MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by TZubiri | 2026-01-02 22:12:16+00:00
Interesting.

Question, while imaging is a bit less common in pediatrics. How are you handling medical images and bloodwork?

It seems like being a pediatric service, there's an opportunity to take ownership of these medical documents, both for life-long storage and centralization. Also if tech is a brand differential it seems like it would be a simple place to get a competitive advantage.
by erichi | 2026-01-02 22:12:56+00:00
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Python, FastAPI, JS, React, Ruby on Rails, Docker, AWS, PostgreSQL, Redis, Playwright, LiveKit (for voice AI)
Résumé/CV: https://github.com/erichi/resume/blob/main/resume-eric-usmanov.pdf
Email: e.usmanov@gmail.com

Hi! I'm Eric, a senior SWE with 15+ years of fullstack startup experience. Most recently led scraping infrastructure at DeleteMe and served as Staff SWE (later CTO) at FridgeNoMore (launched in 6 months, scaled 0→10K daily orders in the next 6).
Looking for remote senior SWE positions. Happy to chat!
by kelseyfrog | 2026-01-02 22:13:22+00:00
There are even things that we do know about but generally aren't talked about such as UV-triggered nitric oxide release[1] which moderates blood pressure among other positive effects.

I want to be clear that there being pros and cons whose relative proportions change is very different than what some other commenters seem to be implying which is closer to a threshold model of UV safety which clearly doesn't exist and is non-scientific.

1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-13399-4
by babyoil | 2026-01-02 22:13:25+00:00
Advice may not be what you are seeking, but a few things jumped out to me:
Pouring thousands of dollars into a casual meetup, even over the years, tells me of it being less casual than what is described in the OP.

I have never had more success trying to cater to different diets, budgets, asking for opinions on restaurants. Organizing a club needs, at least at first, a near totalitarian approach. _You_ pick a nice place, hopefully decently affordable, assume e.g. that everyone will drink and if not the club soda or coke will have to do.

Eventually, the group self-optimizes for the sweet spot in things such as age gap between its members. The ones who don't like the types of places you pick, the tone of the meeting, demography, etc. will drop over time.
by cowl | 2026-01-02 22:13:32+00:00
>How is that different from how it worked without LLMs? The only difference is that we can now get a failing product faster and iterate.

The difference is that there is an engineer in the middle who can judge if the important information is provided or not as input.

1. for a LLM "the button must be blue" has the same level of importance as "the formula to calculate X is..."

2. failing faster and iterating is good thing if the parameters of failing are clear which is not always the case with vibecoding, especially when done by people with no prior experience in developing. plenty of POCs build with vibecoding have been presented with no aparent failure in their happy path but with disastrous results in edge cases or with disastrous Security etc.

3. where previously, familairity with the codebase and especially the "history of changes" gave you context about why some workarounds were put into place, these are things that are lost to a LLM. Vibecoding a change to an existing system risks removing those "special workarounds" that keep in mind much more than the current context of the specifications or prompt.
by ball_of_lint | 2026-01-02 22:13:53+00:00
Yes, the internet has changed that much.

https://www.wired.com/story/youtube-for-kids-videos-problems...

Lots of people are in this thread saying "ah, just tell your children not to get groomed / not to watch disturbing content". They're kids. They are going to disobey their parents. There's no one here arguing we don't need to teach kids these things. But, like how when you're learning to drive you start in a parking lot with a crappy car, we need a way to make a relatively safe place for them to learn. Parental controls are currently failing to do that.

Furthermore, where you and I and median commenter on HN might be an engaged, attentive parent, there's lots of parents out there who are not. Having a good, easy-to-setup version of these controls that a less engaged parent will actually turn on would make a positive impact on those children who aren't receiving the teaching you suggest.
by thayne | 2026-01-02 22:14:39+00:00
> everything fit's nicely in the 10.0.0.0/8 range

Except for when it doesn't.

