MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ranyume | 2026-01-14 14:12:21+00:00
Location: Argentina

Remote: No

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Go, Java, Spring, MCPs, LangChain & LangGraph, Agents, Python, React, Vue, AWS, Docker, Datadog, Redis, Chaos Testing (Steadybit), Sidecars, Authorization (Open Policy Agent), Envoy Proxy

Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hernan-gabriel-farias/

Email: hernan.farias.arg@gmail.com
by watwut | 2026-01-14 14:12:29+00:00
> Your definition of a "good manager" is essentially "does not actively sabotage work of subordinates".

This is not even remotely what that person said. They said "motivates by helping you understand how the things you are doing are actually critical to the success of the team and the company". That is not nearly "does not actively sabotage".

> A person knowing how and in what ways their work contributes to the success of the unit and the whole are absolute basics

Oh please. If you reject every single thing good managers do to motivate people as "does not count" then of course you will end up with nothing. It is super easy to not see how this or that contributes to the success of a thing. It is also possible to be in position where you are in fact not contributing to the success - while you created an illusion in your head about how important you are.
by calgoo | 2026-01-14 14:13:00+00:00
Thats what i always did for our gitlab CI pipeline, just deploy dedicated images for different purposes. We had general terraform images for terraform code, this made it easy to standardize versions etc. Then we made specific ones for projects with a lot of dependencies so we could run the deployment pipeline in seconds instead of minutes. But now you need to maintain the docker images too. All about trade-offs.
by steveklabnik | 2026-01-14 14:14:07+00:00
Interestingly enough, Zig does not use the same terminology as C/C++/Rust do here. Zig has "illegal behavior," which is either "safety checked" or "unchecked." Unchecked illegal behavior is like undefined behavior. Compiler flags and in-source annotations can change the semantics from checked to unchecked or vice versa.

Anyway that's a long way of saying that you're right, integer overflow is illegal behavior, I just think it's interesting.
by Cyph0n | 2026-01-14 14:14:07+00:00
Well, according to this[1] bench, you can get ~10 Gbps with kernel WG.

I'm interested in this because I'm working on a small hobby project to learn eBPF. The idea is to implement a "Tailscale-lite" that eliminates context switches by keeping both Wireguard and L3 and L4 policy handling in kernel space. To me, the bulk of Tailscale's overhead comes from the fact that the dataplane is running between user and kernel space.

[1]: https://github.com/cyyself/wg-bench
by IG_Semmelweiss | 2026-01-14 14:14:36+00:00
This didn't happen in a vaccum.

The tobacco companies like RJR, packed with scientiests researching how to make cigarrettes more addictive, were trojaned into mass food companies like Nabisco [1]

It should not be a surprise that there's been a relentless pursuit of addictive food ever since.

[1] https://legalclarity.org/inside-the-rjr-nabisco-leveraged-bu...
by skeeter2020 | 2026-01-14 14:15:00+00:00
I've found the best managers are very aware of the "clueless manager" trope and suffer from imposter's syndrome more than most, but use that to make them good managers doing what you said: recognizing & owning where they are blind or lack skill (working on it, asking for help), helping where they can (doing a share of the shit work, or backfilling holes), and trying to be a nice person (building a relationship beyond the manager-employee dynamic). This doesn't mean they are your friend, but most people want to work (and win!) with people they like.
by potato3732842 | 2026-01-14 14:15:08+00:00
Of course there's business happening and it will be publicized in the normal ways. This is completely tangential to all the business not happening and all the other sharing of information that's not set in stone enough to be creating a paper trail over.

Like you can't just schedule a conference call with a bunch of important people at your competitors for the purpose of bitching about suppliers or something. You can do that at a conference.
by nayroclade | 2026-01-14 14:15:17+00:00
As I understand it, funding was provided by NLnet[1], a longstanding Dutch non-profit that focuses on supporting open internet technologies. The funding was provided specifically for reviving Servo. By the looks of it, the money itself mostly comes from the EU, which has various grant programmes to fund open access technology, digital sovereignty, etc. Given several Servo contributors worked for Igalia, I expect they submitted a proposal to NLnet for them to fund Servo development, and it was successful.

