MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Tell HN: BunnyPeople
by fuzzfactor | 2026-01-18 06:54:51+00:00
Intel® Sideband Technology

AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTEL SERVER MANAGEABILITY INTERFACES

Intel® LAN Access Division

Legal

INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH INTEL PRODUCTS . . .

BunnyPeople, Celeron, Celeron Inside, Centrino, Centrino logo, Chips . . . Intel, Intel logo, Intel386 . . . Xeon Inside and Xircom are trademarks or registered trademarks of Intel

https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/321786/sideband-technology-appl-note.pdf
by MohskiBroskiAI | 2026-01-18 06:54:59+00:00
The problem with "Continuous Context" is usually context drift.

If you just keep stuffing the window or summarizing, you lose the specific constraints from the start of the conversation.

I've had success using *Coherent State Synthesis*. Instead of a raw buffer, I map the memory to a topological state (using Wasserstein metrics). When the model retrieves context, it validates that the retrieved state hasn't drifted > 5% from the original definition.

It keeps the "Identity" of the agent stable over long threads without the usual degradation.
by utopiah | 2026-01-18 06:55:01+00:00
The problem is : do you trust your hardware? If not can you build, or buy, hardware that you can verify? So they built https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor with an FPGA instead of a CPU from Intel or SpacemiT and are going up and down the chain to insure that EVERYTHING can be inspected.
by nsoonhui | 2026-01-18 06:55:13+00:00
I am basing on Terrence Tao comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46665168

It says that the OpenAI proof is a different one from the published one in the literature.

Whereas whether the Deepseek proof is the same as the published one, I dont know enough of the math to judge.

That was what I meant.
by toast0 | 2026-01-18 06:55:39+00:00
I think if you limit interchange, reward cards will disappear or at least reward rates will drop significantly; and that would be good enough.

Some banks will sometimes pay more in rewards than they collect in interchange and they must make up the difference in fees and cross-subsidies, but I don't think they'll pay out nearly as much as they do now (lots of 2% on everything options, you can get more if you jump through hoops and didn't miss out on grandfathered cards)
by Barrin92 | 2026-01-18 06:56:12+00:00
light mode as the article points out for people with no vision impairment. And the trend towards dark mode in some applications as the default setting is bad.

When people talk about light mode blinding them, please do yourself a favour and do not live like a goblin. Work in a well lit room and calibrate your monitor, your eyes should not be hurting looking at bright colors.
by MohskiBroskiAI | 2026-01-18 06:56:42+00:00
It hasn't changed everything because it's not reliable yet.

We built an entire industry on "Probabilistic Guessing" (Next Token Prediction + Cosine Similarity Retrieval). That works for creative writing, but it fails for engineering.

I think the next shift is toward *Deterministic Constraints*. I recently stripped out the standard RAG stack from my tools and replaced it with strict geometric memory (Optimal Transport).

When you force the AI to be "Topologically Consistent" rather than just "Creatively Smart," it suddenly becomes useful for actual work again.

What that essentially means is - reliable code, reliable out.

No more "AI slop"

Thank God in Heaven.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-18 06:57:42+00:00
Well I've been seeing an objectionable amount of what I consider to be hype since at least transformers.

I never dismissed the actual verifiable progress that has occurred. I objected specifically to the hype. Are you sure you're arguing with what I actually said as opposed to some position that you've imagined that I hold?

> People over hyped the Internet in the early 2000s, yet here we are.

And? Did you not read the comment you are replying to? If I make wild predictions and they eventually pan out does that vindicate me? Or was I just spewing nonsense and things happened to work out?

"LLMs will replace developers any day now" is such a claim. If it happens a month from now then you can say you were correct. If it doesn't then it was just hype and everyone forgets about it. Rinse and repeat once every few months and you have the current situation.
by rekabis | 2026-01-18 06:58:41+00:00
Re-framing the logic of the app can also help.

For example, in your example is there any situation where there is an invoice that has not been paid?