If you just use that space as a flat range, it is almost certainly more than enough. But if you split it up in multiple levels of subnets, you can run into difficulties balancing having enough subnets and having enough space in each subnet.
by mrguyorama | 2026-01-02 22:15:02+00:00
The safe middle space still does not involve a computer

Lots of my tests involved writing pseudocode, or "Just write something that looks like C or Java". Don't miss the semicolon at the end of the line, but if you write "System.print()" rather than "System.out.printLn()" you might lose a single point. Maybe.

If there were specific functions you need to call, it would have a man page or similar on the test itself, or it would be the actual topic under test.

I hand wrote a bunch of SQL queries. Hand wrote code for my Systems Programming class that involved pointers. I'm not even good with pointers. I hand wrote Java for job interviews.

It's pretty rare that you need to actually test someone can memorize syntax, that's like the entire point of modern development environments.

But if you are completely unable to function without one, you might not know as much as you would hope.

The first algorithms came before the first programming languages.

Sure, it means you need to be able to run the code in your head and be able to mentally "debug" it, but that's a feature

If you could not manage these things, you washed out in the CS101 class that nearly every STEM student took. The remaining students were not brilliant, but most of them could write code to solve problems. Then you got classes that could actually teach and test that problem solving itself.

The one class where we built larger apps more akin to actual jobs, that could have been done entirely in the lab with locked down computers if need be, but the professor really didn't care if you wanted to fake the lab work, you still needed to pass the book learning for "Programming Patterns" which people really struggled with and you still needed to be able to give a "Demo" and presentation, and you still needed to demonstrate that you understood how to read some requests from a "Customer" and turn it into features and requirements and UX

Nobody cares about people sabotaging their own education except in programming because no matter how much MBAs insist that all workers are replaceable, they cannot figure out a way to actually evaluate the competency of a programmer without knowing programming. If an engineer doesn't actually understand how to evaluate static stresses on a structure, they are going to have a hard time keeping a job. Meanwhile in the world of programming, hopping around once a year is "normal" somehow, so you can make a lot of money while literally not knowing fizzbuzz. I don't think the problem is actually education.

Computer Science isn't actually about using a laptop.
by conor- | 2026-01-02 22:15:03+00:00
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Linux doesn't have hibernate - there's both userspace systemd-hibernate bindings and also the kernel swsusp which both work equally well (although you may need to make sure you have a large enough swap partition for it to function)

Also the other issues you're describing do sound frustrating but I think it's a byproduct of an entirely different culture. Exposing user-configurable timeouts and you being made aware of it during troubleshooting is something that enables you to deeply understand your system and how it's configured. In Windows, even if there is defaults for things like that it likely is not exposed to the user or configurable at all. If the default settings are bad you're just stuck with it and you aren't expected or intended to modify anything to better suit your needs.

My experience with Arch is mostly due to having been a fairly proficient Linux user prior to switching over and being very comfortable reading the wiki or bbs and tinkering to find solutions to things. A lot of the prior experiences I had with Debian or other "friendly" distros kind of put me through the ringer too and I've found that having the rolling release with Arch fits my preferred workflow much better than something like Ubuntu or Debian or Fedora or the other "batteries included" distros.
Show HN: Swolog, a text based workout log
by yoz-y | 2026-01-02 22:15:06+00:00
Hello,

over the past years I have been chipping on a workout app for the audience of one: myself. I didn't really like any of the classic workout apps, mostly because I don't like the rigid format of plans, exercises and fields.

I've slowly designed this program from a paper notebook, to a text note, to a rudimentary iOS app, until finally settling on a PWA.

I do not think that this app will really suit anybody else than myself, but I found it fun to make a website for it anyway.

Some technical details, since this is HN: It's written in typescript, uses Lit element as framework, it is local-first (fully client-side), with an optional server you can spin off for backups.

Since I built it for me it has no telemetry, doesn't even use cookies, and supports plain copy paste as import/export.

The website acts more as a documentation rather than a some marketing blurb, as I have no intention of monetizing this. I like to think of it as a side project rather than a side hustle.
by jmyeet | 2026-01-02 22:15:07+00:00
IPv6 is the poster child for the second system effect (or solution) [1].

