MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
How are you handling identities for AI agents?
by andylow | 2025-11-01 14:02:48+00:00
I've been thinking about how we manage identities for AI agents and I’m curious how others are approaching it.

From what I’ve seen, many treat agents like microservices, giving them app-style identities, but that feels off to me. That model comes from Web2 application identity systems, and I’m not sure it fits the new context we’re entering.

As we move into the AI age, I suspect we’ll need new forms of identity and authorization specifically designed for agents, especially since existing frameworks like OIDC have some clear limitations.

Would love to hear your thoughts or see what others are experimenting with.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-01 14:05:03+00:00
This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE...

> URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything

This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the project has many other great ideas too, like the modular kernel where implementations can be switched out. Gonna be interesting to see where it goes! Good luck author/team :)

Edit: This part scares me a bit though: "Graphics Stack: compositing in-kernel", but I'm not sure if it scares me because I don't understand those parts deeply enough. Isn't this potentially a huge hole security wise? Maybe the capability-based security model prevents it from being a big issue, again I'm not sure because I don't think I understand it deeply or as a whole enough.
by lolive | 2025-11-01 14:06:26+00:00
JSON and XML are basically syntactic variant of the same data storage strategy [:tree of attributes and children]. [1]

Where XSLT shines, and JavaScript currently has no equivalent afaik, is in transforming a tree into another one, rule-based.

The lack of support of XSLT 2.0 in browsers is a major issue, as it includes many solutions to problems absolutely not covered by XSLT 1.0.

[1]: xml2dict/dict2xml is an implementation of exactly this duality.
by vessenes | 2025-11-01 14:06:53+00:00
No it’s almost certainly true. If you’d like some estimates you should read up on scott Alexander’s pre and post substack revenues. For writers with large followings substack is like a 10-100x monetization boost over other options.

Source: my publishing company published three books of Scotts essays during COVID, hit number one two and four on the essay category on Amazon, and generated less than one fiftieth of Scott’s first year of substack revenues based on his public comments.
by palata | 2025-11-01 14:06:53+00:00
Sounds like there is a lot of survivorship bias to me. "We were profitable because we did it right, and we don't understand why one would decide not to be profitable".

I think it's important to note that if you're building your business and you are profitable, then you're lucky: you're doing something that you find cool, and it's bringing money.

> What holds you back is rarely team size – it's the clarity of your focus, skill and ability to execute.

This, to me, confirms what I said: nowhere they mention anything like "luck". "Being in the right place at the right time", etc.

The reason startups grow without being profitable is because they "fake it until they make it". They pretend that it's all normal and it will work in order to convince VCs who have no way to know if it's true or not, and don't care (it's just another bet).

Of course a founder won't say "we're not profitable because our company is failing". They will truly believe that they're not profitable because they are on the way to get profitable, through growth. But the numbers are here: most startups fail.

It's always tempting to believe that you succeeded because you are strictly better than the others. And that's the whole point of founding a startup: if it succeeds, the founders want to be rich. The first employees will be "compensated" for their lower salary and extra hours, they won't get rich. The founders have to believe that it's all their doing and that they deserve to get rich and not the other employees, that's an obvious cognitive bias. Otherwise how would they feel about themselves? I don't think it could work.
by antonymoose | 2025-11-01 14:07:15+00:00
I would consider the few unicorn examples provided to be outliers.

For most of the 2010’s ZIRP created a startup gold rush with everyone trying to leverage the same “burn money, get users” strategy you’ve outlined.

Excepting the current AI bubble, you cannot play that strategy today. Investors started demanding real results in the post COVID inflation years and continue to do so today, or else don’t invest at all in high-risk ventures with no tangible results.
by pshirshov | 2025-11-01 14:07:20+00:00
I've opened a business account there back in 2018 and used it for a couple of years up to the moment when they asked me to "update details" or so in the middle of a routine transfer. I've sent them what they wanted and they made the transfer with a day of delay, but the experience was too humiliating and alerting.

Revolut might be a bit better but again, you don't owe your money, they may ask for random stuff (a selfie, a scan of your passport, a PoA) randomly at any time, they may arbitrarily block you from accessing your money when your passport expired and you haven't received a new one yet, or when you landed in a new country and their heuristic thinks it's not you, so you cant't even buy some food or get a taxi. Even if you pay their Ultra subscription (which I do) it's hard to speak with someone who may make decisions and I've experienced some comical situations like "we can't figure out which one of your cards was used for this attempted transaction, we can't find it in our database, we will reissue all your cards"
by lapcat | 2025-11-01 14:08:05+00:00
> the far left would say that both parties are the same

This is a hyperbole. The two parties are not exactly the same, though they are the same on a number of issues, such as support for the military-industrial complex and Israel. Here's what Noam Chomsky said: "In the US, there is basically one party - the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies."

