MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jillesvangurp | 2026-01-09 08:40:34+00:00
Many of the build tools Javascript people use are written in Rust now. Some of them can be made to run in browsers, via WASM. React, the defacto UI framework for Javascript has a lot of web assembly components. A lot of the npm ecosystem has quietly brought in web assembly. And a lot of UI stuff gets packaged up as web components these days; some of that uses WASM as well.

If you pulled the plug on WASM, a lot would stop working and it would heavily impact much of the JS frontend world.

What hasn't caught on is modern UI frameworks that are native wasm. We have plenty of old ones that can be made to work via WASM but it's not the same thing. They are desktop UI toolkits running in a browser. The web is still stuck with CSS and DOM trees. And that's one of the areas where WASM is still a bit weak because it requires interfacing with the browser APIs via javascript. This is a fixable problem. But for now that's relatively slow and not very optimal.

Solutions are coming. But that's not going to happen overnight. But web frontend teams being able to substitute Javascript for something else is going to require more work. Mobile frontend developers cross compiling to web is becoming a thing though. Jetbrain's compose multiplatform is has native Android/IOS supported now with a canvas rendered web frontend supported in Beta currently.

You can actually drive the dom from WASM. There are some RUST frameworks. I've dabbled with using kotlin's wasm support to talk to browser dom APIs. It's not that hard. It's just that Rust is maybe not ideal (too low level/hard) for frontend work and a lot of languages lack frameworks that target low level browser APIs. That's going to take years to fix. But a lot compiles to wasm at this point. And you kind of have access to most of the browser APIs when you do. Even if there is a little performance penalty.
by unsupp0rted | 2026-01-09 08:41:04+00:00
Thank you, this is it exactly. And my biggest concern isn't the % of unprepared students who leave medical school. It's the % who stay and get passed through.

"You know what they call the most unqualified insert-identity-here person in the med school class of 2025 who squeezed by because it would look bad if they didn't?"

"Dr."

Which is why 99% AI-driven diagnosis can't come fast enough.
by PunchyHamster | 2026-01-09 08:41:18+00:00
> At their worst, they take on all the worst aspects of cults together with all the worst aspects of high school. Endless manoeuvring for influence, currying favour, autocratic fiefdoms emerging without people having the mental framework to even identify that they exist.

But that's just how it works in typical normal hierarchy. The normal hierarchy just makes it easier to "pick a target" you need to please

The falling of any, whether formal or flat, is incentive misalignment, if a given structure makes it so screwing other people over so you look better is profitable, it will inevitably happen. And it's really hard to align incentives that way, like how even in "flat" companies often working on new shiny profitable brings more capital (whether social or actual) than maintaining long-term project

> I don't know how this applies in the context of Toyota, but there are plenty of places where pushing the Stop button - while formally permitted - has a social cost such that only a certain few are effectively given permission to do so; large amounts of energy are expended either attempting to belong to that few, or currying favour with them. Power tends to accrue to those most inclined to seize it.

The idea that gets lost in the translation is empowering people to put stop to things that can in long term be net loss to company and trusting worker with knowing enough about their job that the power won't be used willy-nilly.

For the idea to work you not only need culture where that won't be shunned by some manager coz it made him miss their KPIs, but also having each worker be competent enough to know where to use the power
by bazhand | 2026-01-09 08:41:41+00:00
FWIW this isn’t new, using a Claude/Max subscription auth token as a general-purpose “API key” has been known (and blocked) for ages. OpenCode basically had to impersonate the official Claude Code client to make that work, and it always felt like a loophole that would get patched eventually.

This is exactly why (when OpenCode and Charm/Crush started diverging) Charm chose not to support “use your Claude subscription” auth and went in a different direction (BYOK / multi-provider / etc). They didn’t want to build a product on top of a fragile, unofficial auth path.

