MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sbinnee | 2026-01-23 13:36:19+00:00
I enjoyed writing git commit messages. I value good commit messages. But at work I recently created a slash command (for those who don’t know, it’s like a snippet for anything) that writes a git commit for staged changes with optional jira tags. Although I always end up amending it, it is so convenient. Does it mean I don’t value good git commit messages? I don’t know… I try my best to review every commit at least.
by marginalia_nu | 2026-01-23 13:37:12+00:00
Oh yeah, there's definitely room for improvement in that general direction. Indexing anchor texts is much better than page rank, but in isolation, it's not sufficient.

I've also seen some benefit fingerpinting the network traffic the websites make using a headless browser, to identify which ad networks they load. Very few spam sites have no ads, since there wouldn't be any economy in that.

e.g. https://marginalia-search.com/site/www.salon.com?view=traffi...

The full data set of DOM samples + recorded network traffic are in an enormous sqlite file (400GB+), and I haven't yet worked out any way of distributing the data yet. Though it's in the back of my mind as something I'd like to solve.
by sam_lowry_ | 2026-01-23 13:37:25+00:00
Shouldn't we sacrifice some security for convenience? And shouldn't we at least have a public discussion where to draw the line?

I already don't encrypt my Pinebook storage, because the device is low-powered.

I now disabled ObscureKeystrokeTiming on the ssh clients where it does not matter. And it should not matter in 99.9999% of cases.

P.S. There's a good reason airline frequencies are unencrypted AM and I hope IT "security" mindset does not reach its dirty hands up the air.
by racktash | 2026-01-23 13:37:56+00:00
We're well past the point where (and it's ever growing) evidence of Trumpism's tyranny and cruelty will sway anyone, I think. As depressing as it is, a large swathe of people just do not and cannot care. I remain shocked that the March CECOT deportations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_2025_American_deportatio...) is largely untalked about now. Yes, many months have passed, but the blatant human rights violations involved remain truly shocking to me.
by fuzzfactor | 2026-01-23 13:38:01+00:00
>things like glyph ordering, bidi resolution, cursor movement, hit‑testing, line breaking, and font fallback

I think part of the problem is that things like this are often just barely working on the one set of test data that often just barely covers the fundamental requirement in its most simplified "happy path" form to begin with. LTR in this case.

And then the coders move on to get the next objective barely working, but nobody ever goes back far enough to reinforce the weak points in the fundamental structure before it's a far more challenging task. And then if done it's still too challenging to go all the way back.
by techdmn | 2026-01-23 13:38:11+00:00
I wouldn't be so dismissive. With only two choices, you get a lot of variation on both sides. I'm sure some people were motivated by animosity, racism, misogyny. Others were likely motivated by things Trump is willing to say out loud: Our trade policies are hurting average Americans. Our oversea imperialism does not benefit average Americans. We need to "drain the swamp". Of course his policies actively make all those problems worse, and could generally be described as an unmitigated disaster, but the pitch was compelling to at least some set of his voters.
by danw1979 | 2026-01-23 13:38:55+00:00
I'm not sure I agree it's completely unenforceable: a sloppy, overly verbose PR, maybe without an attached issue, is pretty easy to pick out.

There's some sensible, easily-judged-by-a-human rules in here. I like the spirit of it and it's well written (I assume by Mitchell, not Claude, given the brevity).
by reactordev | 2026-01-23 13:39:06+00:00
On the contrary. I like agile for when you don’t know exactly what you’re building but you can react quickly to change and try to capture it.

Moving fast and breaking things, agile.

On the other hand. When you know what you want to build but it’s a very large endeavor that takes careful planning and coordination across departments, traditional waterfall method still works best.

You can break that down into an agile-fall process with SAFe and Scrum of Scrums and all that PM mumbo jumbo if you need to. Or just kanban it.

In the end it’s just a mode of working.
by sarchertech | 2026-01-23 13:39:20+00:00
"most of the US" . And yet you think that a group of aliens looking at planet Earth would anchor on that region. This makes no sense. It is what I meant by "parochial".