In the vast majority of shopping cart systems, that would be a hard NO. There would be an Order ID, for carts that have not yet been paid for, sure, but an Invoice ID only makes sense if the order has been fully paid for, and not at any stage previous to that.

As such, why have an Order Status at all? Have the mere presence of the Invoice ID be the flag that states the order has been paid for. As in: null = not paid, not null = paid.
by MohskiBroskiAI | 2026-01-18 06:59:03+00:00
This looks slick, but I guarantee you're going to hit the "Dementia Wall" around 10k turns if you're using Vector DBs.

I built a similar long-term memory system, and the "drift" became unbearable. Cosine similarity just isn't precise enough for a "Co-founder" that needs to remember critical details months later.

I eventually had to rip out the entire vector stack and replace it with *Optimal Transport (Wasserstein Distance)*.

It was the only way to get mathematically stable memory that doesn't degrade over time. If you want your AI to actually remember you forever, you need Geometry, not Similarity. I open-sourced the protocol (`remember-me-ai`)—feel free to steal the math. It saves a lot of headaches.
by MohskiBroskiAI | 2026-01-18 07:00:20+00:00
Institutions are crumbling because we replaced "Truth" with "Probabilistic Vibes."

Standard RAG retrieval has no concept of True or False—only "Close Enough." That poisons the well.

I got so sick of my own agents lying to me that I enforced a *Topological Constraint* on their memory. I switched to using Wasserstein Distance to verify context. If the retrieved memory doesn't mathematically fit the "Truth Geometry" of the query, the system rejects it.

The result? *Zero Hallucination.*
It turns out you can make AI respect the truth, you just have to stop letting it guess. Reliable input, reliable output. It's not magic, it's just better math.
by MohskiBroskiAI | 2026-01-18 07:01:07+00:00
The risk is only there because we are giving kids "Casino AI" instead of "Calculator AI."

If the AI guesses (hallucinates), it's dangerous.
If the AI proves (verifies), it's a superpower.

I refused to let my own tools hallucinate anymore, so I implemented *Bounded Recall* using Optimal Transport. My local stack now operates with a ~0.02% error rate compared to the 12% standard.

We solved the engineering problem—we just need to stop deploying the "lazy" version of AI to schools. When you fix the memory layer, the risk evaporates.
by post_below | 2026-01-18 07:02:08+00:00
Finding patterns in large datasets is one of the things LLMs are really good at. Genetics is an area where scientists have already done impressive things with LLMs.

However you feel about LLMs, and I say this because you don't have to use them for very long before you witness how useful they can be for large datasets so I'm guessing you're not a fan, they are undeniably incredible tools in some areas of science.

https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2025/02/generative-ai-tool...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02046-9
Show HN: Qventory – inventory and sales and fulfillment tracking for resellers
by noakmilo90 | 2026-01-18 07:02:40+00:00
Hi HN! I’m Camilo, founder of Qventory. I built it to solve the chaos of reselling across marketplaces: tracking inventory, fees, shipping, and fulfillment in one place.

What it does:

Syncs inventory and sales (starting with eBay)
Tracks costs, fees, and profit per item
Manages fulfillment status and shipping history
Imports receipts and ties them to items/expenses

Why I built it:

After juggling spreadsheets and scattered tools, I wanted something that kept my listing, shipping, and profit data in one source of truth.

Link: https://qventory.com

I’d love feedback on:

Pain points you still have with existing tools
Must-have integrations or workflows
What you’d need to switch from your current setup
Thanks for checking it out!

If you want it more technical or with metrics/pricing details, tell me what to include.
by eru | 2026-01-18 07:04:31+00:00
> This is a relief, honestly. A prior solution exists now, which means the model didn’t solve anything at all. It just regurgitated it from the internet, which we can retroactively assume contained the solution in spirit, if not in any searchable or known form. Mystery resolved.