[1] https://nlnet.nl/project/Servo/
by steveklabnik | 2026-01-14 14:15:22+00:00
We do have some information: https://youtu.be/Y6SSTRr2mFU?t=361 (linked with the specific timestamp)

In short, the previous two attempts were done by completely different groups of different people, a few years apart. Your direct question about if direct wisdom from these two attempts was shared, either between them, or used by Stylo, isn't specifically discussed though.

> a C++ implementation could be faster because it has better shared data concepts

What concepts are those?
by pjc50 | 2026-01-14 14:15:28+00:00
Really tricky. The big invisible (to many people) piece of progress is equalities; homophobia was much more overt back then. But I still think the best time for us in the UK was the 1997-2001 period. "Cool Brittania" to Iraq War.

1990 probably a bit too early. Right at the end of the Cold War. Deindustrialization still a big, ugly scar across many cities. The Troubles still ongoing; few residents of Northern Ireland would set the time machine back before 1998, I think.
by smeeagain2 | 2026-01-14 14:16:17+00:00
> This response, along with your OP, it’s so pretentious and condescending.

It's simply a fact. Why do you and "Hacker News" hate facts?

Let me guess: you think you already have learned everything you think you need to know about life, and I can't possibly teach you anything, right?

> It seems you feel that you’re superior to everyone intellectually.

On HN/Reddit (but I repeat myself)? Yes, that is correct. This place is a cesspool.

> I assume

Found the problem.

> that you hold the same attitude in person and this is not helping your situation.

Wrong. My situation does not need to be "helped." This is what you keep missing. I'm doing just fine without you or your corrupt "society." You bring negative value to the world. I do far better the less I interact with you pretentious, obnoxious douchebags.

Look at my post history, and notice how 90% of the posts I made here were completely innocuous, but got downvoted, flagged, and disappeared anyway. This site is full of whiny, useless FAGS. It's a toxic shithole. A giant circle jerk. You're all corrupt, down to the last man or dude pretending to be a chick.

> The irony is that I’ve done exactly this. I tried to start a business in my early 20’s and failed dramatically. I stopped developing altogether for a decade while I did minimum wage jobs and struggled to find a career. I started developing again in my early 30’s and half a decade later I’m running a software business.

This is cool (legitimately), but I'm not sure what this has to do with me.

> You may well be intelligent but severely lacking in other necessary areas. It seems it is you who has much to learn.

You're projecting.

There is a reason God has kept me alive this long. I'm doing exactly what I'm supposed to be doing.
by phendrenad2 | 2026-01-14 14:16:45+00:00
I've worked with a few coworkers who came from a 996 environment and kept doing it out of habit. As I was young and impressionable, I started doing it also. I'm not going to be careful with my sentence: these people were absolutely NOT getting more work done than others, in fact they seemed to move glacially, because they had so many more hours to fill up. It's a total footgun, and it chases away good people once the rot reaches management and they start promoting based on perception rather than reality.
by dathinab | 2026-01-14 14:17:19+00:00
maybe much later they did

initially they outright said, there is no problem

and Musk went further saying it's free speech and implying if you try do anything against it you are fascist

and you could check the Grok "~feed" and get tons over tons of examples of them _not_ doing anything. And if that changed, then it did very recently. I mean the UK is not the only country where the topic of regulating X to to them failing to self regulate and outright intentionally ignoring local laws was opened up. And as much as Musk might say he don't care and it's implied that the US will retaliate against any country which enforces actions against X for not complying with their law when doing business in their country, it still is a huge headache for X (company) and it's not like people in the US are supper happy about that either.
by vintermann | 2026-01-14 14:17:25+00:00
When this was in the music industry news a few years ago, a lot more tracks were mentioned, I don't remember if this one was one of the ones they listed or one I found myself. I did find many myself though, at the time it wasn't hard at all. I just remember this one because it was memorable, their name being the same as a far more Wikipedia-notable band.

