MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by stanmattingly | 2026-01-30 18:29:38+00:00
“It’d be funny if a camera told me to do the dishes.”

I said that about five months ago, built a prototype, and started shipping it to anyone who emailed asking for one.

That prototype turned into a small in-home camera that generates simple, practical TODOs (dishes, trash, clutter). It's now grown into a more broad home intelligence layer.

I made a deliberate decision early on to avoid pre-orders. I only sold because I was willing to fulfill. My first Reddit post went mildly viral that first weekend and resulted in ~40 emails. Within 30 days, I’d shipped 36 devices.

Since then, we’ve shipped over 1,000 units and crossed six figures in revenue with a two-person team, a few 3D printers, and a lot of late nights.

For context: after the joke turned into a company, I raised a modest pre-seed (~$375k). We experimented with paid distribution early, but most demand came later after months of iteration, shipping, and embarrassing TikToks that flopped. Toward the end of December, some of those TikToks reached a much wider audience than expected and spread organically (~40M views since January 1st).

The point of this post isn’t the graphs or the view counts. It’s that a lot of consumer hardware (and startups in general) seem optimized for decks, renders, and fundraising rather than getting products into users’ hands. I wanted to see what would happen if shipping was the constraint instead.

Posting to share what that’s been like and to show how far a small team can get by building and shipping continuously without over hiring or frivolous spending.

Happy to answer questions or be told why I should keep my mouth shut.
by Maxatar | 2026-01-30 18:29:42+00:00
I interpreted OP's post to say that you take a C file after the preprocessor has translated it. How you perform that preprocessing can simply be by passing the file to an existing C preprocessor, or you can implement it as well.

Implementing a C preprocessor is tedious work, but it's nothing remotely complex in terms of challenging data structures, algorithms, or requiring sophisticated architecture. It's basically just ensuring your preprocessor implements all of the rules, each of which is pretty simple.
by bigbadfeline | 2026-01-30 18:29:58+00:00
> If I don’t block, 95% of my resources will be spent on feeding bots. How do you block those?

A very good and important question. I was thinking about some combination of proof of work and a dynamic list of offending IPs which servers would update periodically, similar to how such lists used by ad-blockers.

It would be ideal to have some legislative protection from ddos together with technical means of disclosure and prevention, bot scraping is a from of soft ddos.
by dlenski | 2026-01-30 18:30:55+00:00
Agreed. I truly don't understand including these researchers on this list.

Some of Sweeney's most well-known work in this area is from the LATE 1990s. She was sounding the alarm about problems with anonymized data in medical datasets:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latanya_Sweeney#Medical_datase...

Her work almost certainly contributed highly to awareness of these risks.

More recently she has apparently worked on things like protecting voting rights in the US by notifying voters if their registration records change.
by derefr | 2026-01-30 18:31:15+00:00
I don't think the exciting thing here is the technology powering it. This isn't a story about OpenClaw being particularly suited to enabling this use-case, or of higher quality than other agent frameworks. It's just what people happen to be running.

Rather, the implicit/underlying story here, as far as I'm concerned, is about:

1. the agentive frameworks around LLMs having evolved to a point where it's trivial to connect them together to form an Artificial Life (ALife) Research multi-agent simulation platform;

2. that, distinctly from most experiments in ALife Research so far (where the researchers needed to get grant funding for all the compute required to run the agents themselves — which becomes cost-prohibitive when you get to "thousands of parallel LLM-based agents"!), it turns out that volunteers are willing to allow research platforms to arbitrarily harness the underlying compute of "their" personal LLM-based agents, offering them up as "test subjects" in these simulations, like some kind of LLM-oriented folding@home project;

3. that these "personal" LLM-based agents being volunteered for research purposes, are actually really interesting as research subjects vs the kinds of agents researchers could build themselves: they use heterogeneous underlying models, and heterogeneous agent frameworks; they each come with their own long history of stateful interactions that shapes them separately; etc. (In a regular closed-world ALife Research experiment, these are properties the research team might want very badly, but would struggle to acquire!)