IPv4 really only had 3 problems that anybody cared about:

1. Address space size;

2. Roaming; and

3. Reliable connectionless delivery; and

4. The problems created by the at most once delivery under TCP when what we really needed was at least once delivery in many, many cases.

Even the address space size problem is less of an issue than originally predicted because of improvements in NAT, up to and including cgNAT for cellular network providers (which also somewhat addressed (2) in a limited way).

Interestingly, some of the larger companies have networks simply too large for the 10.0.0.0/8 address space.

By "roaming" I mean maintaining a consistent connection while moving between networks.

(4) has kinda fallen on QUIC (now HTTP3) but this should really be core TCP/IP Layer 3.

You could also say that TCP congestion control is pretty outdated. It's not surprising. It was designed at a time before megabit (let alone gigabit) networks. And, more importantly, latency kills throughput. Some efforts have been made on this, such as Google's BBR [2], but other problems remain like MTU windows being too small for modern networks.

So what did IPv6 do? It only solved one problem, address space, and it did it in a way that kinda created new problems. First, the address space is too large (128 bits) and the last 64 bits are kinda reserved for the job that a 16 port used to do. And why was that? Originally, it was intended that the lower 64 bits were derived from a 48 bit MAC address (as used by Ethernet and later Wifi) but they realized this was a huge privacy problem so it never happened.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect

[2]: https://github.com/google/bbr

[2]: https://community.cisco.com/t5/networking-knowledge-base/und...
by markus_zhang | 2026-01-02 22:15:11+00:00
That's like a dream job for me. I'm going to use the rest of the time to hack on OS kernels instead of losing sleep over it. The thing is, people rarely get to work on what they are passionate about. At least I literally have seen none, after spending so many years in 5+ companies, none of my team is very passionate about the job, which is understandable.
by bloating8731 | 2026-01-02 22:15:30+00:00
Thanks for the heads up. I'll keep an eye out on the repo in case you get it there. It's an impressive setup.

Just so I understand correctly, are all the game machines segmented off so that the DHCP server only serves the game machines and doesn't interfere with the rest of the household? Or does it serve everything at once?

My thought process was to keep this game network segmented with a VLAN so that DHCP would be unaffected for the rest of my household.
by seanmcdirmid | 2026-01-02 22:15:48+00:00
I think we have very different experiences then. I find multiple prompts with narrow focuses each executed to update the same file work much better than trying to one shot the file. I think you would have a better experience if you used /clear (assuming you are using Gemini CLI), the problem isn't the change in the file, the problem is probably the conversation history instead.
Show HN: Open-source AI workflows with read-only auth scopes
by akshay326 | 2026-01-02 22:16:12+00:00
Hey HN! I'm Akshay, and I'm launching Seer - yet another AI workflow builder with granular OAuth scopes.

The Problem:
We've been building AI workflows for the past year and kept running into the same issue: existing platforms (n8n, Langflow, Flowise) require full access to your Google services even for read-only operations. Want to summarize emails? You're also granting send permissions. Want to read docs? You're also granting edit permissions.
If you want granular scopes, the onus is on you to:

- Create your own OAuth app with Google (1-2 weeks approval time)
- Modify source code to support read-only scopes

We saw this pattern repeated across Discord channels and GitHub issues - developers asking for better scope support, maintainers saying "you can configure it yourself."

Our Solution: Seer ships with read-only auth scopes as the default for common operations. It's self-hostable, so your data never leaves your infrastructure. The demo shows a simple email summarization workflow (Gmail + LLM API), but the principle applies to any integration.

Why This Matters: Security through least privilege isn't just best practice - it's essential when you're giving AI agents access to your production data. One compromised workflow shouldn't mean your entire Google Workspace is at risk.

Questions for HN:
1. How are you currently handling OAuth scopes in your AI automation workflows?
2. Would you find value in a scope validator that audits your existing workflows?
3. What other integrations would you want to see with granular permissions?

