frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

minikeyvalue

https://github.com/commaai/minikeyvalue/tree/prod
2•tosh•1m ago•0 comments

Neomacs: GPU-accelerated Emacs with inline video, WebKit, and terminal via wgpu

https://github.com/eval-exec/neomacs
1•evalexec•6m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Moli P2P – An ephemeral, serverless image gallery (Rust and WebRTC)

https://moli-green.is/
2•ShinyaKoyano•10m ago•0 comments

How I grow my X presence?

https://www.reddit.com/r/GrowthHacking/s/UEc8pAl61b
1•m00dy•11m ago•0 comments

What's the cost of the most expensive Super Bowl ad slot?

https://ballparkguess.com/?id=5b98b1d3-5887-47b9-8a92-43be2ced674b
1•bkls•12m ago•0 comments

What if you just did a startup instead?

https://alexaraki.substack.com/p/what-if-you-just-did-a-startup
3•okaywriting•19m ago•0 comments

Hacking up your own shell completion (2020)

https://www.feltrac.co/environment/2020/01/18/build-your-own-shell-completion.html
2•todsacerdoti•22m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Gorse 0.5 – Open-source recommender system with visual workflow editor

https://github.com/gorse-io/gorse
1•zhenghaoz•22m ago•0 comments

GLM-OCR: Accurate × Fast × Comprehensive

https://github.com/zai-org/GLM-OCR
1•ms7892•23m ago•0 comments

Local Agent Bench: Test 11 small LLMs on tool-calling judgment, on CPU, no GPU

https://github.com/MikeVeerman/tool-calling-benchmark
1•MikeVeerman•24m ago•0 comments

Show HN: AboutMyProject – A public log for developer proof-of-work

https://aboutmyproject.com/
1•Raiplus•24m ago•0 comments

Expertise, AI and Work of Future [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsxWl9iT1XU
1•indiantinker•25m ago•0 comments

So Long to Cheap Books You Could Fit in Your Pocket

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/06/books/mass-market-paperback-books.html
3•pseudolus•25m ago•1 comments

PID Controller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional%E2%80%93integral%E2%80%93derivative_controller
1•tosh•29m ago•0 comments

SpaceX Rocket Generates 100GW of Power, or 20% of US Electricity

https://twitter.com/AlecStapp/status/2019932764515234159
2•bkls•29m ago•0 comments

Kubernetes MCP Server

https://github.com/yindia/rootcause
1•yindia•31m ago•0 comments

I Built a Movie Recommendation Agent to Solve Movie Nights with My Wife

https://rokn.io/posts/building-movie-recommendation-agent
4•roknovosel•31m ago•0 comments

What were the first animals? The fierce sponge–jelly battle that just won't end

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00238-z
2•beardyw•39m ago•0 comments

Sidestepping Evaluation Awareness and Anticipating Misalignment

https://alignment.openai.com/prod-evals/
1•taubek•39m ago•0 comments

OldMapsOnline

https://www.oldmapsonline.org/en
1•surprisetalk•41m ago•0 comments

What It's Like to Be a Worm

https://www.asimov.press/p/sentience
2•surprisetalk•42m ago•0 comments

Don't go to physics grad school and other cautionary tales

https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2025/12/19/dont-go-to-physics-grad-school-and-other-cautionary...
2•surprisetalk•42m ago•0 comments

Lawyer sets new standard for abuse of AI; judge tosses case

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/randomly-quoting-ray-bradbury-did-not-save-lawyer-fro...
5•pseudolus•42m ago•0 comments

AI anxiety batters software execs, costing them combined $62B: report

https://nypost.com/2026/02/04/business/ai-anxiety-batters-software-execs-costing-them-62b-report/
1•1vuio0pswjnm7•42m ago•0 comments

Bogus Pipeline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogus_pipeline
1•doener•44m ago•0 comments

Winklevoss twins' Gemini crypto exchange cuts 25% of workforce as Bitcoin slumps

https://nypost.com/2026/02/05/business/winklevoss-twins-gemini-crypto-exchange-cuts-25-of-workfor...
2•1vuio0pswjnm7•44m ago•0 comments

How AI Is Reshaping Human Reasoning and the Rise of Cognitive Surrender

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6097646
3•obscurette•44m ago•0 comments

Cycling in France

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/org/france-sheldon.html
2•jackhalford•46m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: What breaks in cross-border healthcare coordination?

1•abhay1633•46m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Simple – a bytecode VM and language stack I built with AI

https://github.com/JJLDonley/Simple
2•tangjiehao•49m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

My blue is your blue: different people's brains process colours in the same way

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02901-3
34•gnabgib•5mo ago

Comments

zahlman•5mo ago
> Now, a study that recorded patterns of brain activity in 15 participants suggests that colours are represented and processed in the same way in the brains of different people.

Interesting, but I'm not convinced that it actually settles (would settle, if the "suggestion" is confirmed) the philosophical question.

smokedetector1•5mo ago
Agreed. It begs the big question of - does identical brain activity produce identical qualia
nyc_data_geek1•5mo ago
I am certain those neural interface folks would be very happy to have an objective answer to this question.
coldtea•5mo ago
Perhaps it doesn't need to be settled anymore, since it's empirically verified.
cluckindan•5mo ago
Oh, really? How many color deficient or color blind people were included? :-)
coldtea•5mo ago
In what way is this relevant?
dragonmost•5mo ago
Is my blue your blue? Yes but only if we see the same blue.
coldtea•5mo ago
That's what the study addresses (even if inconclusively).