4. and that, most interestingly of all, it's now clear that these volunteers don't have much-if-any wariness to offer their agents as test subjects only to an established university in the context of a large academic study (as they would if they were e.g. offering their own bodies as a test subject for medical research); but rather are willing to offer up their agents to basically any random nobody who's decided that they want to run an ALife experiment — whether or not that random nobody even realizes/acknowledges that what they're doing is an ALife experiment. (I don't think the Moltbook people know the term "ALife", despite what they've built here.)

That last one's the real shift: once people realize (from this example, and probably soon others) that there's this pool of people excited to volunteer their agent's compute/time toward projects like this, I expect that we'll be seeing a huge boom in LLM ALife research studies. Especially from "citizen scientists." Maybe we'll even learn something we wouldn't have otherwise.
by mbesto | 2026-01-30 18:31:24+00:00
No but you're claiming "if they all are investing X amount then these bets obviously must pan out". If you follow that rationale then it means that all bets that these company's make in the same space must all pan out. So if they don't all pan out then the fact that they're all making bets isn't a sound rationale for it being true.

As others have pointed out, investors notoriously have FOMO, so rationale actors (CEOs of big tech) naturally are incentivized to make bets and claims that they are betting on things that the market believes to be true regardless if they are so as to appease shareholders.
by robcohen | 2026-01-30 18:31:32+00:00
The problem I have with being vegetarian is that you can't prove that it's actually healthier, because the current state of dietary science is pretty poor.

Even if you could, you would also need to explain all of the evolutionary problems that could come from some humans going vegetarian while others don't.

What if being vegetarian makes you smaller and weaker physically (perhaps the case in some vegetarian countries now). If you had the answer, and it was clear a diet consisting of vegetables causes reduction in physical size, then I have to ask:

Would you want your kids to be shorter and physically weaker than you are?
by rekabis | 2026-01-30 18:32:06+00:00
IMO, the one thing that made JS an absolutely horrid language is that it failed to do what every other programming - or scripting! - language out there did: deprecate the ugly/bad shite.

This could have been trivially handled, even within web browsers. Simply adding a version number to a script tag could have told the web browser to target only that version. The added payload needed to be included with the web browsers would have been tiny, especially if a diff system was implemented that allowed a specific runtime to be auto-assembled and spun up for every version needed.
by phil21 | 2026-01-30 18:32:39+00:00
For a 100MW scale facility the contract work is never over. Once you are done with one bit of work something else is in need of refreshing or changing. Components are breaking daily at that scale, and switch gear, UPS, generators, breakers, etc. all have useful lifetimes and a replacement cycle.

It’s effectively a full time job for an electrician crew or three.

Of course once the facility goes away entirely the job does too. But so goes a factory or anything else.
by Ar-Curunir | 2026-01-30 18:32:40+00:00
Calling out anonymity researchers for showing that "anonymization" schemes don't work well is a stupid and dumb idea.

If they hadn't done it, you can bet that bad guys would have done it instead (and maybe were already doing it). What the researchers did is publicly show that the existing schemes were broken, hence motivating the design of better schemes.

Like, you fundamentally misunderstand computer security research if you think that shitting on people publishing attacks is a good thing.
by AstroBen | 2026-01-30 18:33:02+00:00
I actually think this research points out why that isn't an issue: used properly, AI can help you learn and act as support. I'd also be fine if my LSP disappeared overnight. Kind of annoying but meh I'll be fine

You should be concerned if you're outsourcing your work to it, though. There's also no benefit to doing that outside of laziness (the research shows no statistically significant productivity improvement)
by maxglute | 2026-01-30 18:33:08+00:00
>demand is still there today

Not all demand the same. There are broadly 2 types of USD buyers

1. price insensitive: sovereign banks, who buys for liquidity/storage

2. price sensitive: hedge funds, private buyer who buys returns

Type 1 buyers are bailing out of treasury. Type 1 are marginal buyers, the close auction regardless or rate, this keeps rates low -> debt servicing low. They artificially depress yield to non market rates, without them rate go up because you have more price sensitive buyers who buy for returns. This increases borrowing costs, hence US debt repayment rising massively.