The way I would put it is that there are sane billionaires and insane billionaires, though they both have the economic interests of the billionaire class at heart. The insane billionaires want to disrupt everything and eat the world, while the sane billionaires just want to keep the quiet status quo of their dominance, and so they play "nice".

> maybe the Democrats lost because they turned away from Silicon Valley and Musk pumped hundreds of millions into Trump's campaign

I doubt that Musk's money changed the election outcome. Indeed, Musk's financial meddling in the subsequent Wisconsin Supreme Court election turned a lot of people against his candidate, who lost. The purpose of Musk's contributions was to buy influence with Trump, which worked, at least for a while.
by Anamon | 2025-11-01 14:09:05+00:00
I'm not sure I agree. This is coding for me, the engineering happened long before you knew you'd have to put a button-like thing there.

To me, it's a great example how LLMs are just as shit at coding as everything else. It's just that the majority of people using them to code don't look at how terrible it is as long as it runs.
by JohnFen | 2025-11-01 14:09:18+00:00
No, for three reasons. The first is that I don't think that any automated system could really "understand" my needs, desires, and acceptable compromises to be able to do that well. Even a human would struggle to do that well. The second is that I would be too nervous about genAI going off the rails and doing something crazy. The third is that I don't want the person I'm negotiating with to feel that they're of so little value to me that I'm willing to pawn them off on a machine.
by aeon_ai | 2025-11-01 14:10:13+00:00
I'll note I used no pejorative terms to describe you in order to make my points. I don't need to cast you as a villain or "unwise" individual to argue against the statements themselves.

--

Your framing of AI presumes that my proposal is prompt in >> art out. False frame.

You also state "near universal" disdain of AI from people with "actual" talent. A bold claim to make with little data, and at least for me, clear examples of being false.

I know award-winning directors, iconic creatives, and career/professional artists who are all excited by the technology, exploring ways to use it, and learning how to composite it into their work.

Perhaps you would propose that they have no talent and are not "true" artists! This is why I ask for the definition of art. It's not a "poor refuge" for an honest discussion, it's something that is the fundamental term upon which your argument is hinged. You can't gatekeep "art" without defining what the gate is.

The OP talks about Suno Studio - A DAW experience with recording, editing, generative tools, and generative restyling. This is, objectively, a different level of tool than a "prompt to music" generation experience.

Something that is composited through multiple decisions made by a human, toward some end that only they see, through an iterative process...

Well, I'd say that's where the artistry is.
by mc32 | 2025-11-01 14:11:08+00:00
It's hard to take a book seriously when it leverages clickbait inspired titling to entice readers --I wish authors of serious topics would avoid this. It may have valid points, but when you are serious, you really should avoid the temptation lest you taint your opinion with crassness. It may preach to the choir; ideally you'd want to reach a wider audience.
by ModernMech | 2025-11-01 14:11:32+00:00
SV was always authoritarian tho. Look at the structure of the companies, they are all run top down with a CEO and a strict corporate hierarchy (the notable exception being Steam I guess). That's how authoritarians prefer things.

Contrast with the way academic departments are run, where there is a Chair and a Dean, but faculty rotate and serve in those roles for limited terms.
by jrmg | 2025-11-01 14:11:39+00:00
Here’s Debian’s “Supported Architectures”: https://wiki.debian.org/SupportedArchitectures. These platforms are all in ‘unofficial’ status (like, they work, but are not officially supported by the core Debian project).

Who is actually _running_ Debian Trixie on these platforms now?

It is counter-intuitive to me that these platforms are still unofficially supported, but 32-bit x86 [edit: and all MIPS architectures!] are not!

I am emotionally sad to see them fall by the wayside (and weirdly motivated to dig out a 68k Amiga or ‘very old Macintosh’ and try running Trixie…) but, even from a community standpoint, I find it hard to understand where and how these ports are actually used.
by forgetfulness | 2025-11-01 14:12:32+00:00
Aren’t m68k computers only a few models from the 1990s and 1980s, and some more recent hobby projects? That’s squarely in the retro computing enthusiasts category.

I’m not in the Debian world, but those do seem to me like the types of systems that could use their own specialized distros rather than being a burden to the mass market ones. It’s not as if you could run a stock configuration of any desktop environment on them anyway.
by TZubiri | 2025-11-01 14:12:34+00:00
So if you are preparing a 50Kb webpage, and you do 10 steps of processing, you would have a 500KB memory footprint that might be held during the life of the connection? All the while the footprint and thus capacity of your server could have been 100Kb? Nice craftmanship dude!

We are not even talking about in-place algorithms, just 10 functions that process an html into a new array, maybe:

html = load_template(route) html = formatstring(html,variables) html= localize_paths(html) ...