And I think there’s a privacy/policy reason tightening this now too: the recent Claude Code update (2.1-ish) pops a “Help improve Claude” prompt in the terminal. If you turn that ON, retention jumps from 30 days to up to 5 years for new/resumed chats/coding sessions (and data can be used for model improvement). If you keep it OFF, you stay on the default 30-day retention. You can also delete data anytime in settings. That consent + retention toggle is hard to enforce cleanly if you’re not in an official client flow, so it makes sense they’re drawing a harder line.
by bob1029 | 2026-01-09 08:41:43+00:00
FedEx is easily the best carrier in my area right now. It's not even close. If I need absolute certainty that something will arrive, I'm paying extra for the overnight priority option. All of my employers have seen it the same way. Even the holiday gift packages are sent FedEx.

USPS has been a disaster by comparison. We've been dealing with actual criminal elements in my local post office stealing and tampering with mail. I don't know of anyone in my community who hasnt filed a complaint with the USPIS. I don't even care about the packages anymore. I'm more worried about the tax forms, vehicle titles and replacement credit cards getting lost now.

Any merchant who only offers USPS or uses them as the last mile of delivery is a no-go for me. Amazon is the most stressful experience because you never know. The best approach I've found is to use their pickup box and batch things to coincide with my grocery trip.
by WoWSaaS | 2026-01-09 08:42:21+00:00
Most email programs test subject lines or wait for open rates. That wastes sends, budget, and momentum.

This post is about doing the hard decision before you send: validating whether an email (or sequence) will convert the audience it’s intended for.

The Marketing Email tool in Vect AI is built for that job. It’s a pre-send decision tool that helps you reduce wasted sends and improve ROI before any campaign runs.

What it does (job first):

Scores subject lines, preview text, and body for clarity, urgency, and conversion intent.

Flags weak hooks, vague CTAs, and personalization failures.

Simulates audience reactions against a saved brand profile to surface persuasion gaps.

Recommends precise edits and sequence adjustments (timing, cadence, follow-ups).

Checks deliverability heuristics and common conversion friction before distribution.

Saves named drafts/projects so teams can approve, iterate, and export CSVs for ESPs.

Who this is for: founders, growth operators, email leads, and agencies that run paid or high-impact email campaigns and need predictable outcomes — not guesswork.

Why this matters: it moves the decision earlier in the workflow so you don’t waste budget on poorly targeted sends or lose momentum to slow review loops.

Try the Marketing Email tool (opens the exact flow):
https://vect.pro/#/signup?continue=%2Fapp%2Ftools%3Ftool%3DM...

Inspect public pages for transparency:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site:vect.pro

System design and full rationale:
https://blog.vect.pro/vect-ai-bible-guide

I’m especially interested in feedback from people who run email at scale and would consider paying for better pre-send signals:

Which pre-send signals would make you cancel or push a send?

What level of specificity in recommendations would change your approval flow?

What ESP integrations or export formats matter most?

Happy to dig into signal sources, scoring heuristics, or integration options.
by ngruhn | 2026-01-09 08:43:34+00:00
Just because it's free? Let's talk again when all open source projects are funded and controlled by the state with zero competition between them and no consumer choice. Only one Linux distro, only one database, only one web framework, etc. And it's decided top-down from the state what to work on. I doubt though that these projects would have started in the first place in a communist setting.
by sally_glance | 2026-01-09 08:44:23+00:00
This matches my experience. You mostly want to not even mention negative things because if you write something like "don't duplicate existing functionality" you now have "duplicate" in the context...

What works for me is having a second agent or session to review the changes with the reversed constraint, i.e. "check if any of these changes duplicate existing functionality". Not ideal because now everything needs multiple steps or subagents, but I have a hunch that this is one of the deeper technical limitations of current LLM architecture.
by Mahsanziak9 | 2026-01-09 08:44:50+00:00
I’m curious how others think about dating safety before a first meeting.

Friends of mine have used everything from Google searches to reverse image lookup, but it’s inconsistent and often incomplete. At the same time, anything involving anonymous reports raises obvious concerns around abuse and moderation.

For those who’ve thought about this space:
- What feels reasonable vs overreaching?
- What safeguards would you expect?
- Where do you draw the line between safety and privacy?