Vs

> Interesting that in Terrance Tao's words: "though the new proof is still rather different from the literature proof)"
by eisfresser | 2026-01-18 07:04:36+00:00
Americans consumer may continue to buy European goods at a higher price, but that's only roughly a third of the pie. The bigger part is European firms selling intermediate goods and capital goods to companies. There is not fuzzy preference in that marked, it's very cost driven. The extra tarif will tilt the balance heavily in favour of domestic producer.

And these tarifs will not go away quickly. Those domestic producers who benefited will lobby hard to keep them, no matter who sits in the white house.
by BigglesB | 2026-01-18 07:05:00+00:00
I have ADHD & use a very similar kind of daily notes template. I think the reason that it works for me at least is that it shortcuts some of the "not knowing where to start" executive function issues at the start of the day. I only need to remember one thing: open a new daily notes template. The checklist itself chains other good habits off the back of that, reminding me to e.g. make sure I've taken my meds, make coffee, put music on, think about what I've done recently & if there's anything to pick up again or dive back into & what I'm going to do for the day etc.

Yes, it can feel like a chore at times (especially forcing myself to do more in-depth periodic reflections) but without a system like this, I quickly find myself completely rudderless & my mental health & productivity both collapse pretty quickly.

You'll actually hear quite frequently that people diagnosed relatively late in life went under the radar for so long exactly because we developed our own massively over compensating systems like this & can appear (externally at least) to almost have the exact opposite of "executive function issues"!
by imiric | 2026-01-18 07:05:17+00:00
> “We’ve seen this before and it didn’t happen” is not analysis. It’s selective pattern matching used when the conclusion feels safe.

> If you want to argue seriously, you have to start with ground truth. What is happening now. What the trendlines look like. What follows if those trendlines continue.

Wait, so we can infer the future from "trendlines", but not from past events? Either past events are part of a macro trend, and are valuable data points, or the micro data points you choose to focus on are unreliable as well. Talk about selection bias...

I would argue that data points that are barely a few years old, and obscured by an unprecedented hype cycle and gold rush, are not reliable predictors of anything. The safe approach would be to wait for the market to settle, before placing any bets on the future.

> Time from idea to implementation is collapsing. Junior and mid level work is disappearing first. Teams are shipping with fewer people. These are not hypotheticals.

What is hypothetical is what will happen to all this software and the companies that produced it a few years down the line. How reliable is it? How maintainable is it? How many security issues does it have? What has the company lost because those issues were exploited? Will the same people who produced it using these new tools be able to troubleshoot and fix it? Will the tools get better to allow them to do that?

> The reason this argument keeps reappearing has little to do with tools and everything to do with identity.

Really? Everything? There is no chance that some people are simply pointing out the flaws of this technology, and that the marketing around it is making it out to be far more valuable than it actually is, so that a bunch of tech grifters can add more zeroes to their net worth?

I don't get how anyone can speak about trends and what's currently happening with any degree of confidence. Let alone dismiss the skeptics by making wild claims about their character. Do better.
by Animats | 2026-01-18 07:05:19+00:00
This is the new system for emergency communications? TfL just finished up an upgrade on that in 2021. That upgrade was built by Thales.[1] That system is purely for operational use, and is not cell phone compatible. It's compatible with the gear cops and fire brigades use. Is it being replaced?

As late as 2018, the classic century-old system, with two bare wires on insulators on the tunnel walls, was still maintained.[2] Clipping a telephone handset to the two wires would connect to a dispatcher, and the wires were placed so that reaching out of the driver's cab to do this was possible. In addition, squeezing the wires together by hand would trip a relay and cut traction power. Is that still operational? The 2011 replacement was ISDN.

[1] https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/news-centre/press-releases/th...

[2] https://www.railengineer.co.uk/communications-on-the-central...
by ggm | 2026-01-18 07:05:57+00:00
I think in due course they will deal with it, but the profit centres in Google do not seem to put humans into decision making roles on customer alerted problems if the customer is a free user. If you pay for Google 1 (eg more storage) you paid for a responsive human and might have a better experience. If you are a paying customer and your paying customer identity alerted them, and they have been unresponsive that's more concerning.

