MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by wpietri | 2025-12-08 13:48:49+00:00
Yes, this sounds very familiar to me. I started with dates and went to story points used to estimate dates. Then as we turned up the release cadence, we eventually dropped estimating altogether, even in points, because it wasn't really helping anything.

That doesn't mean we refuse to solve the problems that estimates are used to solve. E.g., "Can we have something by the big conference," or "Can we keep our customers happy." We just solve them other ways.

And totally agreed about the corrosive effect of treating estimates as commitments. It's such a negative-sum game, but people play it all the time.
by mrweasel | 2025-12-08 13:49:20+00:00
Pantone is a business, so I guess this is what they assume will sell next year, but is a bland, boring, sad "colour".

It would have been nice if they had gone: The world is a bland, boring and people are losing optimism, so we're going to make the colour for 2026 be a bright pink, yellow, green and encourage designers and product people to use as much colour as possible.
by liudasjank | 2025-12-08 13:49:43+00:00
The idea came from a simple problem: most teams have lots of API endpoints, but almost no one has realistic coverage. Writing and maintaining test collections takes forever, and scripts always fall out of sync.

Rentgen takes one cURL request and generates: • boundary tests (min/max, out-of-range) • enum variation tests • invalid/negative input cases • trimming/whitespace cases • structure/mapping validation • reflection safety checks • missing/incorrect security headers • basic latency/load insights • automatic bug-report templates • and many other.

The goal is to give engineers a rough but honest API health picture in ~2 minutes — without maintaining test files or writing code.

A fun surprise: I pointed Rentgen at ChatGPT’s API and found a few issues we genuinely didn’t expect to see in production. They were fixed immediately after reporting.

I would really appreciate feedback from the community: • What categories of tests are missing? • Which edge cases do you usually find manually? • What would make this useful in your workflow?

GitHub: https://github.com/LiudasJan/Rentgen

Happy to answer anything about the engine design, how the generator works, reflection detection, or upcoming performance modules.
by Forgeties79 | 2025-12-08 13:50:18+00:00
> You can't blame an LLM for getting the facts wrong, or hallucinating, when by design they don't even attempt to store facts in the first place

On one level I agree, but I do feel it’s also right to blame the LLM/company for that when the goal is to replace my search engine of choice (my major tool for finding facts and answering general questions), which is a huge pillar of how they’re sold to/used by the public.
by DonHopkins | 2025-12-08 13:50:24+00:00
Suck.com Net Moguls, from back in the day (art by Jay Bevenour, edited by Carl Steadman):

https://web.archive.org/web/20181211075708/http://www.suck.c...

Steve Jobs (front):

https://web.archive.org/web/20180802115101im_/http://www.suc...

Steve Jobs (back):

https://web.archive.org/web/20180802143431im_/http://www.suc...

Gil Amelio (front):

https://web.archive.org/web/20180802115107im_/http://www.suc...

Gil Amelio (back):

https://web.archive.org/web/20180802143436im_/http://www.suc...

About Suck.com:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suck.com
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-12-08 13:50:44+00:00
> particularly his attention to detail and craftsmanship

I can get on board with this. I feel as if that has fallen off a cliff, in the last decade.

I just released a rewritten version of an app, and spent many days, running it over, and over, and over again, looking for subtle "pain points." Sadly, some will remain, because SwiftUI is so limited, but I think it came out well.

I do feel that "polishing the fenders" is a big deal. I spent most of my career at a company that would have day-long cage mat- er, meetings, over seemingly insignificant details of user experience.
by regularfry | 2025-12-08 13:50:49+00:00
You probably know this, but for others that don't: local git clones will share storage space with hardlinks for the objects in .git. The wasted space wouldn't be a doubling, it would be the work tree twice plus the (small) non-hardlinked bits under .git. No idea how LFS interacts with this, but it can be worth knowing about this mechanism.

