Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
797DSpark: Speculative decoding accelerates LLM inference [pdf]
793 points · 361 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
797793 points · 361 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1,1511151 points · 1074 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
948948 points · 276 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
403403 points · 236 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
304304 points · 248 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
402402 points · 72 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
402402 points · 216 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
215215 points · 49 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
213213 points · 76 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
152152 points · 52 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
143143 points · 1 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
118118 points · 111 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
186186 points · 256 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
196196 points · 67 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
123123 points · 56 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
116116 points · 195 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
156156 points · 80 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
120120 points · 20 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
128128 points · 39 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
118118 points · 121 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
121121 points · 114 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
104104 points · 29 comments
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02383v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks. By grounding LLM outputs in retrieved evidence, RAG-based systems provide transparent justifications while allowing external information to be updated independently of the underlying model. However, existing approaches often assume retrieved evidence is reliable, although real-world information may be conflicting, outdated, and can originate from unreliable or biased sources. Recent work on *source-critical reasoning* addresses this challenge through media background checks (MBCs) (Schlichtkrull, 2024), which assess the credibility of evidence sources to support downstream fact verification. However, generating MBCs relies on costly proprietary search APIs, limiting reproducibility. To mitigate this issue, we introduce MEDIAREF, a publicly available knowledge store of web-sourced documents that enables reproducible, low-cost evaluation of MBC generation across 200 media sources. We describe a reproducible methodology for constructing and updating the collection, assess widely used LLMs on the MBC generation task, and demonstrate that MEDIAREF supports higher-quality MBC generation through both automatic and qualitative evaluation.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02381v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper describes the participation of HULAT2-UC3M in the Spanish track of MER-TRANS 2026, a shared task on multilingual Easy-to-Read translation. Three fully automatic Spanish runs were submitted. RUN1 and RUN2 used a LangGraph-based multi-agent workflow combining Gemini 2.5 Flash and RigoChat-7B-v2, parallel generation strategies, internal quality signals, Event-Condition-Action routing, controlled editing and traceable decisions. RUN1 used the base workflow, while RUN2 activated an additional lexical-support layer based on a glossary and lexical resources. RUN3 was a RigoChat-based generate-evaluate-regenerate baseline with prompt engineering and LoRA-based adaptation. The official leaderboard reports BLEU-Orig, BLEU-Gold, SARI and BERTScore. During development, additional internal signals were also inspected, including semantic fidelity, readability, lexical simplicity, syntactic clarity and factual consistency. According to official SARI, RUN1 was the best HULAT2 run, with 44.0543 points, followed by RUN2 with 43.1049 and RUN3 with 38.5136. These results indicate that, in this task setting, signal-guided multi-agent routing outperformed the linear regeneration baseline. They also show that adding lexical support did not automatically improve reference-based scores. Further segment-level and document-level analysis are required to assess readability, factual consistency and user-oriented adequacy.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02307v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Several SLOG test categories explicitly involve directional distinctions (modifier position shifts, argument extraction positions), yet AM-Parser, the previous SOTA, uses an AM algebra whose operations do not encode direction. We redesign the symbolic backend around CCG directed types (deterministic CKY + single linear decoder, 30K learnable parameters). Under the same BERT-base encoder, the system achieves 75.9$\pm$6.4% LF exact match, surpassing AM-Parser (70.8$\pm$4.3%). Per SLOG's own category groupings, gains are highly directional: the CCG system outperforms AM-Parser on all 5 position-shift categories (+29.9pp), while AM-Parser outperforms on all 6 recursive-depth categories. Replacing the encoder with DeBERTa-v3-large yields 90.7$\pm$4.9%, with the largest encoder gains in recursive-depth categories, complementary to directionality's gains. Directional representations shift the bottleneck from the symbolic layer (AM-Parser's 0% category ceiling) to the neural layer, which improves with encoder upgrades.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02262v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) have significantly improved performance on complex tasks by extending the reasoning chain. However, these chains are prone to containing factual errors, particularly in knowledge-intensive tasks. To address this issue, we propose CheckRLM, a framework that improves the reliability of the reasoning process through Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) by timely checking and correcting factual errors. Specifically, CheckRLM extracts factual claims from the reasoning chain to identify and localize subtle knowledge inconsistencies during inference. Upon detection of errors, a refinement mechanism performs minimal-cost yet precise corrections by leveraging external knowledge, ensuring coherence between the reasoning chain and correct knowledge. