MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kacper-vstorm | 2025-12-14 06:00:05+00:00
I just released Pydantic-DeepAgents, an open-source Python framework built on top of Pydantic-AI for creating production-grade autonomous agents. It helps developers quickly build agents with features like planning, filesystem ops, subagent delegation, and extensible skills. Key features:

Multiple Backends: StateBackend (in-memory), FilesystemBackend, DockerSandbox, CompositeBackend Rich Toolsets: TodoToolset, FilesystemToolset, SubAgentToolset, SkillsToolset File Uploads: Upload files for agent processing with run_with_files() or deps.upload_file() Skills System: Extensible skill definitions with markdown prompts Structured Output: Type-safe responses with Pydantic models via output_type Context Management: Automatic conversation summarization for long sessions Human-in-the-Loop: Built-in support for human confirmation workflows Streaming: Full streaming support for agent responses

There's a demo app example in the repo: https://github.com/vstorm-co/pydantic-deepagents/tree/main/e... Quick demo video: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hqgXkbAgUrsKOWpfWdF48cqaxRh... And check the README for a screenshot overview. Repo: https://github.com/vstorm-co/pydantic-deepagents Feedback and contributions welcome! If you're into AI agents or Python automation, I'd love to hear thoughts.
by tstrimple | 2025-12-14 06:00:56+00:00
If a change requires cascading changes in almost every other service then yes, you're running a distributed monolith and have achieved zero separation of services. Doesn't matter if each "service" has a different stack if they are so tightly coupled that a change in one necessitates a change in all. This is literally the entire point of micro-services. To reduce the amount of communication and coordination needed among teams. When your team releases "micro-services" which break everything else, it's a failure and hint of a distributed monolith pretending to be micro-services.
by tedggh | 2025-12-14 06:01:03+00:00
Loved his series until he visited my hometown and completely misrepresented it. I get his style was anti establishment and mainstream, but he ended up hanging out with the wrong crowd in town, one of them known for being a fraudster, a spoiled child running bad restaurant after bad restaurant. Somehow these guys managed to be featured in the show as the progressive minds of local cuisine. It made me question everything else I have watched from Bourdain.
by avazhi | 2025-12-14 06:01:40+00:00
https://freedomandcitizenship.columbia.edu/gender-equality-h...

It's been extremely prevalent. In terms of prehistory, we have lots of evidence that young women were almost always spared if one group massacred another, and we have genetic evidence that invariably the winning male bloodline would become predominant in any conquered group.

If you look at the Columbia link and do other research it's pretty obvious that 'punishing' rapists has never really been about punishing them or giving women some kind of absolution. In the code of Hammurabi and with the Jews women who didn't scream so that others could hear were prosecuted for adultery or stoned lol. The idea of giving women the satisfaction of watching anything for their own benefit is a very modern notion and even now doesn't really exist anyway. That's just your personal fantasy. You can go back to the Assyrians to see that if, for example, you raped my virgin daughter then I could legally rape your wife. It's mostly been a property or bloodline issue. It's never been about the females and that's another reason I think it's massively overblown in modern times. It's been normal human behaviour for millions of years. To put it another way, if you were a young 19 year old female in a village that was being ransacked, say, 4000 years ago, you'd know what was going to happen to you if your males lost. I don't think it would have been that traumatising - the males in your village would have done it to the females in their village were the roles reversed. The 'trauma' is largely a modern phenomenon where everything has to be upsetting/triggering/trauma-inducing. Everybody has to be a victim these days.
by tripletao | 2025-12-14 06:01:43+00:00
Acute pain isn't discussed in detail in this paper, but here's a paper they cited:

> Conclusions: There is low-quality evidence indicating that cannabinoids may be a safe alternative for a small but significant reduction in subjective pain score when treating acute pain, with intramuscular administration resulting in a greater reduction relative to oral.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1089/can.2019.0079

For insomnia, this paper itself says:

> meta-analysis of 39 RCTs, 38 of which evaluated oral cannabinoids and 1 administered inhaled cannabis, that included 5100 adult participants with chronic pain reported that cannabis and cannabinoid use, compared with placebo, resulted in a small improvement in sleep quality [...]