Is it that hard to Imagine a group of Aliens is building a scale for the United States of America, which in context is the only relevant country since this entire discussion is about the US switching to Celsius. It doesn’t actually have to be aliens. Just a neutral part with no bias towards an existing scale.

> I can. But if you don't know better than to avoid focussing on that, you're missing the mere familiarity that was emphasised repeatedly.

Familiarity is obviously the reason that the US is a metric holdout. No one has ever argued otherwise.

The only point I am making in this e tire forsaken thread is that for the very specific purpose of air temperature in the United States, F has a nice advantage to C in that the numbers normally line up 0 to 100 and that all other things being equal humans find scales from 0-100 pleasant.

Multiple People in this thread who have no familiarity with Fahrenheit have agreed with this.

Because it is slightly nicer scale in this specific place for this specific purpose, no one is gonna to voluntarily switch the way that some people voluntarily switch to grams when baking or mm when working with small objects.
by cynicalpeace | 2026-01-23 13:39:33+00:00
My instinct to this was: "This is literally patronizing"

Threats are what every parent tells their child: "If you do X, I'll take away Y"

For parenting, a limited form of this probably makes sense, because the parent has an authority over the child given by The Nature of Things.

But between adults this mode of communication is grotesque, and it is more and more common.

Especially amongst redditors, forum moderators, and other geeks of the ilk.
by c0balt | 2026-01-23 13:40:06+00:00
> Imagine if Docker the company could charge AWS and Google for their use of their technology.

An "issue" is that Docker these days mostly builds on open standards and has well documented APIs. Open infrastructure like this has only limited vendor lock-in.

Building a docker daemon compatible service is not trivial but was already mostly done with podman. It is compatible to the extent that the official docker cli mostly works with it oob (having implemented the basic Docker HTTP API endpoints too). AWS/GCP could almost certainly afford to build a "podman" too, instead of licensing Docked.

This is not meant to defend the hyperscalers themselves but should maybe out approaches like this in perspective. Docker got among other things large because it was free, monetizing after that is hard (see also Elasticsearch/Redis and the immediate forks).
by bluGill | 2026-01-23 13:41:24+00:00
What forest? Either it was owned by a noble with enough of an army to stop you, your great...grandparents already cut it, or the land wouldn't be useful for farming for some other reason.

North America had vast empty forests - but remember just before Europeans arrived disease (small pox) killed large portions of the population. We have very little recorded about what life was like before Columbus, but archeological evidence suggests that the land was already used to the max capacity of their technology. (Europe did bring technology to better use the land - for some definition of better. I'm not qualified to comment on why they didn't develop the technology, but there seems to be some interesting culture factors - perhaps you can find an expert)
by Apira_G | 2026-01-23 13:41:31+00:00
Honestly, I think fighting AI with AI is inevitable at this point. When everyone is sending applications, AI may be the solution to reduce all this noise in the job market.

When I was applying for jobs, I tried to focus more on roles that matched my CV, instead of sending out multiple applications. Lately, I’ve seen a lot of new AI job search platforms emerging that claim to help with this. From platforms for optimising CVs to matching candidates with relevant roles. I’m yet to try them myself, but I’ve signed up to the waitlist for one called TalentAid and will get my first month free, so I’m looking forward to giving it a go.

If these tools do what they promise, they could definitely make it easier for candidates to get their CVs through an AI-powered ATS and actually reach human eyes. As I said, sometimes you have to fight AI with AI.
by stokedbits | 2026-01-23 13:42:06+00:00
I get the authors spirit of this article, but a statement like “ People who love using AI to create software are loving it because they don’t value the act of creating & understanding the software.” Just kinda comes off as insulting.

This comes with the assumption that everyone is vibe coding. Which just isn’t the case in the professional circles I’m part of. People are steering tools and putting up guard rails to save time typing. The “creating” part of coding has very little to do with the code, in fact my perspective is that it’s the most insignificant part of creating software.