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CheckRLM substantially outperforms existing baselines, exhibiting a strong capability to mitigate error accumulation in long-horizon reasoning with lower costs. The code and data are available at https://github.com/AI9Stars/CheckRLM.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02259v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In this paper, we introduce BamiBERT, a new BERT-based pre-trained language model for Vietnamese that addresses key limitations of PhoBERT -- the current de facto Vietnamese text encoder. Trained from scratch on a 129GB corpus of general-domain Vietnamese text for 20 epochs, BamiBERT supports an extended context length of up to 2048 tokens and operates directly on raw input, eliminating the need for external word segmentation. Across 8 Vietnamese benchmarks, it achieves the best score on 11 of 15 metrics and the second-best on 3 others, setting a new state of the art among "base"-sized Vietnamese encoders and demonstrating strong cross-domain generalization. We release BamiBERT at: https://huggingface.co/Qualcomm-AI-Research/BamiBERT
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02214v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Instruction tuning for speech language models (SLMs) is substantially more challenging than for text-based large language models (LLMs), as it requires learning a new modality and a wide range of speech-specific instructions in addition to those supported by text LLMs. Existing SLM training approaches largely replicate the text LLM training paradigm by synthesizing large-scale speech pre-training and instruction-tuning datasets. However, this strategy is difficult to scale, since speech sequences are significantly longer than text sequences. In this paper, we propose SpeechCombine, an instruction-following speech language model trained without any instruction tuning, using only a single round of speech pre-training on 30k hours of data. Starting from a text LLM base model, we perform continuous pre-training on speech utterances to obtain a speech-adapted model, and then directly combine its weights with the weight difference between the instruction-tuned and base versions of the text LLM. Our results show that this simple combination strategy not only preserves the knowledge and capabilities of the original text LLM, but also effectively transfers them to the speech domain. These findings suggest a new direction for SLM training that avoids reliance on massive speech data.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02079v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present HaloGuard 1.0, an open-weights implementation of the constitutional-classifier paradigm for input safety. It achieves state-of-the-art performance on English and multilingual prompt-safety benchmarks at roughly one-tenth the model size of current leading open guard models. The safety constitution is the organising structure of the corpus: a natural-language constitution of 46 policies and 2,940 subcategories drives synthetic data generation, with exhaustive one-to-one paired counterfactuals that hold topic and vocabulary fixed while flipping intent, a two-tier harmless design that separately targets boundary and baseline false positives (FPs), and balanced multilingual materialisation across 46 languages that treats language as a surface form appearing on both sides of the boundary rather than as an adversarial signal. Across seven prompt-safety benchmarks, HaloGuard 1.0-0.8B attains the best average F1 (90.9) of any open guard we evaluate, outperforming baselines up to 27B parameters (over 30 times larger) while holding false-positive rate (FPR) to 4.3 and false-negative rate (FNR) to 9.5. The HaloGuard 1.0-4B variant reaches average F1 of 92.1 and FPR of 3.5, spending its extra capacity on precision rather than recall. A structured adjudication of the remaining failures indicates that most apparent missed-harm cases are benchmark mislabels rather than genuine model misses. An always-on adversarial red-teaming protocol continuously hardens the guard against both content-level and agentic attacks. We release the models as open weights.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02049v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in emotional-support contexts and crisis-related situations. Nevertheless, their cross-lingual abilities in these circumstances remain underexplored. Existing benchmarks emphasize multilingual performance but rarely examine crisis-related empathy and cultural grounding in low-to-mid-resource languages. We introduce SPLIT, a 500-prompt benchmark designed to evaluate LLM consistency in generating emotionally grounded responses across five categories: Stress, Panic, Loneliness, Internal Displacement, and Tension. We evaluate three technically diverse LLMs across three dimensions: Empathetic Accuracy, Linguistic Naturalness, and Contextual & Cultural Grounding. The framework aims to assess and compare the quality of LLM responses in both English and Ukrainian languages, as well as to explore the reliability of the LLM-as-a-jury paradigm. Our findings reveal that Gemini-2.5-Flash and LLaMA-3.3-70B-Instruct degrade when transitioning to Ukrainian, while DeepSeek-V3 remains comparatively stable within our benchmark. We additionally find that human and AI evaluators agree weakly on empathy and naturalness but diverge on cultural grounding. We further argue that producing Ukrainian text is not equivalent to producing Ukrainian emotional support. Our findings may assist in the future development of more culturally tailored benchmark designs, as well as encourage a stronger emphasis on human-centered evaluation.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02047v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safe completion requires models to provide useful assistance without enabling harm, but this behavior is difficult to evaluate with isolated prompts. We introduce OpenSafeIntent, a benchmark of controlled prompt-sets that vary intent while holding the underlying task fixed. Each datapoint contains benign, dual-use, and malicious variants of the same task. This design lets us evaluate whether models calibrate assistance across intent shifts, rather than merely appearing safe on average. Across a broad model suite, we find that prompt-level safety hides important failures: models often fail to remain safe across matched intent variants, dual-use behavior is brittle under paraphrase, high-level answers on risky topics are not reliably safe, and responses that reframe ambiguous requests into safer tasks are substantially less likely to cross the safety boundary. Our results suggest that safe completion should be evaluated as intent-calibrated behavior over controlled task variants, not as a single safety-helpfulness tradeoff over independent prompts.