It goes on to criticize those studies, but we again see low-quality evidence in favor.

In the context of evidence-based medicine, "does not support" can mean the RCTs establish with reasonable confidence that the treatment doesn't work. It can also mean the RCTs show an effect in the good direction but with insufficient statistical power, so that an identical study with more participants would probably--but not certainly--reach our significance threshold. The failure to distinguish between those two quite different situations seems willful and unfortunate here.
by vunderba | 2025-12-14 06:02:19+00:00
Hey that's neat! I hadn't heard of it. It says you need to publish the novel and the source at the end - so I guess as part of the submission you'd include the RNG seed.

The only thing I'm a bit wary of is the submission size - a minimum of 50,000 words. At that length, It'd be really difficult to maintain a cohesive story without manual oversight.
by eqvinox | 2025-12-14 06:03:29+00:00
> Keep those for loops sharp if you want, but I don't see people paying you to hand code.

Well, personally speaking, I'm paid to hand code; LLMs have not reached the quality of my code output yet and I'm seeing no pressure at all to use LLMs.

Relatedly, I work on an open source project where the constraining resource is review (as it is in most open source projects.) The current state is that LLM generated code is incredibly hard and annoying to review and there is a lot of pushback.

So, I'm going to wait and see.

(...especially since there's also legal challenges to LLMs trained on open source code with no regard to its licenses.)
by handoflixue | 2025-12-14 06:03:53+00:00
I think the most interesting predictions are the ones that sound bold and even a little bit insane at the time. I think a lot more of the people who were willing to say saying "ASI will kill us all" 20+ years ago, because they were taking a risk (and routinely ridiculed for it).

Even today, "ASI will kill us all" can be a pretty divisive declaration - hardly safe and boring.

From the couple of threads I clicked, it seemed like this LLM-driven analysis was picking up on that, too: the top comments were usually bold, and some of the worst-rated comments was the "safe and boring" declaration that nothing interesting ever really happens.
by quotemstr | 2025-12-14 06:03:56+00:00
> The kaboom you get is a safety panic

You don't always get a panic. An attacker who can get a program to access an offset he controls relative to P2 can access P1 if P2 is torn such that it's still coupled, at the moment of adversarial access, with P1's capability. That's dangerous if a program has made a control decision based on the pointer bits being P2. IOW, an attacker controlled offset can transform P2 back into P1 and access memory using P1's capability even if program control flow has proceeded as though only P2 were accessible at the moment of adversarial access.

That can definitely enable a "weird execution" in the sense that it can let an attacker make the program follow an execution path that a plain reading of the source code suggests it can't.

Is it a corner case that'll seldom come up in practice? No. Is it a weakening of memory safety relative to what the JVM and Rust provide? Yes.

You are trying to define the problem away with sleigh-of-hand about the pointer "really" being its capability while ignoring that programs make decisions based on pointer identity independent of capability -- because they're C programs and can't even observe these capabilities. The JVM doesn't have this problem, because in the JVM, the pointer is the capability.

It's exactly this refusal to acknowledge limitations that spooks me about your whole system.
by nivertech | 2025-12-14 06:04:54+00:00
For credits to not be considered a money substitute, they must be non-transferable, non-refundable, and have an expiration date. Without an expiration date, unused credits cannot be accounted for as revenue, but as a liquid asset similar to cash.

Best practice is to set a long expiration date, such as 1-2 years. There are different regulations about it in different states. After that unused credits can be accounted as breakage revenue.

If a company treats credits as money, it will have to comply with numerous financial regulations. For example, if a company compensates for SLA breaches with cash rather than credits, this could be considered insurance.
by prisenco | 2025-12-14 06:05:15+00:00
Everyone's suggestions feel designed to frustrate me. Instructions on how to cajole and plead that seem more astrology than engineering.

This is the pattern I settled on about a year ago. I use it as a rubber-duck / conversation partner for bigger picture issues. I'll run my code through it as a sanity "pre-check" before a pr review. And I mapped autocomplete to ctrl-; in vim so I only bring it up when I need it.