So: do you pay Google for services?

That form is general availability. It's not locked to customers only.
by xobs | 2026-01-18 07:07:57+00:00
> Rust? Only Rust?

Yes, this OS is written in Rust. However, since it has a well-defined ABI, and all services are defined to use `#[repr(C)]`, and the interface is simple primitive enums, it's designed with C-like language support in mind. The hardest part in C is getting an equivalent to `#[repr(C, align(4096))]` which, last time I checked, only let you do alignments up to 64 or so without resorting to linker tricks.

> This mechanism seems ripe for squatting attacks

There are only a few services with well-known names, and they start up before things like the scheduler are running. Most things go through the nameserver service which supports things like attestation, finite-client limits, and signature checking.

> Just use standard ELF.

Sure, there's a loader available that lets you run standard ELF files: https://github.com/betrusted-io/xous-core/tree/main/apps/app...

The bootloader uses the MiniELF format because we can make assertations about things like the order of sections and about merging multiple segments, while also stripping non-loadable sections. It would be possible to just bundle all the ELF images for all programs together, but if you're generating the loader image you might as well shrink the image a bit.

> What?? No! sbrk() is a terrible interface.

Then you can call `MapMemory(NULL, NULL, [size], RWX)`: https://docs.rs/xous/latest/xous/syscall/fn.map_memory.html
by efreak | 2026-01-18 07:08:00+00:00
Considerate? Yes, I'll consider leaving you alone. If it seems that you're having an actual problem, I'll even leave you alone. But if you're being rude because you haven't considered that others might not be interested in listening to your tiktok videos repeat endlessly, then when I take that into consideration it will likely have a negative effect on how I decide to treat you.

I'll also take into consideration whether or not you appear to be homeless if you stink (choosing not to shower and deciding not to shower are two different things). I'll take into consideration who it sounds like you're talking to when you're telling on the phone ("are you ok" vs interminable conversations on speakerphone in the break room/restaurant/other public places). If you're playing loud music in your car, before calling you out I'll consider whether the doors are open (you might not realize) or if you have the windows open (sharing your music choices with the world).

Consideration is the entire point. It doesn't mean letting people do whatever they like, it means judging (thinking about) then before doing anything. You have every like right to play your video, and I have every right to get annoyed at you for doing it without being considerate yourself.

Considerate:
1. Having or showing regard for the needs or feelings of others. synonym: thoughtful.
Similar: thoughtful
2. Characterized by careful thought; deliberate.
3. Given to consideration or to sober reflection; regardful of consequences or circumstances; circumspect; careful; esp. careful of the rights, claims, and feelings of others.
by checker659 | 2026-01-18 07:10:23+00:00
> and not have to worry about the right libraries being installed on my system and whether I've generated a Makefile. Packages are easily searchable, hosted on popular platforms like GitHub, and I can file bugs and ask questions without having to join an obscure mailing list or deal with an unfriendly community.

Maybe it's just me, but that right there is the stuff of nightmares. What library, and written by who, is it going to pull in.
by viraptor | 2026-01-18 07:12:16+00:00
It was a very long time ago, but during a programming competition one of the warm-up questions was something to do with a modified sudoku puzzle. The naive algorithmic solution was too slow, the fancy algorithm took quite a bit of effort... and then there were people who realised that the threshold for max points was higher than you needed for a brute force check of all possible boards. (I wasn't one of them)

This generalises to a few situations where going faster just doesn't matter. For example for many cli tools it matters if they finish in 1s or 10s. But once you get to 10ms vs 100ms, you can ask "is anyone ever likely to run this in a loop on a massive amount of data?" And if the answer is yes, "should they write their own optimised version then?"
by mvdwoord | 2026-01-18 07:12:28+00:00
Great project! It takes a bit of fiddling to get the distance parameter right in some cases, and two possible improvements would be to allow for coordinate input rather than city name so I can point it at a specific spot as the center of the map. Another one would be to output all styles simultaneously so I can visually select from the generated images.