At the end of the day, how code gets into a pr doesn’t matter. A human should be responsible to review, correct, and validate the code.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-23 13:42:10+00:00
Okay I think I see the issue (and slight misunderstanding). I believe the problem is actually latency. I was assuming the jitter interval would be noticeably larger than the gap between typical (say 95%) of key presses. Any smaller than that and you start to need cover traffic.

Such an interval would still face correlation issues due to the varying nature of the overlap between the jitter intervals, however it seems like that should be trivial to address. That said, just throwing in some cover traffic is bound to be simpler.

But a jitter interval long enough that keystroke packets can change order is going to be noticeable to a human typing quickly on what should be a solid connection - my WiFi is only at 3 to 6 ms RTT and I already notice that versus a wired connection. That doesn't sound so trivial to fix, and once again just throwing in some cover traffic completely solves the issue.

So just do what's simple.

My next question was going to be, why on the order of 100 extra packets instead of just 1 or 2? But of course an attacker could attempt to search some set of permutations for recognizable words. So either you drown everything out (simple) or you hook a multilingual dictionary up to a key stroke delay model for your cover traffic generator (complex).

But really shouldn't this feature be implemented as some constant (low) background level of cover traffic that scales up as your typing frequency increases but caps out at some (still fairly low) rate? That seems both less likely to suffer from inadvertent leaks as well as not running afoul of the issue in the article.
by jaberjaber23 | 2026-01-23 13:43:05+00:00
Six months ago, if you asked me whether an LLM could write a CUDA kernel that actually beats PyTorch's compiler, I would have said no. The optimization space is too complex. Too many hardware details. Too easy to write something that compiles but runs slower than the baseline

I was wrong!!

We're now seeing multi-agent systems that take your PyTorch code and spit out CUDA or Triton kernels with 2x to 14x speedups over torch.compile(mode='max-autotune-no-cudagraphs'). Not on toy benchmarks. On real models like Llama-3.1-8B, Whisper, and Stable Diffusion
by zbentley | 2026-01-23 13:43:06+00:00
> Validating that your compiler didn’t introduce a timing side channel into a crypto algo is harder than validating that the crypto algo has no memory safety bugs.

Genuine question from a novice in this area: assuming that your critical crypto operations are, at the assembly level, in identifiable labeled blocks, why is this hard?

My understanding of timing attacks is that most of them derive from code that uses a looping construct such that performance is O(length(data)), and that most mitigations involve either replacing loops with constant-time instructions, or padding loops out to be fixed-iteration-count (in which case, they can/should hopefully be unrolled).

If that's true, wouldn't it be easy to identify whether a specific, user-selected critical section of compiled/assembly-output code was vulnerable to a side channel by checking it for nonterminal jumps (or generating a very simple/shallow-depth CFG and checking for cycles)?

Even if that's possible, I know it's definitely not sufficient for timing attack protection (awareness of specific instructions' performance and instructions whose performance are affected by other code are just a few examples of where this breaks down); I'm just wondering if it's a means of checking some timing-attack low hanging fruit in an easy way at compile time or (assuming simple disassembly is possible and critical sections can still be identified from machine code) startup time.

I very much do not want to sound like I'm proposing a solution from first principles here; I'm a total novice and this is a very deep area. I'm quite certain the answer is somewhere on the spectrum between "this doesn't work for $reasons" and "this is already well-known and practiced in sanitizer passes/serious cryptography libs". I'm just curious about the approach.
by Lerc | 2026-01-23 13:44:19+00:00
That's the judgement made with all consumption of energy. The benefits weighed against the costs.

Because of the harms of environmental change, there should be pressure placed to avoid damaging ways to generate that energy.

When people complain about the amount of energy being used, they are making the judgement on the benefits. This is subjective and people do not agree on the benefits. The argument you shouldn't do this because of the energy consumed is implicitly saying "My judgement on the worth of this supercedes yours"

Pretty soon it devolves into criticizing the energy use of things you just don't like.

A society has to accept that people have different opinions on things. That includes what it is worth using energy for.