I’m asking partly out of personal curiosity and partly because I’ve been working on a small project in this area.
by eecc | 2026-01-09 08:45:03+00:00
Yeah but it wasn’t the unelected bureaucrats that fucked the EU. It was the German attitude towards debt and the redistribution of surplus. The Eurogroup sheepishly followed whatever Austerity fever dream of Schauble, tanked the Greek economy to teach every other Med country a lesson and by doing so, crippled any chance of post 2009 recovery
by torginus | 2026-01-09 08:45:29+00:00
Like the gifted kid who lives with his mom at 30, at some point in time, we have to stop talking about potential and start talking about results.

Theory and practice doesn't match in this case, and many people have remarked that companies that sit on the WhatWG board have vested interest in making sure their lucrative app stores are not threatened by a platform that can run any app just as well.

I remember when Native Client came to the scene and allowed people to compile complex native apps to the web that run at like 95% of native speed. While it was in many ways an inelegant solution, it worked better than WebAssembly does today.

Another one of WebAssembly's killer features was supposed to be native web integration. How JS engines work is that you have an IDL that describes the interface of JS classes which is then used to generate code to bind to underlying C++ implementations. You could probably bind those to Webassembly just as well.

I don't think a cross-platform as in cross CPU arch matters that much, if you meant 'runs on everything' then I concur.

Also the dirty secret of WebAssembly is that it's not really faster than JS.
by shuka | 2026-01-09 08:45:34+00:00
Damn! I'm so sorry to hear that :((
Happened to me too and I also find it kinda frustrating.
As you can see on the README, my first backlog item is to add a diff mechanism. Would also love for help but either way I'm going to add it.
In the meanwhile all I can offer is to buy you a coffee and apologize <3
by Mahsanziak9 | 2026-01-09 08:45:41+00:00
I’m curious how others think about dating safety before a first meeting.

Friends of mine have used everything from Google searches to reverse image lookup, but it’s inconsistent and often incomplete. At the same time, anything involving anonymous reports raises obvious concerns around abuse and moderation.

For those who’ve thought about this space:
- What feels reasonable vs overreaching?
- What safeguards would you expect?
- Where do you draw the line between safety and privacy?

I’m asking partly out of personal curiosity and partly because I’ve been working on a small project in this area.
by nbadg | 2026-01-09 08:46:12+00:00
I mean, for retail investors outside the US, the question you're asking boils down to „does purchasing power parity follow popular US domestic market indices?“, to which the answer is a resounding no.

There may be some offset for goods imported from the US, but that's a minority of consumer goods globally, and even then, the purchase currency will usually still be the local fiat, and then the attractiveness of the US index fund still has to be weighed against the performance of non-US-based indices in that same local currency as opportunity cost.
by inglor_cz | 2026-01-09 08:47:00+00:00
Russia is fighting the war exactly how I would expect an economy of that size to fight a war. Slow attrition coming from an inability to overwhelm their enemy decisively and fast.

How exactly is their economy "strong"? By what measure? You cannot really eat tanks, that is what made life in the Soviet Union unsatisfactory as well.

Current price of Ural oil is some 9 dollars above their breakeven costs. As the classic says, not great, not terrible.
by dewey | 2026-01-09 08:47:14+00:00
That's a very smug take, especially when you encounter websites every day that don't autofill for whatever reason (As another poster already showed with some examples) or in my case the 1Password extension in Safari failing to connect to the main 1Password deamon or a number of other issues that make this still common place in 2026.

And that's for me, a technical user using a password manager.
by noufalibrahim | 2026-01-09 08:47:17+00:00
As a die hard old schooler, I agree. I wasn't particularly impressed by co-pilot though it did so a few interesting tricks.

Aider was something I liked and used quite heavily (with sonnet). Claude Code has genuinely been useful. I've coded up things which I'm sure I could do myself if I had the time "on the side" and used them in "production". These were mostly personal tools but I do use them on a daily basis and they are useful. The last big piece of work was refactoring a 4000 line program which I wrote piece by piece over several weeks into something with proper packages and structures. There were one or two hiccups but I have it working. Tool a day and approximately $25.
by jasode | 2026-01-09 08:47:36+00:00
>Are we really running URL-unaware password managers in the year 2026?