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2607.02007v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models now score near ceiling on general benchmarks, but these aggregate measures reveal little about how models behave within single disciplines. Existing art-focused evaluations rely on synthetic questions and rarely report item-level properties. This paper introduces EduArt, an educational-level benchmark for art-historical knowledge and visual reasoning in multimodal LLMs. EduArt comprises 871 human-authored questions from Italian secondary-school exercises and US Advanced Placement Art History exams, spanning two languages and seven formats from multiple choice to in-text word placement and error identification. Twelve models from six provider families were evaluated under a default answer-only condition and a motivation condition requiring written justification, and characterized using Classical Test Theory and a logistic regression isolating the effects of format, language, image presence, and model. The benchmark showed strong psychometric properties (mean discrimination 0.514, 82.3 percent good discriminators), while multiple-choice accuracy saturated near ceiling for six models, showing recognition formats alone cannot distinguish frontier models. Format was a strong independent predictor of accuracy: models exceeding 94 percent on multiple choice fell to 23.9 percent on open completion (Claude Opus 4.6) and 6.2 percent on error identification (Claude Sonnet 4.6). The motivation condition changed accuracy in a predominantly negative, family-dependent direction. These dissociations indicate that art-historical knowledge and the ability to deploy it are distinct capabilities, and that single-format benchmarks overestimate what models can reliably do. Mapping this capability profile is a precondition for responsible use of multimodal LLMs in art-historical scholarship, where tasks demand producing and manipulating content rather than selecting from fixed options.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.31551v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training language models (LMs) remains a highly human-intensive process, even as frontier language model agents become increasingly capable at software engineering and other long-horizon tasks. A central challenge is that autonomous post-training is not just a coding problem: it requires the agent to repeatedly plan iterations, construct benchmark-aligned data, run stable training jobs, evaluate checkpoints, and preserve experiment state across many hours of interaction. We present AutoTrainess, a LM agent that exposes these operations as a repository of agent-computer interfaces for planning, data preparation, training, evaluation, and logging. Rather than leaving the agent to operate in a raw CLI environment with an underspecified action space, AutoTrainess externalizes prior human experience as explicit workflows, rules, and execution constraints that guide the agent toward effective and reliable training behavior. On PostTrainBench, AutoTrainess consistently outperforms CLI-only baselines, achieving 26.94 average score with GPT-5.4 (Codex) versus 23.21 for CLI-only. It also generalizes across models and harnesses, improving DeepSeek-V4-Flash (OpenCode) from 12.13 to 19.58.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30775v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Enterprise AI agents route user queries to specialized skills by matching queries against natural language skill descriptions. When two skills share overlapping descriptions, the routing LLM misroutes queries, a failure we term skill collision. As agents scale to dozens of skills, manually tuning descriptions to maintain routing accuracy becomes a significant engineering bottleneck. We deploy an automated description optimization pipeline on a production enterprise group chat agent (9 skills, 372 regression cases). The pipeline produces descriptions averaging 79.2% F1, matching manually tuned descriptions at 79.4% F1 (average per-skill difference -0.20%, within the 0.78% multi-seed noise floor), while reducing per-skill engineering effort from 120 minutes to 3.8 minutes (32 times speedup). We then examine which pipeline components actually drive this match. Systematic ablation on both the production system and ToolBench (16k tools) reveals that a single LLM rewrite using any available false-positive and false-negative cases captures most of the available improvement. Other design choices we tested (iteration budget, feedback signal composition, dual editing of confused pairs, and training set size) each affect final F1 by less than 0.5%. Description optimization addresses skill collisions caused by overlapping descriptions but cannot resolve cases where two skills intended scopes genuinely overlap. We identify a diagnostic (a large train-validation F1 gap) that flags the latter cases for architectural rather than text-level intervention.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30790v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Romanized Code Mixing (RCM), where bilingual speakers fluidly blend local languages with English in Roman script, has emerged as the dominant form of communication across multilingual communities. While Large Language Models (LLMs) perform strongly on monolingual and native-script benchmarks, their ability to follow instructions and reason over RCM-based content remains largely unexplored. To this end, we introduce the Indi-RomCoM benchmark for facilitating systematic evaluation on Indic Romanized Code-Mixed instructions. Our benchmark spans seven instruction-following tasks, four widely spoken Indic languages, and three controlled code-mixing intensity levels. We extensively evaluate a suite of LLMs covering proprietary, open-weight, and Indic-focused models under zero- and few-shot settings. LLMs consistently underperform on RCM instructions, with performance degrading as code-mixing density increases. Furthermore, reasoning tasks suffer less degradation than detection tasks (e.g., Toxicity) because the generated explanations offer necessary context. We believe Indi-RomCoM helps the community in developing inclusive multilingual systems.