Producing clean energy is something everyone should be able to get behind. There is a solid consensus that it would make a better world.
Show HN: ARM64-optimized prime sieve with 3.75x memory compression
by amadeapewe | 2026-01-23 13:44:24+00:00
This is not new math — it’s a memory-layout optimization of a classic wheel/segmented sieve (H=30).
Speedup comes from packing 8 residues into one byte, reducing memory traffic and cache misses on ARM64 (tested on Apple M1).
Benchmarks compare against a standard wheel sieve.
I’m a graphic designer by background; code was written with AI help. Feedback welcome.
by Pooge | 2026-01-23 13:44:38+00:00
Don't we start the equations after observing a phenomenon? It wouldn't make sense to try to explain something before observing it..

For example, after observing black holes we understood that Newton's was not enough to explain them. Thus we had to find another theory that explained our observations. Now with quantum computing we know that Einstein's theory is insufficient, too (not very knowledgeable on quantum physics myself, though)
by dgroshev | 2026-01-23 13:44:44+00:00
It's pretty easy to get some hard data, it's an open source project. I went to https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3A... and looked at the last few PRs:

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4824/files "some performance improvements", no new tests

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4820/ "fix wal checkpoint", one basic test

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4815/ "Optimizer: fix bugs, improve cost model", a lot of nontrivial logic, no new tests

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4814 "WAL auto truncation: increase epoch to prevent stale pages reuse", there's a new test with a comment "It is slightly fragile and can be removed if it will be unclear how to maintain it"

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4806/ "Busy snapshot bugfix" with two new tests with the same comments as 4814 (I guess they didn't fix the bug in one go?)

https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4802/ "fix/translate: revert change that allowed index cursor with stale position to be read", fixes a data-corrupting bug, there's a regression test, good (although the original bug sounds like it should've been caught by a suite like the one SQLite has)

That's just a couple days worth of PRs.

This style of development does not inspire confidence. They develop features, sure. But I want my database to be rock-solid and completely covered by tests, not just move fast and break things. It's not FUD to just look at how they approach PRs.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-23 13:45:08+00:00
I've seen a demo house in Canada that had a bucket standing in the middle of a room with -20 outside. The bucket had been there all winter and it never froze, a single, huge candle warmed the house. It was most impressive. I never did figure out how enough oxygen made it in to keep that candle burning!

But it really made me realize that even though I'm used to brick houses and stone everywhere that that is a terrible thing efficiency wise. A properly insulated wooden house can indeed be heated almost by body heat and waste heat alone. The big loss is windows so triple insulated and properly mounted windows are a must for such a setup.
Show HN: VelinScript 3.0 – eine neue Sprache MIT bidirektionaler Type‑Inference
by SkyliteDesign | 2026-01-23 13:45:09+00:00
Ich habe eine neue Programmiersprache gebaut, die folgende Features kombiniert:

bidirektionale Type‑Inference (inkl. Any‑Refinement über Member‑Access)

automatische Auflösung verschachtelter Result‑Typen

Flow‑Sensitive Typing für desugarten Code

automatisches Code‑Ordering basierend auf Abhängigkeiten

Multi‑File Build‑Orchestrierung (DAG‑Analyse)

AI‑Code‑Sicherheitslayer (Prompt‑Sanitization, Sandbox, Auto‑Review)

Ich freue mich über Feedback, Kritik, Edge‑Cases und alles, was hilft, das System robuster zu machen.
by bfly123 | 2026-01-23 13:48:06+00:00
Hi HN,

Different models and CLI tools have their own strengths, but we are often forced to choose just one, or rely on hidden "agentic" API calls that are opaque and hard to control.

I built CCB to solve this. It lets you freely combine different CLIs (Claude Code,
Gemini, Codex, OpenCode, Droid) and mount them into Tmux split panes with a single command.

It solves the "single model tunnel vision" by enabling stable interaction between them. You can use natural language in one CLI (e.g., Claude) to delegate tasks to other visible CLIs and get results back.

For example:
* You can ask Claude to design a feature.
* Claude can then explicitly instruct Gemini (in the adjacent pane) to read the docs or review the plan.
* You see everything happen in real-time across the splits.