Otherwise, I write everything myself. AI written code never felt safe. It adds velocity but velocity early on always steals speed from the future. That's been the case for languages, for frameworks, for libraries, it's no different for AI.

In other words, you get better at using AI for programming by recognizing where its strengths lie and going all in on those strengths. Don't twist up in knots trying to get it to do decently what you can already do well yourself.
by andrewflnr | 2025-12-14 06:05:29+00:00
This feels just north of conspiracy theory logic. It's proven that humans can just barely sense large-scale magnetic fields, so how about if they can also sense extremely finely detailed fields in a way that solves long-standing philosophical and medical problems? Here are some supporting coincidences that have any number of alternate explanations, but it would sure be cool if this whole tower of conjecture was true, right? If you've seen conspiracy-theory debunks, the resemblance is rather strong.
by reincoder | 2025-12-14 06:06:43+00:00
Our headcount is approximately 70 right now. Most of engineering consists of data engineers, researchers, and data scientists because data is our product. Then we have infrastructure engineering, software engineering, integration engineering, support engineering, solutions architects, mobile application engineering, UX/UI designers, website engineering, API engineering (separate from the website because of the volume of traffic we receive), a full commercial team with partnerships and sales, finance/accounting, legal and a marketing team. I think I am still forgetting some people. We also work closely with consultants who are foundational to the internet as a whole. We have an open hiring policy for the right talent.

During our offsite, we had to rent out a small ship (ferry?) to host everyone: https://x.com/coderholic/status/1975333382604398702/photo/4

More than a decade ago, when IPinfo launched, a lot of community interaction was done by our founder. Now, you have me in a full-time role talking to people. My role is literally called Developer Relations.

We are not just a IP geolocation company; we are an internet data company. IP geolocation and VPN detection are only products to us; the team and goal are actually quite huge.
by array_key_first | 2025-12-14 06:06:51+00:00
It's not a "hack" because many language DO NOT let you store functions with state. Gleam does, I write PHP, and that does as well.

PHP has interfaces and whatnot, but a lot of the time I do polymorphism by just having a class that has Closure members. When you can arbitrarily pass around functions like that, it's basically equivalent to an interface or abstract class, with a bit more flexibility.
by dalnoon | 2025-12-14 06:07:48+00:00
Hello everyone,

As a side hustler, I've always wondered if LLMs recommend me to their users. My way of knowing the answer to this question has been going to every single one and typing questions one by one, which is obviously far from being efficient.

Also, when I ask questions from my ChatGPT it tends to be biased towards my platform since it already knows me/my platforms.

So I built Spottedby.ai that helps you track what you should rank for and to show your rank among your competitors.
by _ache_ | 2025-12-14 06:08:56+00:00
This can fool someone from one location and only in one way (if you are near Somalia and expect a 10ms latency, a virtual VPN can't reduce latency to simulate been in Somalia). So it have to be dynamic to fool multiple locations to stay probable.

But anyway, *you can't fool the last-hop latency* (unless you control it, but you can control all of it), and basically it impossible to fool that.
by petersellers | 2025-12-14 06:10:35+00:00
I think the blog post is confusing in this regard. For example, it explicitly states:

> We no longer had to deploy 140+ services for a change to one of the shared libraries.

Taken in isolation, that is a strong indicator that they were indeed running a distributed monolith.

However, the blog post earlier on said that different microservices were using different versions of the library. If that was actually true, then they would never have to deploy all 140+ of their services in response to a single change in their shared library.
by inkyoto | 2025-12-14 06:11:38+00:00
ServiceNow is a platform-as-a-service (PaaS), not a SaaS, that allows development of new products on top of it.

At its core, there is a workflow management engine that third parties can use to implement their own, stateful, process centric products and services.