And you would rather have it:

template = load_template(route) formatted_html = formatstring(template,variables) html_with_localized_paths = localize_paths(html)

And you would rather have the latter? For what gain? I think you wouldn't.

"Only a sith deals in absolutes", you have to recognize that both are valid under different contexts. And I'm merely explaining why inmutable is the default in python, 1: python doesn't do programmer self restrictions like const and private; 2: memory is automatic, so there's no explicit allocation and freeing like in C++, so using a new variable for each thing isn't a zero overhead abstraction.

Even for smaller cases, (not 50kb arrays), it's still the proper thing to do, although you have freedom to choose, it's easier to just follow one style guide and protocol about how to do things, if it's pythonic to reuse the variable name, just reuse the variable name. Don't fall for the meme of coming from another language and writing C++ in python or Java in python, you are not a cute visionary that is going to import greatness into the new language, it's much better to actually learn the language rather than be stubborn.

There's places where you can be super explicit and name things, if it's just an integer then it's a very cheap comment that's paid in runtime memory instead of in LOC. But this is why the default in python is not const, because variable name reuse is a core python tactic, and you are not our saviour if you don't get that, you are just super green into the language.
by subscribed | 2025-11-01 14:12:59+00:00
Close.

To me it's a biggest missing feature to date (and the team brought that up with European Commission already, as there are no technical or security reasons for that). Worth noting it will work on the old, unpatched, rooted, wildly unsafe phones with the right magisk configuration. But not on the safest os.

Anyway, it keeps the passes okay for me, and for the payments I use Garmin Pay.
by cmm11 | 2025-11-01 14:13:09+00:00
Just annoys me that he calls features "crap" just because he likely doesn't use them personally and ends that post with a random sentence claiming such a version "increases the risk of drive-by attacks" with zero evidence. The developer explains the features aren't plugins and aren't even enabled by default. Arrogance from maintainers like this from within Debian is what will hurt it far more than any external entity.
by edot | 2025-11-01 14:13:24+00:00
I doubt this makes you feel better but they didn't buy guided missile warheads. That category ("guided missile warheads and explosive components") contains, among other things, "distraction devices". So things like flashbangs, smoke grenades, etc.

The purchase order PDF is linked here: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-guided-missile-warhead...
by kibwen | 2025-11-01 14:13:37+00:00
It feels to me like there's plenty of design space to explore. Sure, it's possible to view "selection" as a basic building block, but even that is insufficiently precise IMO. There's a reason that Javascript provides all of Promise.any and Promise.all and Promise.allSettled and Promise.race. Selection isn't just a single building block, it's an entire family of building blocks with distinct semantics.
by lchoquel | 2025-11-01 14:13:51+00:00
Hi atombender, you have a point. The current runtime supports asynchronous operations with the limits of python asyncio and your CPU/RAM. But we designed our orchestration layer so that it could integrate easily with durable workflow platforms such as temporal.io which also bring the ability to spread the load over many workers, which will give you horizontal scaling.

Our integration with temporal.io has been working as a prototype in our lab for many months but we had to focus on the core features to nail down our language and make it as easy to use as possible. Now in the coming weeks we'll be able to focus more on the temporal-powered version, adding the missing features to make it practical, which will also make it usable with other workflow platforms.
by hagbard_c | 2025-11-01 14:13:55+00:00
The important difference here is that nearly all of those countries both border those where the conflicts are and are ethnically and culturally similar to the conflicted regions. This is not true for western Europe (which is where most of these migrants want to go) which neither borders any of the conflicted regions nor is (or, locally, was) culturally similar to them. The exception to this in the list you quoted is Poland which does have a border with a country at war - Ukraine.

If war breaks out in Finland there will be a swell of Finnish refugees entering Sweden and Norway but I do not foresee them flying halfway across the globe to request asylum in Afghanistan even if that country were to be flourishing then. Why, then, is the opposite seen as normal?
by georgefrowny | 2025-11-01 14:14:20+00:00
Libertarianism is "freedom" only for the top slice and always has been.

Depending on how principled you want to be about what happens to the underclass, you have a choice. Either exert control privately, by removing state protections for people and using corporate strength. Or you can co-opt the existing government to act on your behalf. You can mix and match, where you weaken parts of government which protects and strengthen that which controls.

Whether the jackboots have a national emblem or a company logo on them doesn't make a lot of difference to the necks.
by throwpoaster | 2025-11-01 14:14:57+00:00
Thiel pointed out that (paraphrasing): “libertarianism is the safe way to be right-wing in Tech, because it’s not politically credible. You can be safely ignored.”

Left authoritarians have more in common with Right authoritarians than with the broader Left. You saw this in Germany and Russia when their respective authoritarianisms collapsed and the same people simply changed teams.