Feedback and PRs are welcome!
by plagiarist | 2026-01-23 13:48:13+00:00
> Apple doesn't send out marketing messages and obeys their customers' marketing email preferences ... except .. when you buy a new iPhone and then they send emails about "Your new iPhone lets you try Apple TV for 3 months free!" and then more emails about "You have Apple Music for 3 months free!"

That's "transactional" I'm sure. It makes sense that a company is legally allowed to send transactional emails, but they all abuse it to send marketing bullshit wherever they can blur the line.
by kxbnb | 2026-01-23 13:48:47+00:00
This is the exact problem we're seeing with MCP adoption too - powerful tool access with zero restrictions by default.

The "tool chaining" attack class is particularly nasty because each individual action looks benign. Read file? Fine. Send email? Fine. But the combination is exfiltration.

We're working on deterministic policy enforcement for agent pipelines at keypost.ai - the idea is you define what tools can do (not just whether they can be called), so "email tool can only send to @company.com" becomes a hard boundary the agent can't reason around.

The tricky part is making policies that are specific enough to block attacks but general enough to not break legitimate workflows. Curious what patterns you found that would be hardest to catch with simple allow/deny rules?
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-23 13:48:48+00:00
Airline isn't about power consumption but rather reliability. You don't introduce failure modes to safety critical systems unless absolutely necessary.

Meanwhile the power consumption of a few extra packets or even AES on your block storage device is approximately nothing relative to the other things the device is doing. Unless the CPU or GPU is going full tilt the screen on a mobile device consumes more power than the rest of the system combined (not sure about a laptop but it's likely a similar story).

It's a bit like worrying about saving a single glass of drinking water, then turning around and hopping in the shower for an hour. Or not flushing the toilet then immediately drawing a bath.
by imranq | 2026-01-23 13:49:02+00:00
Most people just go to a few websites anyway

- Email

- YouTube

- Community / Reddit / HN

- Your news site

- Your LLM provider

The rest are other topics covered by search, but in general most users do only 2 searches per day: https://explodingtopics.com/blog/google-searches-per-day

So I'm guessing there wasn't that much demand for niche web searching for them to continue supporting it
by aranw | 2026-01-23 13:49:03+00:00
Which SQLite Go library do you use? My biggest pain with using SQLite in Go is often the libraries and the reliance of CGO which is what puts me off using Turso

Edit: Looking at the go mod file I noticed github.com/mattn/go-sqlite3 which I think is a C wrapper library so I'm assuming you rely on CGO for compiling
by iamnothere | 2026-01-23 13:49:09+00:00
I hate that they use “AI” as a scaremongering tool in the title here, as it’s not just AI. The system they are building includes pervasive camera surveillance, tracking via ad networks, and plenty of non “AI” algorithms. Regardless, the views expressed are troubling:

> “When I was in justice, my ultimate vision for that part of the criminal justice system was to achieve, by means of AI and technology, what Jeremy Bentham tried to do with his Panopticon. That is that the eyes of the state can be on you at all times.

A normal person doesn’t make that kind of statement.
by deltoidmaximus | 2026-01-23 13:49:24+00:00
I never really could get into the Cameron/Joe romance, it felt like it was initially inserted to get sexy people doing sexy things onto the show and then had to be a star crossed lovers thing after character tweaks in season 2.

But when they changed the characters to be passionate stubborn people eventually started to cling to each other as they together rode the whirlwind of change the show really found its footing for me. And they did so without throwing away the events of season 1, instead having the 'takers' go on redemption arcs.

My only real complaint after re-watching really was it needed maybe another half season. I think the show should have ended with the .com bust and I didn't like that Joe sort of ran away when it was clear he'd attached himself to the group as his family by the end of the show.
by torginus | 2026-01-23 13:49:56+00:00
Imo the problem with SaaS products is that their revenue expectations are priced accordingly to the market they serve, not the money it takes recreating them.

If I wrote the best word processor in the world, I could probably sell it for a decent money to quite a few people.

However if I expressed my revenue expectations as a percentage of revenue from the world's bestselling novels, I would be very quickly disappointed.