Also, if you end up relying on it for space reasons, worth knowing that cloning from a file:// url switches the hardlink mechanism off so you end up with a full duplicate again.
by airstrike | 2025-12-08 13:50:56+00:00
No issue at all is guaranteed to be fixed by the next release. There's no expectations that the deck of issues gets cleared when a new release is published, so conflating the two topics isn't accurate or helpful.

You'll have to explain why the master branch approach isn't ideal. The only argument I've seen hold up is that the community can pin their own crates around a specific release, so if you rely on a lot of third party crates, you benefit from more frequent releases. Given iced is still pre-1.0, I do not encourage people to rely on a lot of third party crates. Most of them also have permissive MIT licenses so you can always bring any one-off bit of code into your own crate and maintain attribution. I did that with the split widget from iced_aw, which was available in 0.12 and dropped by those maintainers when 0.13 came around. I've since made several tweaks to it to fit my specific use cases, so all in all I'm just better off vendoring it myself.

In fact, you also have no guarantee that third-party crates will (1) continue to update for future releases and (2) evolve their own APIs in the manner that you prefer. So if you're worried about being up-to-date and/or stability, again bringing the code into your crates is again the better choice—at the obvious cost of having to maintain it yourself, but such is the nature of software.

I do not know what you mean by "inspire the same level of trust". Or I think I do, but I do not think it's helpful language or an accurate framing. Are you a part of the iced community? I can't speak for everyone, but ISTM that most everyone trusts hecrj implicitly—and we all understand iced is a labor of love, not commercial and the fact that it is subject to his whims actually helps guide a specific vision forward, however long that may take. The ride has been great so far. The Pop!_OS team seems to agree.

Finally, about Dioxus specifically, I'll leave this informative video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKvFFf04clU
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2025-12-08 13:51:10+00:00
Depends on the blockchain. There are plenty of ways to have private transactions.

Bitcoin came about to solve the trustless component and provides weak anonymity.

Then Monero, ZCash, etc built on that to add privacy and anonymity.

If you use bitcoin nowadays and expect anonymity or privacy you are clearly mistaken but there are plenty of platforms built for privacy and anonymity on extensions of that same underlying technology.

Like basically every vendor that accepts cryptocurrency and values privacy/anonymity is going to offer monero as an option.
by previa1998 | 2025-12-08 13:51:23+00:00
Hi HN,

This is officially my first open-source package.

I've been deep-diving into Django REST Framework and Django Q2 recently to better understand asynchronous task handling. While studying the internal models, I hit a friction point: monitoring tasks always required logging into the Django Admin. I wanted to see if I could decouple this and expose the queue data via a standard API to build custom dashboards.

So, I built django-q-monitor as a solution.

It wraps the Q2 models to provide: 1. Read-only JSON endpoints for Tasks and Schedules. 2. Action endpoints to Retry or Cleanup tasks (using DRF ViewSets). 3. Configurable permissions (so you don't actually need to be an Admin to monitor tasks).

Since I'm new to the open-source community, I treated this as an exercise to learn proper packaging (pyproject.toml) and API design. I'd really appreciate any feedback on the code structure or best practices I might have missed.

Docs/Code: https://github.com/previa1998/django-q-monitor
by Analemma_ | 2025-12-08 13:51:44+00:00
It’s a silly bit of theater and American exceptionalism.

Infamously, “grand juries” are supposed to be a check against bringing frivolous charges, but they’ve never done this: there’s a famous quote about a prosecutor being able to get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. They’re also used to kill trials which are politically inconvenient but which the government doesn’t want to take the blame for burying, usually for killer cops: just tell the grand jury not to indict and then say “welp, nothing we could do.”

All the romantic stories about jury nullification being a check against government overreach are also crap. Historically the most common use in practice, by far, was when juries would exonerate people who’d been caught dead-to-rights lynching black men.
by chrischen | 2025-12-08 13:51:53+00:00
We already have verification layers: high level strictly typed languages like Haskell, Ocaml, Rescript/Melange (js ecosystem), purescript (js), elm, gleam (erlang), f# (for .net ecosystem).