We have ServiceNow proper (the CRM) and a completely unrelated to CRM third party product that we have purchased and which is implemented on the ServiceNow platform. Both have nothing to do with each other and are used by different business users.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-14 06:13:36+00:00
Another option: It's genuinely easier, for what amounts to namespacing reasons. Like, if I came up with a cool new C compiler, I'd probably name it ${MYNAME}cc just because that's an easy identifier that is very unlikely to have a collision and doesn't require me to spend time thinking of some name that is clever, unique, and accurately conveys what the project is about.
by somat | 2025-12-14 06:14:01+00:00
I don't really want an e-ink "monitor" as that does not really play into the advantages of an e-ink display. By the time the e-ink display is uprated enough to act as a monitor It feels like a lot of the advantages of e-ink are lost and the display server does not really downrate enough to utilize e-ink's strength.

But an e-ink "terminal" would be nice, not an actual tty but something more like a tablet form factor that has a few buttons, little to no internal smarts and you can push images to it.
by mimasama | 2025-12-14 06:14:33+00:00
Actually JPEG XL is based in part on Google's PIK format. The Zurich team from Google Research (which developed PIK and Brotli) is even actively working on JPEG XL to this day.

The reason why Chrome (also a Google product) removed it at first is more likely to be internal politics. Google is a very large corporation after all, with each faction within it having its own priorities and alignments. In the case of Chrome the team there are probably more aligned with the AVIF/AOM team than with Zurich/PIK when it came to the next-gen image format to be pushed (which would explain why Chrome did not have problems with Brotli, because there wasn't a competing Google faction that is developing a replacement for gzip).
by ang_cire | 2025-12-14 06:17:04+00:00
In total? Sure. But 99% of that propaganda isn't targeted at, seen by, or relevant to, any given person. Can you name one propaganda campaign on social media that is targeted at Australian schoolkids?

The propaganda in schools is highly relevant, exactingly targeted, and (by merit of being literally taught to every schoolkid) always seen.

And if you don't think that the worldwide backlash against "social media propaganda hurting kids" despite social media being around for 30+ years is possibly more than an organic and earnest and uncoordinated concern, I think you may be more susceptible to propaganda than you think.
by pizlonator | 2025-12-14 06:17:41+00:00
> An attacker who can get a program to access an offset he controls relative to P2 can access P1 if P2 is torn such that it's still coupled, at the moment of adversarial access, with P1's capability

Only if the program was written in a way that allowed for legitimate access to P1. You’re articulating this as if P1 was out of thin air; it’s not. It’s the capability you loaded because the program was written in a way that let you have access to it. Like if you wrote a Java program in a way where a shared field F sometimes pointed to object P1. Of course that means loaders of F get to access P1.

> That can definitely enable a "weird execution"

Accessing a non-free object pointed by a pointer you loaded from the heap is not weird.

I get the feeling that you’re not following me on what „weird execution” is. It’s when the attacker can use a bug in one part of the software to control the entire program’s behavior. Your example ain’t that.

> Is it a corner case that'll seldom come up in practice? No. Is it a weakening of memory safety relative to what the JVM and Rust provide? Yes.

I don’t care about whether it’s a corner case.

My point is that there’s no capability model violation and no weird execution in your example.

It’s exactly like what the JVM provides if you think of the intval as just a field selector.

I’m not claiming it’s like what rust provides. Rust has stricter rules that are enforced less strictly (you can and do use the unsafe escape hatch in rust code to an extent that has no equal in Fil-C).
Show HN: I built an AI that scans 10k Reddit comments to find 'Blue Ocean' ideas
by WoWSaaS | 2025-12-14 06:21:37+00:00
Hi HN, I dropped out of college 3 months ago to solve my own problem: I kept building SaaS products that nobody wanted. I realized I was guessing instead of measuring. So I built a system to automate "Market Signal Detection" using LLMs. The Architecture: 1. Ingests data primarily from Reddit (niche communities), Hacker News, and rising Search Queries. 2. Filters for "Negative Sentiment" + "Financial Pain" (e.g., people complaining about losing money). 3. Calculates a "Velocity Score" to spot trends before they hit mainstream Google Trends. I wrote a detailed technical breakdown of the methodology and the "3 Signals" I look for (Bleeding Neck, Fragmentation, Wallet Index). You can read the full guide (no paywall) here: https://blog.vect.pro/trend-hacking-guide The tool itself is part of the platform I'm building, but the guide stands alone as a framework for finding ideas manually if you prefer. Would love feedback on the signal detection logic. - Afraz
by quotemstr | 2025-12-14 06:22:29+00:00
> Only if the program was written in a way that allowed for legitimate access to P1. You’re articulating this as if P1 was out of thin air; it’s not.