GitHub: https://github.com/seer-engg/seer
Demo video: https://youtu.be/cmQvmla8sl0

The only similar platform with granular scope support is Make.com, but it's closed-source. We think this should be the standard, not the exception.

Would love your feedback!
by BoredPositron | 2026-01-02 22:16:45+00:00
If you are going to defend someone you have no or very distant association with like you stated in another reply. Maybe just maybe read what everyone else is talking about, in this chain it would be his email exchange with epstein. Thanks for making ME read that pseudo intellectual shit again so YOU don't have to.

"too many people, so many mass executions of the elderly and infirm make sense is the fundamental fact that everyone dies at some time .make it imporrisbole to ask so why not earilier. if the brain discards unused neurons, why shold socieity keep their equivalent."

https://www.jmail.world/thread/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026413?view=i...

EDIT: There was no comment before I edited mine. @dang can probably timestamp it if you want to make a fuss about.
by tjohns | 2026-01-02 22:17:31+00:00
The biggest tangible benefit is you don't need to worry about NAT port mapping any more. Every device can have a public address, and you can have multiple servers exposing services on the same port without a conflict.

(The flip side is having a network-level firewall is more important than ever.)

You also don't have to worry about running a DHCP server anymore, at least on small networks. The simplicity of SLAAC is a breath of fresh air, and removes DHCP as a single point of failure for a network.
by sgjohnson | 2026-01-02 22:17:37+00:00
RFC 1631 is a memo, not a standard.

Actually, my bad. NAT was NEVER standardized. Not only NAT was never standardized, it’s never even been on standards track. RFC 3022 is also just “Informational”

Plus, RFC 1918 doesn’t even mention NAT

So yes, NAT is a bug in history that has no right to exist. The people who invented it clearly never stopped to think on whether they should, so here we are 30 years later.
by IshKebab | 2026-01-02 22:17:38+00:00
It's not customer support; it's giving the product good usability. I would much rather they do that than waste time writing documentation that people won't read.

I think a concrete example would help here. Let me find one from this repo...

Ok after looking through about 20 discussions I was actually unable to find a single one that was a misunderstanding or misconfiguration on the user's part. They appear to all be real bugs (or feature requests), and very high quality ones at that.

So I think their assertion that 80-90% of what people think are bugs are actually not is total and utter bullshit.

That's kind of unrelated to what we were discussing though; misunderstandings due to poor usability do happen but I guess we can't easily find examples in Ghostty.
by lobf | 2026-01-02 22:18:00+00:00
Looking at the stats, we seem to be manufacturing about as much as ever in the last 30 years, and the value of that manufacturing is skyrocketing. We're certainly employing fewer people in manufacturing, but it seems to be remarkably strong still.

>LLMs are going to drop the price of informational value.

Maybe... maybe not? I'm not going to try and predict the future wrt AI, personally.
by ectospheno | 2026-01-02 22:18:04+00:00
I suppose I could have said how.

Windows in powershell:

SetNetIPv6Protocol -UseTemporaryAddresses Disabled
SetNetIPv6Protocol -RandomizeIdentifiers Disabled

Linux:

sysctl net.ipv6.conf.all.use_tempaddr=0

or in NetworkManager config file:

ip6-privacy=0

OpenBSD:

ifconfig em0 inet6 -temporary
by rectang | 2026-01-02 22:18:21+00:00
I only work for small companies that don’t have any business interest in areas where I want to maintain independent side projects.

When a startup I was working at made a successful exit and got acquired my a major corporation that did have business interests which overlapped with my side projects, I refused the bonus contract and froze my side project activity until leaving about a year later.

Don’t get cute. Avoid side projects that compete with your employer, and disclose unrelated side projects properly so that your employer is forced to acknowledge them. Do what it takes to avoid entanglement, making sacrifices if necessary.
by TZubiri | 2026-01-02 22:18:41+00:00
Are you tunnel visioning on detecting outputs of a technology using the same fundamental technology? It seems like that would be an inescapable product-risk that I would bet against.