The argument implicit in the headline is therefore perhaps better expressed as two thoughts: why did the tech right get tired of being ignored, and how did they go about flipping the authoritarian structures that already existed?
by refulgentis | 2025-11-01 14:15:30+00:00
Usually I'd cosign, but I get it, after a similiar issue I had a couple days ago with a Rust article that was insanely frustrating to deal with.

It's a brain scramble because you can't just read in toto.

Well, you can literally, but, you don't feel like you grok it.

And when you take a second pass you gotta slow down and stop and parse "what's r here? is it relevant? oh rows?"

It's one of those things that's hard to describe because it doesn't sound like much if you got it. And this example is trivial, especially if you're not open to the idea its a problem (r/c = rows/columns) But it's nigh-impenetrable in other scenarios.

You feel like you're barely understanding something that you actually might grok completely.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-11-01 14:15:51+00:00
The really bad part is that the middle/upper-middle class is the real cash cow, the top ~75%. These people are incredibly numerous and have good to incredibly good disposable income.

But since they are such a large cohort, you cannot form a policy around increasing the burden on them. And after all, the tech family pulling $450k/yr are still a "working grunts".

So it's all eye's on the top 1%, but a true wealth gap fix would actually come mostly from harvesting the wealth of the top 20-30%.
by mc32 | 2025-11-01 14:16:05+00:00
Turks can't force language usage -least of all English which does not have a governing body. It's like demanding they obey native language spellings for any number of countries. Go ahead, demand that Turkey spell China using hanzi. It's ludicrous. It's like Spain asking English speakers to spelll Spain "Espanna" (but using a tilde on one of the ens and removing the second en.)
by hollerith | 2025-11-01 14:17:05+00:00
I do not catch your meaning.

Experts sometimes spell it "off-premise":

https://www.nabca.org/covid-19-dashboards-premise-retailers has "While there are several different retail channels permitted to sell alcoholic beverages for offsite (off-premise) consumption".

https://www.parkstreet.com/states/california/ has "Retailers [c]an sell product directly to consumers for on or off-premise consumption".

"Off-premises" is also used.
by JohnFen | 2025-11-01 14:17:18+00:00
> how do you currently deal with your smartphone, which often has wakeword detection enabled (like “Hey Google”)?

I keep all of that stuff disabled.

> Or when you're visiting friends who have an Alexa device at home. Would that already be a problem for you?

Yes, it is, although I only have one friend who has such a device. I tend not to spend much time at their place. If someone I knew had a wearable that was analyzing/recording everything, and they refused to remove it, I'd minimize the amount of time I'd spend with them.

> I’m genuinely curious where you draw the line.

"Drawing the line" isn't really the way I'd put it. As you say, we're surrounded by surveillance devices and there's little I can do about it. All I do is avoid them wherever it's possible for me to do so and be sparing/cautious about what I say and do when I'm near surveillance that I can't avoid.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-01 14:18:01+00:00
> It's one of those things that's hard to describe because it doesn't sound like much if you got it. And this example is trivial, especially if you're not open to the idea its a problem (r/c = rows/columns) But it's nigh-impenetrable in other scenarios.

I agree, it's highly context-specific.

In a small demo for a small blog post with basically no complexity? Go ahead, use 1 character variable names, it really isn't difficult.

In the 1000 long CUDA kernel where you barely understand what's going on even though you understand the concepts? I'd be favoring longer descriptive names than one letter names for sure.
by layer8 | 2025-11-01 14:18:44+00:00
The article is about how software is changing to target casual “normies” over power users. You agreed with this take and likened it to how software is becoming more like office suites. From this I inferred that you don’t think that office suites are catering to power users.

So I don’t understand what properties of office suites you are alluding to here. Or is your point that the previously desktop-only software suites now have web-based counterparts, and the latter aren’t catering to power users anymore?
by dap | 2025-11-01 14:19:00+00:00
I think you misunderstand the problem. The only purpose of the sleep in this example is to control interleaving of execution to ensure the problem happens. Here's a version where the background task (the initial lock holder) only runs a bounded number of instructions with the lock held, just as you suggest:

https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...

It still futurelocks.

> After that process has finished, you release the lock. Then you return to the scheduler and execute the next future. The next future cannot be blocked because the lock has already been released. It's simply impossible.

This is true with threads and with tasks that only ever poll futures sequentially. It is not true in the various cases mentioned in this RFD (notably `tokio::select!`, but also others). Intuitively: when you have one task polling on multiple futures concurrently, you're essentially adding another layer to the scheduler (kernel thread scheduler, tokio task scheduler, now some task is acting as its own future scheduler). The problem is it's surprisingly easy to (1) not realize that and (2) accidentally have that "scheduler" not poll the next runnable future and then get stuck, just like if the kernel scheduler didn't wake up a runnable thread.