URL-aware browser plugins for autofilling passwords can also make people _more_ susceptible to phishing.

The password managers plugins sometimes not working correctly changes the Bayesian probabilities in the mind such that username/password fields that remain unfilled becomes normal and expected for legitimate websites. If that happens enough, it inadvertently trains sophisticated computer-literate users to lower their guard when encountering true phishing websites in the future. I wrote more on how this happens to really smart technical people: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45179643

Password browser plugins being imperfect can simultaneously increase AND decrease security because of interactions with human psychology.
by Certhas | 2026-01-09 08:48:07+00:00
I am not discussing the FT case. But as regards Wigner's article, the core thing he points out is that while we are used to the effectiveness of maths, centuries after Newton, there in fact is not any prior grounds to expect this effectiveness.

And no, this is unrelated to whether math is invented or discovered. If anything this is related to the extreme success of reductionism in physics.

As a general point of reflection: If an influential article by a smart person seems silly to you, it's good practice to entertain the question if you missed something, and to ask what others are seeing in it that you're missing.
by lompad | 2026-01-09 08:48:10+00:00
>But inference costs are dropping dramatically over time,

Please prove this statement, so far there is no indication that this is actually true - the opposite seems to be the case. Here are some actual numbers [0] (and whether you like Ed or not, his sources have so far always been extremely reliable.)

There is a reason the AI companies don't ever talk about their inference costs. They boast with everything they can find, but inference... not.

[0]: https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai_docs/
by sfn42 | 2026-01-09 08:48:29+00:00
> Expecting your average front-end logic to be compiled in WebAssembly does not make much sense.

Why not? .NET Blazor and others already do that. In my eyes this was the whole hype of WASM. Replace JS. I don't give a crap about running node/java/whatever in the browser, why would i want that? I can run those outside the browser. I mean sure if you have some use case for it that's fine and I'm glad WASM lets you do it but I really don't see why most devs would care about that. We use the browser for browsing the web and displaying our websites.

To me the browser is for displaying websites and I make websites but I loathe JS. So being able to make websites without JS is awesome.
by troad | 2026-01-09 08:48:38+00:00
I keep wondering what I'm missing, when I see people boldly declare that the future is WASM.

1. The most obvious use case is replacing JS, but the stakeholders have made it clear that WASM is to be some kind of abstract bytecode, not wedded to the browser.

2. This bytecode doesn't appear to be headed to bare metal, nor is there any obvious room for it among the existing ISAs. The direction of travel appears to be the opposite, towards the JVM/CLR. (With the addition of GC, etc)

3. But we already have the JVM/CLR? And tons of other VMs? What does WASM offer here that is not already a solved problem in the high-level VM space? What is the out-of-browser use case here?

In as far as a high level VM with security sandboxing is neat, nothing is stopping MS/Oracle from replicating that functionality with a restricted feature set of their existing VMs.

In as far as it's "C++ in a browser" - sure, that's neat - but I wouldn't bet on that being 'the future'. And if that's the play, why is there such intense reticence to actually surfacing browser interop?

I keep feeling like the folks behind WASM are just totally neglecting the obvious gap in the stack (a fully featured JS replacement), in favour of some abstract adventure to being an ideal Platonic ISA, except there's no market or practical use case for that.
by Denzel | 2026-01-09 08:48:45+00:00
Cool, that potential 5x cost improvement just got delivered this year. A company can continue running the previous generation until EOL, or take a hit by writing off the residual value - either way they’ll have a mixed cost model that puts their token cost somewhere in the middle between previous and current gens.

Also, you’re missing material capex and opex costs from a DC perspective. Certain inputs exhibit diseconomies of scale when your demand outstrips market capacity. You do notice electricity cost is rising and companies are chomping at the bit to build out more power plants, right?

Again, I ran the numbers for simplicity’s sake to show it’s not clear cut that these models are profitable. “I can sort of see how you can get this to work” agrees with exactly what I said: it’s unclear, certainly not a slam dunk.