Type 1 buyers, i.e. US allies (and historically even adversaries) soaked up treasuries are now de-dollarizing / buying gold in lieu of _more_ USD. Type 1s underpin the "privilege" part of exorbitant privilege. The more they de-dollarize the more dollars become exorbitant, aka debt like everyone else. Type1, sovereign held 60% of USD to 40% in last 5 years. This large part of why interest tripled and debt servicing went from 350B to 1T in 5 years. Type1s exit to 20% in another 5 years and maybe interest goes to 5%, debt servicing 2T+. It's the difference between 10%/20%/30% debt servicing as % of federal revenue.

This not to mention USD reserve ticking down at 1% per year means meaningful changes in our lifetimes, and velocity may increase with developments like Saudi no longer locking oil to dollar. Less USD as % of global reserve = more network effects of alternate payment = increased potential velocity of USD reserve drop. This doesn't mean other currencies pickup all slack, i.e. central banks seem to be going in gold / commodities with no counter party risk for new storage. The net result is USD will still be around, in large volumes, but the cost/debt to sustain the system will be "normalized" while US budget is historically is built around USD debt being privileged. AKA difference between borrowing money from family vs payday loans.

>Nearly all commodities are still priced in USD

PRICED as in benchmarked in USD, but =/= USD is being spent to settle them. There's a fuckload of commodities where PRC alone buys 30/40/50%+ of global production, and while quoted in USD, increasingly settled in rmb/CIPS, bilateral currencies, BRI infra or other swaps mechanisms that bypasses USD. This one of the largest source of dedollarization - PRC went from single digit % to plurality of cross-border settlements in RMB/non USD. Though this is just very recent leading indicator that USD is functionally circumventable.
by mlyle | 2026-01-30 18:34:35+00:00
Hmm.

You know, building infrastructure to hook to some API or to dig through email or whatever-- it's a pain. And it's gotten harder. My old pile of procmail rules + spamassassin wouldn't work for the task anymore. Maintaining todos in text files has its high points and low points. And I have to be the person to notice patterns and do things myself.

Having some kind of agent as an assistant to do stuff, and not having to manage brittle infrastructure myself, sounds appealing. Accessibility from my phone through iMessage: ditto.

I haven't used it yet, but it's definitely captured my interest.

> He would have saved time looking at the table it gets its data from, using a calculator.

The hard thing is always remembering where that table is and restoring context. Big stuff is still often better done without an intermediary; being able to lob a question to an agent and maybe get an answer is huge.
by slifin | 2026-01-30 18:34:47+00:00
I am going to continue eating meat and plants but that's because the choice between eating plants or meat misses the point

The issue here is the industrialisation of the land and the shortcuts that farmers are doing that essentially kill the land, animals and plants in a way that is unmaintainable

The way this should work is animals should be herded on to land to eat and poo, once the grasses are nearly eaten the animals should be rotated on to other fields, the new grass regrows in this fresh environment because it has no competitor and plenty of fertiliser this process kills weeds and rejuvenates soil ready for planting

This mimics the nomadic lives that early humans would have led, following their herds of animals to fresh new pastures

Then the farmers worked out they didn't need animals to do this process they could just plow their fields and then that gets rid of the weeds, not quite as good as animals doing it in terms of soil health but effective and quick

Then the farmers were sold weed killers which meant they didn't need to plow their field, they just needed to buy GMO glyphosate resistant seeds and flood their fields with glyphosate, some types of crops are even killed close to harvest with glyphosate so it'll be in your food at high rates for certain crops