These aren’t just strict type systems but the language allows for algebraic data types, nominal types, etc, which allow for encoding higher level types enforced by the language compiler.

The AI essentially becomes a glorified blank filler filling in the blanks. Basic syntax errors or type errors, while common, are automatically caught by the compiler as part of the vibe coding feedback loop.
by HighGoldstein | 2025-12-08 13:52:59+00:00
Nigeria, Argentina, Venezuela, all prime examples because they faced especially severe problems with hyperinflation and traditional banking. You can also find widespread use in developing economies like Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, but of course to a lesser degree since the problems with traditional finance are not as severe there. I will gladly provide more in-depth information, if someone provides some evidence to support that crypto users are the dumbest people on Earth. If not, feel free to use your own time instead of mine for your education.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-12-08 13:53:01+00:00
> Once again, this is one of those areas where HN commenters believe they can understand a complex industry based on Wikipedia-level stats.

Please elaborate your math here. I just outlined the cost of batteries, the cost of fuel, the cost of electricity. Is my math wrong? Because if it isn't, it's at least feasible. You seem to assume very different numbers here. Which I would argue are probably a combination of dated and wrong.

> SMRs, renewably cracked hydrocarbons, and fusion will all be mainstream beforehand.

We'll know in a few years how wrong you or I will be. I don't find your argumentation very persuasive though. You might be eating your proverbial hat by the 2040s. I'm betting somebody will manage to stuff a few gwh of battery in a ship by then. A shipment of 7-9K EVs at 50kwh each, pretty much gets you there. That's the capacity of some of the new ships that BYD uses for transporting their EVs around the world. 2000EVs is basically about 1 gwh of power.
by pavlov | 2025-12-08 13:54:48+00:00
> "buying this domain pseudo-anonymously (yes I know I can do things with monero too so thus anonymously too) is the only real use case"

The domain registrar is required to have valid contact information for you. Sure, you could lie to them, but then you risk having your account terminated.

So I'm not sure this is a real use case for crypto.
by wisty | 2025-12-08 13:54:52+00:00
Trump did it, so frankly it's probably just a brain fart.

However, the US having a strategic reserve of a currency makes it a lot like other currencies. The next logical step is that banks can use it (already in the works - also Trump). If you can get a bank account it bitcoin, the next logical step is towards a fractional reserve system (loans, banks effectively "printing money"). The strategic reserve can cover a run on banks - think interbank lending, bailouts. Then the fed can offer bonds and IOUs (fiat).

All the things q lot of bitcoin advocates say bitcoin should stop, but you can't stop the government writing an IOU and demanding everyone treat it as currency.
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2025-12-08 13:55:34+00:00
That is unfortunately a fairly weak form of anonymity. With a fully public network you can trace even the most meticulously tumbled and laundered tokens. And while they may not exclusively trace back to you, they'll trace into a mixer and out of a mixer with a large majority of the inputs and outputs being tainted.

Most exchanges, etc won't really touch accounts or UTxO that are messing with mixers.

Because of that it's generally just better to use "properly" private and anonymous blockchains instead. If they are fully opaque then tracing becomes effectively impossible.
by regularfry | 2025-12-08 13:55:35+00:00
My journey was CVS->SVN->darcs->Hg->git. I can thoroughly recommend at least playing around with the others to see what you're missing. Darcs in particular I remember as having a much nicer model than either git or mercurial, but it had a horrible corner case behaviour. Pijul is supposed to fix that, but I haven't tried it yet.
by tovej | 2025-12-08 13:55:44+00:00
What?

The LLM is trained on a corpus of text, and when it is given a sequence of tokens, it finds a set of token that, when one of them is appended, make the resulting sequence most like the text in that corpus.

If it is given a sequence of tokens that is unlike anything in its corpus, all bets are off and it produces garbage, just like machine learning models in general: if the input is outside the learned distribution, quality goes downhill fast.

The fact that they've added a Monte Carlo feature to the sequence generation, which makes it sometimes select a token that is slightly less like the most exact match in the corpus does not change this.

