influencer running a pretty naive writing benchmark ("slop test") that is wrong in a very obvious manner. The only unambiguous cases of distillation were Gemini 2.0 experimentals being trained on Claude outputs, and GLM-4.7 being trained on Gemini 3.0 Pro. The rest are pretty different from each other.