If you discover the best AI detection technology, then it will eventually be used as a (negative) reward function in training future models. It's an arms race.

Would you be open to alternative techniques, like metadata, source analysis, or online (fuzzy) reverse searching? Consider that judges and court experts don't rely solely on the evidence itself to determine if it's 'real', but to an even greater extent they rely on how it was collected, if evidence has not been sourced correctly, judges don't even look at it.
by selectively | 2026-01-02 22:18:51+00:00
I am not going to engage with your reply guy stuff any longer.

No, tech companies still don't care about degrees. They care about the skills, period, the end. If you are seeking a role that relates to tech and you actually have the skills, that's all they care about.

22 is recently a kid. We have nothing further to discuss; you are unreasonable.
by seanmcdirmid | 2026-01-02 22:19:09+00:00
> 1. for a LLM "the button must be blue" has the same level of importance as "the formula to calculate X is..."

You can divide those into two prompts though, there is no point for the LLM to work on both features at the same time. This is why iterative is so useful (oh, the button should be blue, ... and later, the formula should be X).

> 2. failing faster and iterating is good thing if the parameters of failing are clear which is not always the case with vibecoding, especially when done by people with no prior experience in developing. plenty of POCs build with vibecoding have been presented with no aparent failure in their happy path but with disastrous results in edge cases or with disastrous Security etc.

This isn't about vibecoding. If you are vibecoding, then you aren't developing software, you are just wishing for good code from vague descriptions that you don't plan to iterate on.

> 3. where previously, familairity with the codebase and especially the "history of changes" gave you context about why some workarounds were put into place, these are things that are lost to a LLM. Vibecoding a change to an existing system risks removing those "special workarounds" that keep in mind much more than the current context of the specifications or prompt.

LLMs can read and write change logs just as well as humans can (LLMs need change logs to do updates, you can't just give it a changed dependency and expect the LLM to pick up on the change, it isn't a code generator). And again, this is serious software engineering, not vibecoding. If you are vibecoding, I have no advice to give you.
by austinjp | 2026-01-02 22:19:20+00:00
Agreed. I walked past a high-end fashion store in a major European city recently. The big glass door was locked, with a sign explaining that the shop was open, the door was locked to prevent theft. There was one young woman inside staffing the shop, sitting behind a counter. I envied her, I could happily take minimum wage for a year or so, sitting at a desk all day with very occasional interruption, while I tap at a laptop working on personal projects. Unfortunately I'm not a glamorous 20-something European woman.
by semilin | 2026-01-02 22:19:36+00:00
I think this points to the only real sustainable solution: make it so that students would prefer to do real work. We have seen for ages the distinction between seeming and being in regards to verbal understanding blurred. LLMs are only an acceleration of the blurring. Therefore it will at some point become essentially impossible to determine whether one really understands something.

The two solutions to this are (1) as some commenters here are suggesting, give up entirely and focus only on quality of output, or (2) teach students to care about being more than appearance. Make students want to write essays. It is for their personal edification and intellectual flourishing. The benefits of this far surpass output.

Obviously this is an enormously difficult task, but let us not suppose it an unworthy one.
by lukan | 2026-01-02 22:19:37+00:00
The optimus will save the day!

At least that seems the current story. And I mean if it lives up to it's promises, it might. I surely would have a need for a robot servant. But I won't preorder as I a) don't trust it will work as promised b) if it actually works out, I still don't trust Elon enough to put a robot in my home that he controls.
Same AI agent, different prompts: 0% vs. 62% security pass rate
by xsourcesec | 2026-01-02 22:21:02+00:00
I've been testing production AI agents for vulnerabilities.

Interesting finding: System prompt design matters more than the model itself.

Same agent. Same task. Same attack vectors.
Only difference: how the system prompt was structured.

Results:
→ Prompt A: 0% pass rate (failed every test)
→ Prompt B: 62.5% pass rate

No model change. No fine-tuning. Just prompt engineering.

Anyone else seeing this pattern? What's your approach to hardening AI agents?