Especially when you factor in all the other real-world costs.

We’ll find out soon enough.
by keysersoze33 | 2026-01-09 08:48:45+00:00
Sadly the blogpost fails to mention which browser extension was the macilious one that compromised his session tokens.

While quite technical users (a la. this community and devs in general) would be able to inspect the source code of browser extensions to do an audit, most of us don't have time for this, and we just have to rely on the browser add-on number of downloads & reviews as a poor indicator.

It would be really useful to know how this particular extension was rated
by mirzap | 2026-01-09 08:48:59+00:00
Feels like most of the disappointment comes from the wrong expectation. Wasm was never going to replace HTML/CSS/JS for normal frontend work, and JS got good enough that most apps don’t need it anyway. On the other hand, Wasm as a universal runtime (WASI replacing containers, etc.) is clearly still unfinished.

Where it has worked is as infrastructure: fast, sandboxed, portable code for the parts that actually need it. A lot of people are already using it indirectly without realizing. So it’s less "what happened to Wasm?" and more "it didn’t become the silver bullet people imagined."
by michalsustr | 2026-01-09 08:49:02+00:00
We love wasm! You can get pretty far with it. We’re building new machine learning experiment tracker using wasm on the front end. (If you know what Wandb or Neptune is, you should give us a try!)

As far as I know, we are the fastest on the market. The multithreaded support is a pain though.

https://minfx.ai
by PunchyHamster | 2026-01-09 08:49:16+00:00
agile has become "no true scotsman", it's impossible to criticize because someone always will get out of woodwork and start yelling you're doing it wrong.

I begin to think the "successful" dev teams using agile don't need agile principles in the first place and would work just fine under any other system, up and including "just a shared text file with all the current ideas and system issues", purely because they are competent at their job.
by bonesss | 2026-01-09 08:49:29+00:00
Given a 25% hypothetical boost: there are categories of errors vibe testing vibed code will bring in, we know humans suck at critical reading. On the support timeline of an Enterprise product that’s gonna lead to one or more true issues.

At what point is an ‘extra’ 25% coding overhead worth it to ensure a sane human reasonably concerned about criminal consequences for impropriety read all code when making it, and every change around it? To prevent public embarrassment that can and will chase off customers? To have someone to fire and sue if need be?

[Anecdotally, the inflection point was finding tests updated to short circuit through mildly obfuscated code (introduced after several reviews). Paired with a working system developed with TDD, that mistake only becomes obvious when the system stops working but the tests don’t. I wrote it, I ran the agents, I read it, I approved it, but was looking for code quality not intentional sabotage/trickery… lesson learned.]

From a team lead perspective in an Enterprise space, using 25% more time on coding to save insane amounts of aggressive and easy to flubb review and categories of errors sounds like a smart play. CYA up front, take the pain up front.
by torginus | 2026-01-09 08:49:36+00:00
Imo stuff like Flatpak has the right idea - provide a rich but controllable set of features, API/ABI compatibility, while providing zero overhead isolation (same as docker since it relies on the same APIs).

I also rather like the idea of deploying programs rather than virtual machines.

Docker's cardinal sin imo is that it was designed as a monetizable SaaS product, and suffers from inner platform effect, reinventing stuff (package management, lifecycle management etc) that didn't need to be invented.
by saidnooneever | 2026-01-09 08:49:42+00:00
modern humans be here for atleast 200k years. why would we only use tools in the last half if we have developed brains already.

there is tons of evidences of tool use etc. way before this date. its just filtered out because people used to be fired, ridiculed and pushed out of the scientific community if they would say anything that challenge some big names. Archeology was especially toxic in that regard....
by oblio | 2026-01-09 08:50:06+00:00
All the TUI agents are awful at scrolling. I'm on Ubuntu 24.04 and both Claude Code and Gemini CLI absolutely destroy scrolling. I've tested Claude Code in the VS Code and it's better there, but in the Gnome Terminal it's plain unusable.

And a lot of people are reporting scrolling issues.

As someone was saying, it's like they don't have access to the world's best coding LLM to debug these issues.