The question is how "but they didn't include color blind people" has any relevance to the subject.

For color blind people we already know that they don't see the same colors, so the answer for them is trivial. They can't even decode the same input, so nobody expects them to have the same color qualia as someone who does.

The purpose of the study is to examine the color of people with same typical vision capabilities. So regarding the objection, it's like some team doing a pitch perception study and someone asks why the deaf weren't included!

cluckindan•5mo ago
If you don’t have the cones for a specific frequency of light, how are the corresponding neurons going to light up in an fMRI?
coldtea•5mo ago
Yeah, I understand the limitation. But that is an irrelevant objection (is my point), since we already know that the color blind don't see the same colors - and know it at an objective level even (they can't discern them from totally different colors when asked for example).

The study is meant for people with typical vision. Might as well object that they didn't include the blind...

cluckindan•5mo ago
Blind from birth, sure. A bit off topic, but a person who has experienced colors normally and later become blind could still imagine seeing the colors, and that would likely produce the same activation pattern, at least in some parts of the brain.

Then there’s the fact that some people are unable to distinguish between blue and green colors, because their language uses the same word for both. They simply cannot perceive the colors being different. How would they compare?

neonrider•5mo ago
> Is the colour you see the same as what I see? It’s a question that has puzzled both philosophers and neuroscientists for decades, but has proved notoriously difficult to answer.

> Now, a study that recorded patterns of brain activity in 15 participants suggests that colours are represented and processed in the same way in the brains of different people.

They're not asking the same question though. Neuroscientists are asking whether the brain processes the physical substrate (photons) that precedes the experience in the same way. Philosophers are asking if the subjective experience that follows (the qualia) is identical. The former is the easy question. The latter is the impossible question.

LiquidSky•5mo ago
This is a classic case of “STEM types please learn the tiniest bit about the humanities before expounding on them”.
pmdulaney•5mo ago
Heaven forbid that one of the ignorati express an unguarded comment in the august halls of Hacker News.
skywhopper•5mo ago
In fact, I think the latter is an even easier question. People’s subjective experience of colors is obviously different across a large enough population. Colorblindness and synesthesia alone prove as much.
loki49152•5mo ago
The latter is an "impossible question" because it's a meaningless question.
_mu•5mo ago
It is not a meaningless question? It is a very profound question.
yeoyeo42•5mo ago
it's not meaningless, it has several direct implications about the nature of reality.

consider that subjective experience - to put it in the weakest and most general statement - clearly has a physical component. I'm being careful to not say that it is a physical phenomenon, is caused by physical phenomena, and so on, because while I think that's a reasonable assumption, we technically have no evidence for it.

but we do have plenty of evidence that, even if it is some supernaturally created magical process, subjective experience interacts with the physical world. for one, it clearly exchanges information with basic physical systems in your body - if it did not have some way to exchange information about what your eyes are seeing, you wouldn't be able to experience sight.

subjective experience is also easily altered with simple physical phenomena like chemical substances in your brain. so either these physics directly modify your subjective experience, or the subjective experience you have is mostly a physical product of your brain and the subjective experience part is only the end point of the process that receives all the information.

it's interesting because in physics, any exchange of information implies the existence of some directly measurable physical process. anything that is the product of such a process, you can generally speaking measure. all the things you can measure in an experiment are the things we eventually call the fundamental components of nature - like the charge, spin and so on of particles, as well as their place in time and space.

so subjective experience is either already some part we haven't observed of those fundamental components - which would in some way imply that everything is subjectively experiencing all the time - or it's an extra element we have not yet observed, but may be able to directly observe in experiment in the future.

andyjohnson0•5mo ago
Care to elaborate on why you think it's meaningless?
txrx0000•5mo ago
The article may be philosophically ignorant, but there's still value in the findings here. It answers the question in a limited sense: if materialism is ultimately true, then your blue is approximately my blue because the physical brain state is the consciousness.
kbelder•5mo ago
I wonder if scientists are more ignorant of philosophy than philosophers are of science, or the other way around?

Either way, both fields really seem to fumble around when they approach the other's domain.

jjk166•5mo ago
Imagine I built a machine that allowed you to see colors exactly how another person perceived them. You look through Bob's eyes and see that his blue is your blue.

Then I notice a loose screw and tighten it. Now you see Bob's blue as orange.

Was the machine properly functioning with the screw loose or tightened? Was it properly functioning in either configuration? How would you prove it?

akomtu•5mo ago
We see different blues, obviously. We've got millions of RGB receptors in our eyes, each receptor has a unique color response. We are not machines, after all, made of identical transistors.
efilife•5mo ago
https://archive.is/z6T7R
perrygeo•5mo ago
Looking at this from a different perspective, what is the evolutionary advantage of even "seeing" blue in the first place? Considering the vast range of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, consider that we can only "see" a small fraction of the EM spectrum we encounter (380-700 nanometer wavelength).

There is something special about this wavelength; it's not a coincidence! It would be very surprising if the evolution of ALL life honed in on this critical range of the EM spectrum but left human perceptions open to wide interpretation. IOW interpreting "blue" is probably hard wired trait into most evolved life because we share a sun and the earth's atmosphere.