What is hard though, is finding out which aggregator/intermediary/record company collected the payments for mayfly Mayhem's plays. I have not succeeded at that, if you find a way to get that information out of Spotify, do tell me. It's probably actually easier to find out who made the music. MBW managed to find out that at least some of these tracks were made by well-connected Swedish producers, as I recall.
by bluGill | 2026-01-14 14:17:28+00:00
You need to find the right person to complain to. Here we are sympathetic, but can't do anything.

The right person is the other riders on the train - but the hard part is to frame this such that they join you on a march to the the agency that owns that machines to complain. I wish you the best of luck figuring out how to do that (I don't know how to do it - and if I did there are might higher priority things that need to be fixed).
by jijijijij | 2026-01-14 14:17:29+00:00
No, but subnets can't be as easily associated with unwanted traffic. If IPv6 gets blocked you just get another IP. A VPN or hosting provider can't simply rent, or god forbid buy IPv4 addresses and subnets, arbitrarily. The IPs they use are rather static and easy to discover. Rather trivial to block all them, preemptively. Residential IPv4 VPNs are not legal offerings and their use is limited.
VPNs can fight traffic analysis, they can't fight preemptive IPv4 blocking.

See, it doesn't matter if it's somehow possible to control IPv6 traffic, factually, it is sooo much easier to control and observe IPv4. IPv6 adoption isn't going great at all and now there are new strong business incentives against it.

The direction we're moving right now isn't free intergalactic mesh networking, but holistic control and centralization by the tech oligarchy. IPv6 is good things... we can't have those.
by Rochus | 2026-01-14 14:18:08+00:00
Interesting article, thanks. There is indeed a "semantic gap". However, there is also a practical solution: bidirectional LLM translation. You can verify the formal specification by back-translating it to natural language with another LLM session, allowing human review at the intent level rather than requiring expertise in e.g. Event-B syntax (see https://rochuskeller.substack.com/p/why-rust-solves-a-proble...). This addresses the concern about "mis-defining concepts" without requiring the human to be a formal methods expert. The human can review intent and invariants in natural language, not proof obligations. The AI handles the mathematical tedium while the human focuses on domain correctness, which is exactly where human expertise belongs.
Show HN: A minimal example of why reactive systems oscillate
by SpicyG | 2026-01-14 14:18:12+00:00
I kept seeing the same failure pattern across systems that look unrelated on the surface: autoscaling that flaps, alert storms that resolve on their own, retraining pipelines that chase noise, and failover logic that makes things worse before they get better.

In each case, nothing was obviously “wrong.” The metrics were real. The thresholds made sense. The logic was locally defensible. What broke was timing.

To make this concrete, I built a tiny toy system with a feedback loop. It reacts immediately to a noisy signal by taking action, and that action feeds back into the signal. There’s no bug in the logic, just immediacy.

Conceptually, it looks like this:

signal = noisy_input()
if signal > threshold:
take_action()

When this runs inside a feedback loop, the system oscillates. Not because the threshold is bad, but because the decision happens before the signal has stabilized.

Now add one constraint: the decision is only allowed to exist if the condition persists over time.

window = recent(signal, N)
if mean(window) > threshold and variance(window) < limit:
take_action()

No prediction, no learning, no global state. Just persistence.

The oscillation disappears.

What surprised me is how often this shows up in real systems. Treating decision timing as an architectural concern, rather than a tuning problem, seems to explain a lot of brittle behavior I’ve seen in production.

I’m curious how others here handle this in practice. Do you rely on hysteresis, persistence windows, explicit “not-yet” states, or something else entirely? And where have you found immediate reaction to actually be the right choice?
by bbor | 2026-01-14 14:18:13+00:00
A) I'm assuming you meant "TBH", but please correct me if I have an acronym to learn.

B) Hacker news is crazy -- I didn't expect to spawn a thread that would get responses from actual board members, ex- or otherwise! I'd like to take a brief moment deep down into this thread to echo what I said to Simon above: thanks for giving your valuable time to help grow the best programming language & community to ever exist :)
by amalcon | 2026-01-14 14:18:28+00:00
Well, it can be annoying to limit oneself to a smaller under-seat bag. Taking the bigger bag out during the flight uses up even more of the available space. I've generally got nowhere to put it except behind my legs (which cramps things a lot): on my lap doesn't work if I want to actually use anything in that bag.