Anyhow, nice work. Thanks!
by r_singh | 2026-01-18 07:12:39+00:00
It depends on what you define as a startup. In my opinion it is, but as I’d read in another place: I think features will turn into products. So build a feature and do it the best for a segment and it should give you at least a small business.

And sure, maybe someone will try to copy what you build, but that’s a good problem to have because by then you’re probably somewhat successful.
by yunohn | 2026-01-18 07:14:17+00:00
> no programming language supports the notion of "just do the usual" or "I don't care, pick whatever, we can revisit the topic once the choice matters"

Programming languages already take lots of decisions implicitly and explicitly on one’s behalf. But there are way more details of course, which are then handled by frameworks, libraries, etc. Surely at some point, one has to take a decision? Your underlying point is about avoiding boilerplate, and LLMs definitely help with that already - to a larger extent than cookie cutter repos, but none of them can solve IRL details that are found through rigorous understanding of the problem and exploration via user interviews, business challenges, etc.
by peter_d_sherman | 2026-01-18 07:14:19+00:00
I absolutely love it!

(Now, I would have preferred a Lattice ICE40 FPGA as opposed to the Xilinx Spartan II XC2S100 FPGA, simply because the ICE40 toolchain is entirely open source (https://prjicestorm.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) but that's a very minor (less than 1%) extremely small "nitpick" -- on what should be praised and lauded as some truly great work!)

Anyway, to repeat, I absolutely love it!

Upvoted and favorited!

Well done!
by refurb | 2026-01-18 07:15:07+00:00
As a scientist, the two links you provided are severely lacking in utility.

The first developed a model to calculate protein function based on DNA sequence - yet provides no results of testing of the model. Until it does, it’s no better than the hundreds of predictive models thrown on the trash heap of science.

The second tested a models “ability to predict neuroscience results” (which reads really oddly). How did they test it? Pitted humans against LLMs in determining which published abstracts were correct.

Well yeah? That’s exactly what LLMs are good at - predicting language. But science is not advanced by predicting which abstracts of known science are correct.

It reminds me of my days in working with computational chemists - we had an x-ray structure of the molecule bound to the target. You can’t get much better than that at hard, objective data.

“Oh yeah, if you just add a methyl group here you’ll improve binding by an order of magnitude”.

So we went back to the lab, spent a week synthesizing the molecule, sent it to the biologists for a binding study. And the new molecule was 50% worse at binding.

And that’s not to blame the computation chemist. Biology is really damn hard. Scientists are constantly being surprised at results that are contradictory to current knowledge.

Could LLMs be used in the future to help come up with broad hypotheses in new areas? Sure! Are the hypotheses going to prove fruitless most of the time? Yes! But that’s science.

But any claim of a massive leap in scientific productivity (whether LLMs or something else) should be taken with a grain of salt.
by AndrewStephens | 2026-01-18 07:15:36+00:00
Great question, I could answer with many stories but here are two:

The (deliberately) very limited analytics software I wrote for my personal website[0] could have used database but I didn't want to add a dependency to what was a very simple project so I hacked up an in-memory datastructure that periodically dumps itself to disk as a json file. This gives persistence across reboots and at a pinch I can just edit the file with a text editor.

Game design is filled with "stupid" ideas that work well. I wrote a text-based game[1] that includes Trek-style starship combat. I played around with a bunch of different ideas for enemy AI before just reverting to a simple action drawn off the top of a small deck. It's a very easy system to balance and expand, and just as fun for the player.

[0] https://sheep.horse/visitor_statistics.html

[1] https://sheep.horse/voyage_of_the_marigold/
by qaboutthat | 2026-01-18 07:17:11+00:00
Sorry to have missed this. First, props that Blink is indeed superior in that it actually works.

My recollection is that the primary way Termius "feels better" is the pre-terminal UI (configuring hosts, etc).

But I'm still a daily Blink user, so I don't 100% recall what Termius did to make me think it was nicer, I just remember that scrolling was fucked so I gave up on it.