The problem with this approach is glyphosate is assumed safe because its mechanism for killing weeds is based on a system we don't directly have as humans, but our gut bacteria do, it also competes with glycine in our bodies used to create proteins, I wouldn't want to drink glyphosate from the bottle but it's being added to my food so effectively I do that

It also degrades the soil quality into dust, instead of being full of earth worms which would normally feed the birds, the local wildlife etc

So these mono culture fields are just turning huge swathe of land into sterile dust bowls that exacerbate climate change

Then these crops are either sold directly to me as a plant eater or given to the animals to make them bulk up and sick

As someone who eats a lot of meat I want my animals to be grass fed (or their natural diet) I don't want them to have to take antibiotics because the farmer needed to bulk them up with cheap glyphosate laced mono culture grains and cereals to get more profit out of the animal

So if you are vegan you cannot just wipe your hands of this problem because you're still contributing by eating these mono crops - What we really need from consumers is for them to care how their plants and animals are raised and not accept glyphosate or other weed killers in their supply chains

Animals should be pasture raised from a moral point of view but also a health and climate point of view
by belter | 2026-01-30 18:34:52+00:00
They released the file...then removed minutes ago, although many had already a copy. Here is what was on it: https://www.threads.com/@meidastouch/post/DUJFSmTiUjo/link

This is the file the DOJ just deleted minutes after release:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EY0UXGGDNKdDwppTR78LdCBNUOx...
by DennisP | 2026-01-30 18:34:53+00:00
Well one major change to his politics was his view on climate change. He also supported Obama in both elections, and had the self-control to keep pretty quiet about issues unrelated to his business.

I found the article I was talking about: https://alisoncrosthwait.substack.com/p/a-ketamine-addicts-p...

It says it's quite easy for ketamine use to get out of control without the users noticing, that they're are able to work effectively despite that, and that they tend to develop radically different and delusional beliefs. Given that Elon has admitted to self-administering ketamine, I don't think the idea should be dismissed.
by agentzed | 2026-01-30 18:35:06+00:00
Does this claim deny that in the span of generations quality of life by differing metrics rise and fall?

One generation may be poor with deeper self dependence skills and a next may be more wealthy with weaker competencies, or familial bonds.

By these types of story telling studies, any number of fantastical fictionalizations exist among us and along side of us as suggested, yet in the span of decades cyclically, there are rising and falling standards which often contradict by perspective.

I declare that the “post enlightenment” age denying “objective morality” is a self imposed philosophical hyjinx, a self deception of the self inflicting kind.

Morality is that we do not destructively interfere with others, “the innocent.” Without lawful due cause. And every society has to evolve its own customs and standards for interpretation and applying this idea to what it considers “the body of power.”

Today we want the individual to be the body of power, in many places it is the state, or among some it is God. Historically it usually has something to do with procreation of familial lines and the control of territory.

That said, different cultures have come and gone and today they mostly mix well in accordance with local regulations. Problems remain and we do “get away” with less and less. The ouroboros.

Aside from story telling are the shifts in ideologies which many do not want to hear. Morality is real, everyone should have free will and be left alone by others, yet how law or tradition imposes upon this is a generational contention of wills.
by crazygringo | 2026-01-30 18:35:12+00:00
Seriously, this is not a thing. It doesn't even begin to make sense. It's made up.

If you work in a factory with time cards that need to be punched in, and you punch in a buddy's who is late, that's a thing -- a very risky thing if you get caught, since it's fraud.

But the idea that you'll give a coworker your password so they can boot up and log in and somehow make it look like you're online...? Not a thing. And doesn't even make sense today when you can just open your chat client on your phone anyways and be present there. We've been in an era of remote work for a long time now.
by jama211 | 2026-01-30 18:35:52+00:00
Ubuntu has done a decent job for normal installs but take it from me, if you want to dual boot it, it still doesn’t make it easy. It’s too easy to mess up your whole system if you don’t know what you’re doing, not to mention bootloaders are all still stuck in the 90’s, and are even worse to configure nicely than they are to use.