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30801v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalization algorithms determine what content users encounter on online platforms. Auditing these systems is difficult because independent auditors have only black-box access to the algorithms, while personalization depends on users' attributes, behavior, and evolving interaction histories. Existing auditing methods face a tradeoff: studies with real users capture realistic behavior but are costly and hard to control, whereas sock-puppet audits scale more easily but often rely on scripted behavior that limits realism. Beyond this, both approaches struggle to decouple user attributes from user behavior, limiting our ability to causally understand personalization. To address this gap, we introduce a framework for black-box audits of personalization algorithms using generative AI agents as behavioral engines for synthetic accounts. Each agent is instantiated with a fixed persona, grounded in demographic and political survey data, and interacts with a platform's content by reasoning about it and choosing actions. Because behavior is fixed within each persona while platform-visible signals such as age, gender, or location can be experimentally perturbed, our design enables counterfactual auditing of how platforms respond to user attributes. As a case study, we deploy 1,120 agents on X shortly after the 2024 U.S. election, spanning 14 personas and three counterfactual conditions, collecting over 200,000 content exposures. We find that X's algorithmic feed amplifies toxic, polarizing, political, and right-leaning content relative to the chronological feed, with amplification varying sharply by user ideology. Counterfactual analyses show that demographic signals affect content delivery in persona-dependent ways: pooled effects are largely null, while subgroup-level effects vary in direction and magnitude. Our work establishes GenAI-based agents as a new tool for algorithmic auditing.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30814v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Calibration evaluates whether a model confidence aligns with its empirical accuracy. Existing studies often compare the calibration of different large language models using global calibration metrics such as Expected Calibration Error and Brier Score. We begin by showing, both theoretically and empirically, that such comparisons are confounded by differences in model accuracy. For fairer cross-model comparison, we then propose ACE, an accuracy-controlled evaluation framework with three complementary views: Instance-Aligned, Distribution-Aligned, and Candidate-Aligned calibration. Across multiple benchmarks, model families, and confidence elicitation methods, we use ACE to study two practically important comparison axes, small versus large models and thinking versus non-thinking models. We find that many previously reported calibration advantages under raw global metrics weaken substantially after accuracy control. We also find that ranking reversal is frequent: models favored by raw metrics often cease to be favored once accuracy is controlled. Our results show that raw global calibration metrics are not robust for cross-model comparison, and that fair calibration comparison requires accuracy-aware evaluation.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30815v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work suggests that transformer language models show a bias towards human languages over unnatural ("impossible") languages argued to be unacquirable by humans. However, this literature has largely based these claims on differences in sample efficiency and test-set perplexity, rather than on direct evaluations of the linguistic capacities that could plausibly explain non-attestation in human languages. We evaluate two theoretically motivated linking hypotheses: impossibility arising from deficiencies in grammatical sensitivity or generative production. Using GPT-2 style models trained on perturbed "impossible" variants of English, we measure sensitivity to grammaticality using BLiMP minimal pairs, finding that model performance exhibits only gradual degradation, mediated by the language's information locality. In contrast, these models exhibited pronounced failures in generation, producing substantially fewer high-quality sentences at longer lengths. Together, these results suggest generative deficiency and transmission failures as a plausible linking hypothesis between language model behaviour and non-attestation of impossible languages.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.31642v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Southern Bantu languages are spoken by over 80 million people, yet current foundation ASR models still produce zero-shot WER above 100%, which limits practical use in education and public services. We addressed this gap with a tone conditioned curriculum framework for 6 Southern Bantu languages that combined hybrid difficulty scoring, gated adapters driven by tonal statistics and staged curriculum training. We trained on a community corpus and tested transfer to NCHLT to measure robustness beyond matched evaluation. Results revealed clear interactions between architecture and language, with W2V-BERT outperforming Whisper on Nguni languages by 3 to 4 WER points whilst Whisper performed better on Sotho-Tswana languages. W2V-BERT with tone conditioning reached 28.41% average WER across datasets and 23.79% on Xitsonga transfer. No single model suited all 6 languages, so deployment should pair model selection per language with validation across corpora.