Both accounts are used to advertise their website.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing#...
AI is present everywhere these days. I wouldn’t be surprised if a OpenClaw bot autonomously create a project on GitHub and then submit it to HN, without any human involement.
Root cause: CIA uses FIPS codes (CanonicalCode), which differ from ISO Alpha-2 for many countries. Templates and SQL queries prioritized CanonicalCode over ISOAlpha2, so URL codes like /archive/2025/AU matched the wrong country.
Australia (AU) -> American Samoa (AS = CIA FIPS for Australia) Singapore (SG) -> Senegal (SG = CIA FIPS for Senegal) Germany (DE) -> Gambia (GM = CIA FIPS for Germany)
This is a good example of the importance of strong toping patterns. The GDP of Germany just tanked, we didn’t lose a mars climate orbiter this time. :)
In case you are patching fields/bugs in database (like country codes for example), would it be possible for you to share that database as well with us so we can build on top?
This is actually an excellent dataset to test GraphRAG capabilities.
Also, a world simulation game, embodied with real data and real changes, can be built based off this data.
Thanks..
I will add them to the github :)
2018: total: 17,856,024 → parses as 17856024 (correct raw count) 2020: total: 18.17 million → parses as 18.17 (WRONG - drops "million") 2025: total: 39.3 million → parses as 39.3 (WRONG) So the chart jumps from ~18 million down to ~18, making it wrong. The fix is to handle "million/billion/trillion" after total.
Just deployed a new bug fix.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
Yes it is an ambitious project, yes it is useful in theory, but I’m interested in its viability as a legitimate tool for the sort of people who would rely on it for research purposes as opposed to the sort of people who find it a fascinating project but in practice it is little more than something to pique their curiosity—a toy.
At the same time maybe it doesn’t have to be either. It could just be a display of the initiative and ingenuity of the person behind it. But little else can be inferred about them I reckon.
One thing; you're supposed to write "Cannot confirm or deny my affiliation with the CIA"
Then when you actually are in Australia, if you click back to 2001 or earlier it changes to 'Ashmore and Cartier Islands'
Root cause: The CIA World Factbook, published by the Central Intelligence Agency, uses the U.S. Government's FIPS 10-4 country codes, which differ from the ISO 3166-1 Alpha-2 codes used by the rest of the world. Of the 281 entities in our database, 173 have different FIPS and ISO codes. Our lookups matched FIPS codes first, so when codes collided between the two systems, the wrong country was loaded. Fixed all 13 queries and 6 templates to always prefer ISO over FIPS.
Examples fixed:
Australia (ISO=AU) was loading American Samoa (FIPS=AQ, but Australia's FIPS=AS collides with American Samoa's ISO=AS) Singapore (ISO=SG) was loading Senegal (FIPS=SG) Germany (ISO=DE) was loading Gambia (FIPS=GM = Germany's FIPS, ISO=GM = Gambia) Bahamas (ISO=BS) was loading Burkina Faso (FIPS=BF = Bahamas' FIPS, ISO=BF = Burkina Faso)
I didnt discover this until I saw the recent post about its deactivation.
One small bug though: https://cia-factbook-archive.fly.dev/analysis/compare?a=IN&b...
.. The second dropdown switches to "Comoros" instead of "China" even after selection, though URL says CN for China.
edit: I mean, not the archive, that's golden! But a branch of usa propaganda being the stop gap provider on geographic data.
Root cause: The CIA World Factbook, published by the Central Intelligence Agency, uses the U.S. Government's FIPS 10-4 country codes, which differ from the ISO 3166-1 Alpha-2 codes used by the rest of the world. Of the 281 entities in our database, 173 have different FIPS and ISO codes. Our lookups matched FIPS codes first, so when codes collided between the two systems, the wrong country was loaded. Fixed all 13 queries and 6 templates to always prefer ISO over FIPS.
Examples fixed:
Australia (ISO=AU) was loading American Samoa (FIPS=AQ, but Australia's FIPS=AS collides with American Samoa's ISO=AS) Singapore (ISO=SG) was loading Senegal (FIPS=SG) Germany (ISO=DE) was loading Gambia (FIPS=GM = Germany's FIPS, ISO=GM = Gambia) Bahamas (ISO=BS) was loading Burkina Faso (FIPS=BF = Bahamas' FIPS, ISO=BF = Burkina Faso)
The pages are dense blocks of tiny gray serif text with default line height and almost no visual hierarchy. It feels like gray text on gray blobs. It is exhausting to scan and read.
In 2026, this should not be an issue. We have clear standards. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) exist for a reason. Basic accessibility best practices have been documented for years.
https://wave.webaim.org/report#/https://cia-factbook-archive...
The issues are not subtle. Small text, low contrast, and long unbroken paragraphs are not design preferences. They are barriers. They make the content harder to read for everyone, especially people with visual or cognitive challenges.
This is fixable. Increase the base font size. Improve contrast ratios. Add meaningful spacing. Use clear headings and structure. These are foundational usability principles.
Accessibility is not extra polish. It is baseline quality. Right now, the site is unnecessarily hard to read. That is a design problem, not a content problem.
That said, I had a different experience. I found the site readable and fairly easy to navigate once I understood the underlying structure of the data. The content is dense, but that seems inherent to the subject matter rather than purely a design issue. For me, it strikes a reasonable balance between overly sparse, scroll-heavy modern layouts and extremely compressed ones.
That doesn't mean improvements couldn't be made, especially around contrast, but I don't think the current design is unusable. It may simply work better for some reading styles than others.
In 2026, tools like WAVE, Lighthouse, and a real screen reader should be part of any website design process. They catch issues early. A stitch in time saves nine.
I know you may not be a designer. That’s fine. Starting with a solid, off-the-shelf CSS framework can get you much closer to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) compliance from day one. It sets a baseline so you’re not reinventing solved problems.
Building from scratch is absolutely valid. It’s cool, even. But right now it reads less like an intentional design choice and more like missing fundamentals.
I’m not trying to be a dick, the project has potential! A few design improvements would make it usable for a lot more people.
Cheers!
"A cache for datasets for the country profiles from the World Factbook in the original (1:1) format from the cia.gov website"
https://github.com/factbook/cache.factbook.json