It's easier to just pack my laptop (plus anything I might use during the flight) in my overhead bin carry-on. It's a real pain to actually get anything out of there, but a paperback book or ebook reader will fit in a coat pocket or small handbag -- and that's all I truly need on the plane. Plus, the airline won't be able to force you to check your overhead carry-on that way since the laptop has lithium batteries in it.
by sensanaty | 2026-01-14 14:19:44+00:00
> Many cynics seem to believe rich people are demons with zero consideration for their fellow humans.

Do they have considerations for their fellow humans? I certainly haven't observed that they give a shit about anyone or anything that isn't their bottom line. What exactly has Zuckerberg contributed to this world and to his fellow man, other than a mass data harvesting operation that has enabled real life genocides?

"They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks." - Zuckerberg, talking about Facebook users.

What has Bezos done for the average Amazon warehouse worker, other than stick them in grueling conditions where they even have their toilet breaks timed, just to squeeze out every single inch of life out of his workers he can? What have the people working for Big Oil done that is beneficial to humanity, other than suppressing climate change research and funding lobbying groups to hide the fact that they knew about climate change since the 70s? What have the tobacco execs done for humanity, other than bribing doctors to falsify medical research indicating that tobacco isn't harmful? I could go on and on about all the evils brought on to the world by psychotic executives and their sycophantic legions sucking the teet hoping for a handout, but we'd be here all day.

Sure, there's a few philanthropists out there bobbing around in the ocean of soulless psychopaths that are doing some good things, but they're very much the exception.

> Not to mention that we have democratic mechanisms that give power to the masses.

Even (especially?) just looking solely from a US POV, these democratic mechanisms are quickly and actively being eroded by these "considerate" billionaires like Thiel (who is quite openly & proudly naming his companies using literally evil things from Tolkien's works). They're talking about taking over Greenland to distract from them all being ousted as pedophiles for fuck's sake, what "democractic mechanisms"?

> We will obviously transition to a system where most of us can live a comfortable life without working a full time job, and it's going to be great.

I again don't see how this is "obvious", and you haven't outlined anything about how this utopia is supposed to work other than extremely vague statements. How is this utopian state more obvious than the one we are currently freefalling into, a dystopian police state where your every breath is being tracked in some database that is then shared with anyone with 3 pennies to pay to access the data?
by pornel | 2026-01-14 14:19:54+00:00
In short, the maximum possible speed is the same (+/- some nitpicks), but there can be significant differences in typical code, and it's hard to define what's a realistic typical example.

The big one is multi-threading. In Rust, whether you use threads or not, all globals must be thread-safe, and the borrow checker requires memory access to be shared XOR mutable. When writing single-threaded code takes 90% of effort of writing multi-threaded one, Rust programmers may as well sprinkle threads all over the place regardless whether that's a 16x improvement or 1.5x improvement. In C, the cost/benefit analysis is different. Even just spawning a thread is going to make somebody complain that they can't build the code on their platform due to C11/pthread/openmp. Risk of having to debug heisenbugs means that code typically won't be made multi-threaded unless really necessary, and even then preferably kept to simple cases or very coarse-grained splits.
by ndsipa_pomu | 2026-01-14 14:20:16+00:00
> The anti-LLM side seems much more insecure.

I can't agree with that.

The pro-LLM side is relentlessly pushing everyone into using it, even when very few people want it (e.g. WhatsApp not even allowing people to turn it off). That smacks of insecurity to me.

Anti-LLM people are happy to continue coding/writing/drawing without the new digital tools - that sounds like someone who knows what they're doing and feels secure about their abilities.

> LLMs have also become kind of a political issue, except only the "anti" side even really cares about it

The stock market would disagree to the tune of a large sum of money. What the "anti" side care most about is being forced to pay for (typically hidden costs such as a percentage of your pension investments) and often forced to use "AI" despite knowing that the service is substantially worse than getting people to do the same job (e.g. "AI" support service agents)
by prvt | 2026-01-14 14:20:22+00:00
Hi HN,

I recently noticed a recurring visual artifact in the "Most Replayed" heatmap on the YouTube player. The highest peaks were always surrounded by two dips. I got curious about why they were there, so I decided to reverse engineer the feature to find out.