LLMs are fuzzy lookup tables for existing text, that hallucinate text for out-of-distribution queries.

This is LLM 101.

If the LLM was only trained using documentation, then there would be no problem. If it would generate a design, look at the documentation, understand the semantics of both, and translate the design to code by using the documentation as a guide.

But that's not how it works. It has open source repositories in its corpus that it then recreates by chaining together examples in this stochastic parrot -method I described above.
by kace91 | 2025-12-08 13:55:51+00:00
Rust is a bit smarter than that, in that it covers exhaustiveness of possible states, for more than just enums:

fn g(x: u8) { match x { 0..=10 => {}, 20..=200 => {},

}

}

That for example would complain about the ranges 11 to 19 and 201 to 255 not being covered.

You could try to map ranges to enum values, but then nobody would guarantee that you covered the whole range while mapping to enums so you’d be moving the problem to a different location.

Rust approach is not flawless, larger data types like i32 or floats can’t check full coverage (I suppose for performance reasons) but still quite useful.
by stego-tech | 2025-12-08 13:56:19+00:00
The China thing is broadly just Nationalism rather than an actual threat at the moment. Even China has acknowledged it by reigning in AI research and excess in favor of pursuing function and utility, leaving the US to do as we do best: throw money at every conceivable idea, and bailout those with the most economic or political clout when the bubble pops or fire erupts.

Also, I don’t think you fully appreciate the distance to which humans in power will scheme to preserve power long past the point of its utility. If future AI needs organic human data to improve, then we will be turned into data generation machines with money granted based on the quality, uniqueness, or importance of said data - which is kinda what Capitalism is already doing, if you squint a bit. Those systems, once entrenched, will survive long past the point of necessity provided the populace as a whole doesn’t become aware of that fact. After all, just look at the growing political extremism as more folks realize that not only is the current social contract irreparably broken (all work, no homes, no stability or security with which to take chances for most folks), but that current political mechanisms and institutions built to serve it are similarly unnecessary. It’s partly why, I suspect, Capital is latching so hard onto the idea that AI is their exit strategy, as it means their assets will continue appreciating in value along with their net worth even as the rest of the planet crumbles and burns around them - ensuring their safety, or so they think.

My point is: the future is unknowable, and you should’t underestimate the human desire to humiliate and enslave others to their will by any means necessary.
by lenerdenator | 2025-12-08 13:56:22+00:00
The problem now is poverty, inequality, and distribution.

That wasn't the problem in 1950. The problem then was "this pest/plant/fungus made my crop inedible" across entire regions and that kept there from being enough food.

If there wasn't a good reason to use these chemicals, we wouldn't use them. Farming is a notoriously risky way to earn a living, and if farmers could cut thousands of dollars of chemicals and gear out of their expenses, they almost certainly would, especially if that meant sending those hacks at Bayer less money for seeds that the farmers are restricted from doing certain things with.
by mbreese | 2025-12-08 13:56:26+00:00
Secrets management is hard. And proper secret sharing setups meant for larger groups are quite unwieldy to work with with smaller groups. Well, they are hard to work with for all sizes of groups, but it seems particularly overkill for small groups. So I see why you'd want to do this. I also kinda like the idea of just encrypting/decrypting .env files. It's a pretty clean design.

But storing secrets in the same git repository just seems off to me. I don't like the idea of keeping the secrets (even in encrypted form) with the code I'm deploying.

There should be a better balance somewhere, but I'm not sure this is quite it for me. Shared keepass files (not in git) or 1Password vaults are harder to work with, but I think lean more towards the secure side at the expense of a bit of usability. (Depending on the team, OSs, etc...)
by wpietri | 2025-12-08 13:56:37+00:00
I am always fascinated when people tell me it is impossible to do something I have done. That plenty of people have done. For decades. But I shouldn't be surprised. Kuhn was not kidding around.