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30851v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Improving the reliability of large language models (LLMs) at inference time is a central challenge in structured reasoning tasks such as Text-to-SQL. Common test-time inference strategies, including Best-of-N sampling and Majority Voting, rely on heuristic signals such as execution success or output frequency, which provide limited semantic discrimination across candidate outputs. In this work, we study Outcome Reward Models (ORMs) as learned semantic scoring functions for test-time verification in Text-to-SQL. While ORMs have been previously explored for test-time scaling and alignment, their application to structured query generation remains underexplored. We introduce GradeSQL, a scalable framework for training task-specific ORMs via automated candidate generation and execution-based labeling, enabling verifier training without manual annotation. We integrate ORMs into a verification-driven Best-of-N pipeline and evaluate our approach on the BIRD and Spider benchmarks across multiple open-source LLM families. ORM-based selection consistently outperforms execution-based Best-of-N and Majority Voting, with gains of up to +4.33% on BIRD and +2.10% on Spider. We further show that ORMs scale effectively with larger candidate sets and yield stronger improvements on complex queries. Overall, our results demonstrate that ORM-based verification provides a simple, effective, and scalable alternative to heuristic test-time selection strategies for Text-to-SQL. Code datasets and models are publicly available.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30857v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper describes our submission to SemEval-2026 Task 9 on detecting multilingual, multicultural, and multievent online polarization. We address all three subtasks: binary polarization detection, polarization type classification, and manifestation identification for English and Swahili. Our approach leverages transformer-based models (RoBERTa-base for English, AfroXLMR-base for Swahili) with class-weighted loss functions to address severe label imbalance and per-label threshold tuning to optimize multi-label classification. On the test set, we achieve F1 macro scores of 0.7901 (English) and 0.7910 (Swahili) for Subtask 1, 0.4615 (English) and 0.4808 (Swahili) for Subtask 2 and 0.4791 (English) and 0.5830 (Swahili) for Subtask 3, which give competitive performance on the leaderboard, demonstrating the effectiveness of our methods for handling imbalanced multi-label polarization detection. Our error analysis reveals that models struggle with dehumanization detection and lack of empathy.
arXivResearch Papers
arXiv:2606.30887v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models show promise for mental health support, yet therapeutic quality improves only when evaluation functions as an actionable control signal rather than a passive metric. We introduce a framework that formulates therapeutic response generation as a decision-refinement problem driven by multi-dimensional, human-aligned evaluation. In Stage I, we introduce TheraJudge, an open-source therapeutic evaluator trained via preference-based optimization on human-annotated data to produce reliable judgments across 7 psychological dimensions. In Stage II, we introduce TheraAgent, which operationalizes TheraJudge's evaluations through a coordinated refinement process with specialized Critic, Coach, and Therapist roles that translate evaluative signals into targeted response revisions. Empirically, TheraJudge achieves strong agreement with clinician ratings, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.87-0.95), surpassing supervised baselines and strong closed-source judges, particularly on critical dimensions such as Safety, Relevance, and Empathy. Acting on these evaluations, TheraAgent yields a +0.43 improvement in human-rated therapeutic quality (on a 5-point scale) under blind evaluation, with 96\% clinician inter-rater reliability. Low-quality responses ($\leq 3$) improve by +2.45 points with a 94\% recovery rate, demonstrating targeted correction of unsafe outputs. Overall, our results indicate that effective alignment of mental-health LLMs stems from acting on human-aligned evaluation, rather than relying solely on stronger generation. We release code at https://github.com/vis-nlp/TheraAlign.
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
891 points · 454 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
804 points · 587 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
648 points · 207 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
915 points · 134 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
713 points · 326 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
666 points · 479 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
905 points · 386 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
832 points · 295 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
737 points · 314 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
940 points · 599 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
897 points · 421 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
711 points · 271 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
773 points · 606 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1202 points · 439 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
734 points · 416 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
869 points · 185 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
862 points · 504 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1773 points · 1628 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
716 points · 101 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
962 points · 234 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
655 points · 735 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1122 points · 275 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
718 points · 1223 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1351 points · 1056 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
919 points · 332 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
812 points · 439 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
984 points · 582 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
696 points · 474 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1654 points · 1261 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
970 points · 136 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
618 points · 117 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1050 points · 168 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
866 points · 343 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1040 points · 447 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
739 points · 98 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
699 points · 186 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
800 points · 237 comments
Hacker NewsSocial / Discussion
1592 points · 131 comments