Dual booting is one of the best ways to introduce someone to Linux in theory as they’ll feel safe trying that without having to delete their whole old system… except it’s also the scariest and most difficult way to install it and no installer makes it easy. It’s a real foot gun.
by bhouston | 2026-01-30 18:36:28+00:00
> Why do none of the thousands of articles on this mention what her account is/was? Mis/incomplete information spreading like wildfire.

I think you are misunderstanding. She account was banned and then it seems after the outcry, it was restored:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/30/gaza-based-journali...
by simonw | 2026-01-30 18:36:33+00:00
That's really cool.

Any chance you could add SQLite?

% uv run --with pyeryx python
Installed 1 package in 1ms
Python 3.14.0 (main, Oct 7 2025, 16:07:00) [Clang 20.1.4 ] on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import eryx
>>> sandbox = eryx.Sandbox()
>>> result = sandbox.execute('''
... print("Hello from the sandbox!")
... x = 2 + 2
... print(f"2 + 2 = {x}")
... ''')
>>> result
ExecuteResult(stdout="Hello from the sandbox!\n2 + 2 = 4", duration_ms=6.83, callback_invocations=0, peak_memory_bytes=Some(16384000))
>>> sandbox.execute('''
... import sqlite3
... print(sqlite3.connect(":memory:").execute("select sqlite_version()").fetchall())
... ''').stdout
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<python-input-6>", line 1, in <module>
sandbox.execute('''
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^
import sqlite3
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
print(sqlite3.connect(":memory:").execute("select sqlite_version()").fetchall())
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
''').stdout
^^^^
eryx.ExecutionError: Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
File "<string>", line 125, in _eryx_exec
File "<user>", line 2, in <module>
File "/python-stdlib/sqlite3/__init__.py", line 57, in <module>
from sqlite3.dbapi2 import *
File "/python-stdlib/sqlite3/dbapi2.py", line 27, in <module>
from _sqlite3 import *
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named '_sqlite3'

Filed a feature request here: https://github.com/eryx-org/eryx/issues/28
by WalterBright | 2026-01-30 18:36:33+00:00
Last year I was driving on an arterial, with a 35mph speed limit, that was a miles long downhill grade. There was a bike lane on the right. In it was a girl maybe 12, and on the back of it was another girl maybe 6. With the downhill, she was able to go about 20mph. Suddenly, she veers into the center of the car lane. Never looked over her shoulder. (Traffic was lining up behind me.) She then rides a bit on the stripe separating the bike land from the car lane. Then back to center of the car lane. Then in the bike lane, then back to the car lane. Back and forth. She never looked over her shoulder. I never dared to pass her, even when she was in the bike lane.

OMG
by smeej | 2026-01-30 18:36:42+00:00
> Remember when you could text Dave from the office to turn your PC on because you were stuck in traffic?

I don't understand why this doesn't still work. If Dave from the office has access to your PC, presumably Dave and your PC are in the office, connected to your office's network, and thus it would appear that you are in the office?

Or is the assumption that you're carrying another device with you that would give you away? In which case, shouldn't the complaint be more about being forced to perform some kind of work task (like carrying/being accessible by your phone) when you're off the clock...which is hardly a new issue/complaint?
by Terretta | 2026-01-30 18:36:49+00:00
This is a terrible thing to say out loud*, but, in all such cases I'd rather just give them the more money to do the better answers.

It boggles the mind that "wrong answers only" is no longer just a meme, it's considered a valid cost management strategy in AI.

* Because if they realize we're out here, they'll price discriminate, charging extra for right answers.
by kccqzy | 2026-01-30 18:36:59+00:00
Completely agree. My employer makes all employee badging data available. Any employee can view whether any other employee has badged into the office and when. This includes viewing whether your boss has come in.

However badging data is much more coarse-grained than WiFi. For one, because the building is large, you can’t tell which part of the office the employee is. For two, you can’t tell when the employee has left work because no badging is needed to exit the building.