And yes, I strongly believe in accountability to business stakeholders, customers, and colleagues. I just think the better way is not paper fantasies, but demonstrated realities. Focusing on working software, customer collaboration, and responding to change, one might say. But people have said it before and it didn't make much difference.
Show HN: I built an AI tool to evaluate my AngelList deal flow
by stiline06 | 2025-12-08 13:56:44+00:00
I'm Kyle, a software engineer who started angel investing through AngelList syndicates (~25 deals, $1-10k each). I'd see interesting ideas and clever founders but wasn't sure what to look for or how to compare them. I wanted a system to think through deals more systematically. A second opinion to challenge my initial read.

What it does: - Paste a deal memo → get scoring on 8 criteria (founder, market, traction, etc.) - Every score cites specific evidence. "Strong retention" without numbers = lower score - Compare deals side-by-side, ask follow-up questions

Demo:

https://www.loom.com/share/a360b329f9e849c38c1ea70ba510d178

Tech: - Claude Sonnet 4.5 for analysis (Anthropic for nuanced judgment) - Local anonymization—company/founder names scrubbed client-side before API calls - Multi-layer QA: accuracy checker catches hallucinations, auto-retry on errors, final polish

What I learned: AI coding tools make it too easy to tinker. I'd have 3 fixes going at once, creating more bugs than I solved. Had to force myself to slow down and work methodically. Bigger lesson: I spent months tweaking in isolation instead of getting external feedback. This post is me breaking that habit.

Try it: Free tier has 20 triages + 3 deep analyses/month. I'd love feedback on whether scoring feels calibrated and happy to talk about any elements of my development here.

https://angelcheck.ai
by Bostonian | 2025-12-08 13:56:46+00:00
'The European Union’s decision Friday to impose a fine on Elon Musk’s social-media platform X.com raises a question: What the heck is wrong with these people? Even in Brussels, it’s unusual for a single policy move to create so much economic self-sabotage and diplomatic harm at one go.

The €120 million ($140 million) fine is for breaches of Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA), the first time Brussels has enforced that law in this way since it came into force in 2022. Europe’s online commissars cite several supposed infractions. The silliest complaint is that X’s system for selling “verification” blue checkmarks “negatively affects users’ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with.”

More serious, Brussels insists X must make data about advertising on the platform readily available to outsiders, and shouldn’t use its terms of service to prohibit data scraping by “eligible researchers.” The EU claims this open access to X’s commercial data is vital to allow researchers and “civil society” to spot scams and information warfare.

That reference to “civil society” is a tell. Brussels wants to force X (and inevitably other platforms) to share data that hostile activists can wield against the platforms in future regulatory actions or litigation. All based on a theory that European citizens are too dumb to take the things they read on X or elsewhere online with a grain of salt.

Mr. Musk and Trump Administration officials describe this regulatory case as a form of censorship, and it’s hard to disagree. Mr. Musk wrote on X last year that the European Commission, the EU bureaucratic arm levying the fine, offered X a “secret deal” to drop the case in exchange for the platform censoring unspecified forms of speech.'

...
by dns_snek | 2025-12-08 13:57:54+00:00
> We, the people, make the rules.

Since when? We merely vote for politicians who promise to enact laws and regulations that are beneficial for us but they almost universally fail to do that, succumbing to self-interests and corruption.

If a government implements authoritarian measures that curb our freedom in an unpopular manner, "we the people" can't do anything about it. In a few years we may or may not vote them out, and the people who replace them may (or may not) do what we, the people, want.
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-12-08 13:58:12+00:00
You can resolve this issue by repeatedly tumbling your money, using the same tumbling scheme as everyone else. This will reduce the value of your wallet slightly, to pay the mining fees, but it's… hm. That sounds equivalent to inflation or tax, except that the lost money doesn't go towards anything useful: it just goes towards buying ASICs and burning electricity.
by olafmol | 2025-12-08 13:58:29+00:00
CircleCI made great steps the last few years, f.e. to better support proper DRY working, supporting OPA policies-as-code, VSCode extensions with "dry-run" options.

For some examples of more advanced usecases take a look: https://circleci.com/blog/platform-toolkit/

Disclaimer: i work for CircleCI.