My program:

if (p == P2) return p[attacker_controlled_index];

If the return statement can access P1, disjoint from P2, that's a weird execution for any useful definition of "weird". You can't just define the problem away.

Your central claim is that you can take any old C program, compile it with Fil-C, and get a memory-safe C program. Turns out you get memory safety only if you write that C program with Fil-C's memory model and its limits in mind. If someone's going to do that, why not write instead with Rust's memory model in mind and not pay a 4x performance penalty?
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-14 06:22:44+00:00
To remain clear: This is largely devil's advocate. I believe that niche platforms generally should be supported, and that includes GNU/Linux on amd64, and NetBSD on literal VAX (yes, that is an officially supported platform in current NetBSD), and RedoxOS on ARM, and OpenBSD on MIPS, and [...]. I just think it's really weird to claim that GNU/Linux, with 3% of the desktop market, should be supported, but a platform that is similarly a small fraction of Linux is dead weight that should be dropped.

With that said, remainder of this comment continues with the position that GNU/Linux, which I am writing this comment on, is obviously not worth supporting for the same reasons as i.e. MIPS and RISC-V.

> 1) Development resources are finite.

That is an argument in favor of cutting niche platforms like GNU/Linux.

> 2) Linux runs all of the world supercomputers,

You can't defend a niche OS by pointing out that it's used in a tiny niche market. How many supercomputers exist on earth? I'd bet you there are more working MIPS installations than supercomputers.

> most of the internet infrastructure (server, routers, etc),

I'll grant you headless machines used by IT folks, but that's still a specific subset of the market and it has little bearing on whether, say, Tor should support it as a desktop OS.

> most of the cellphones (Android),

Android/Linux is quite different from GNU/Linux; effectively nobody developing for Android is targeting Linux in any meaningful sense.

> and lots of other things. Its global marketshare is way bigger than macOS and all the BSD put together.

Only if we include embedded systems and servers. If you intend to target servers, then yes obviously Linux matters. Otherwise, not so much.
Show HN: I replaced a 5-person marketing team with a swarm of autonomous agents
by afrazullal | 2025-12-14 06:23:09+00:00
Hi HN, I was frustrated by the standard startup advice: "Hire a VP of Marketing, Hire a Content Lead, Hire a Video Editor." It leads to massive burn ($30k/mo) before finding product-market fit. I spent the last 3 months asking: "How much of this can be automated?" I built a framework called the "Zero-Employee Growth Stack." It uses different agentic workflows to handle the entire pipeline: 1. Signal Detection (Scanning trends). 2. Content Strategy (Clustering keywords). 3. Production (Generating SEO blogs & video scripts). I documented the entire architecture and the "ROI Table" of Human vs. Agent stack here: https://blog.vect.pro/automated-marketing-strategy-guide This is my Manifesto for the "One-Person Unicorn." I believe the next $10M SaaS will have 0 employees. Curious to hear if anyone else is running a fully autonomous marketing stack? - Afraz
by al_borland | 2025-12-14 06:26:40+00:00
I share your frustrations. I was hopefully for the relaunch of Digg, but it very quickly started to feel like Reddit, especially when people inject politics (with an heavy bias) into everything. I purposely didn’t follow the politics community, as I had a feeling that would be bad, but that mindset very quickly started infecting many other communities and discussions. It seemed impossible to have a good faith discussion of the actual issues. I gave up yesterday, deleting the app, logging out of the site, and deleting my bookmark. I’m too old to waste my time dealing with conversations like those.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-14 06:26:42+00:00
I really don't see how that's different at all, certainly not fundamentally. You can download flat files over the network, and you can download OCI image layers over the network. I'm pretty sure those image layers are hash-addressed and safe to share between builds, too, and you should make every effort to keep them on the CI runner and reuse them.