This post documents the deep dive. It starts with a system design recreation, reverse engineering the rendering code, and ends with the mathematics.

This is also my first attempt at writing an interactive article. I would love to hear your thoughts on the investigation and the format.

Alt URL: https://priyavrat-misra.github.io/blog/reversing-most-replay...
Show HN: LogiCart – Agentic shopping using Generative UI (A2UI pattern)
by ahmedm24 | 2026-01-14 14:20:26+00:00
Hey HN, I’m the solo builder behind LogiCart.

I recently refactored my frontend to use a Generative UI pattern (inspired by Google's new A2UI framework) because I realized a static chat interface fails for complex shopping intents.

The Problem: A user buying a single item needs a completely different UX than a user planning a complex project. A standard "list of cards" doesn't work for both.

The Solution: I built an Intent-to-UI engine where the LLM decides the interface structure based on the query.

How the Logic Works:

Intent Classification: The LLM first classifies the prompt into one of three modes.

Dynamic Rendering: It returns a JSON schema that my custom React renderer maps to specific components:

Single Item Intent (e.g., "Best Gaming Monitor"): Triggers a Comparison View. It renders a "Best Match" card with detailed specs alongside 3 alternatives for quick comparison.

Bundle Intent (e.g., "Build an AMD Gaming PC"): Triggers a Grouped View. It clusters products by category (CPU, GPU, RAM) to ensure the build is complete.

DIY/Project Intent (e.g., "How to build a deck"): Triggers a Plan View. It renders a step-by-step timeline mixed with the required materials. The number of steps and product complexity dynamically adjusts based on the user's stated experience level.

The Stack:

Backend: Node.js / TypeScript

Search: pgvector (PostgreSQL) for semantic retrieval of Amazon/Retailer SKUs.

Frontend: React (with a custom renderer for the A2UI schemas).

Context: I pivoted to this "deep complexity" approach after Microsoft Copilot launched their generic shopping agent 24 hours after my initial beta. I realized I couldn't compete on generic search, so I’m focusing on the complex/messy projects that require dynamic UI adaptation.

It’s live in Beta. I’d love feedback on the "Intent Router"—try breaking it by asking for something ambiguous like "Coffee" vs "Coffee Station" to see if the UI adapts correctly.

Link: https://logicart.ai
by Trackboxx | 2026-01-14 14:20:28+00:00
Euroboxx is a European platform showcasing innovative startups, digital products, and emerging technologies from across the EU.

It connects founders, companies, and ideas by giving startups visibility where it matters — simple, focused, and growth-oriented. Euroboxx highlights innovation, entrepreneurship, and scalable solutions built in Europe.

Designed as a discovery hub, Euroboxx helps startups reach new audiences and strengthens the European tech ecosystem.

Key facts:

Focus on European startups & innovation

Visibility for early-stage and growing companies

Simple, curated startup discovery

Built for founders, investors, and tech enthusiasts
by speakingmoistly | 2026-01-14 14:20:57+00:00
The problem that I see with background agents in general is that not following along and making it interactive adds compounding interest to the cost of editing, reviewing and understanding the agent's output since it's not something I've seen come together firsthand.

Agents also very rarely are truly hands-off: most of my usage is walking through a pre-determined set of steps and course-correcting along the way. In my experience, having it run out of sight leads to heavier editing since smaller realignments couldn't be applied along the way.
by TZubiri | 2026-01-14 14:21:23+00:00
>If we assume C is the ‘fastest language,’ whatever that means

I agree that it has no meaning. Speed(language) is undefined, therefore there is no faster language.

I get this often because python is referred to as a slow language, but since a python programmer can write more features than a C programmer in the same time, at least in my space, it causes faster programs in python, because some of those features are optimizations.

Now speed(program(language,programmer)) is defined, and you could do an experiment by having programmers of different languages write the same program and compare its execution times.