MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by disposition2 | 2026-02-23 17:49:57+00:00
This wasn’t my experience, if anything, they often didn’t have stock in the store and told us to go online to buy the item.

And 800+ stores doesn’t seem like over saturation, it looks like there are more BestBuy and Hobby Lobby stores than that and they both sell stuff that most folks would feel equally comfortable buying online. Where, as you rightly stated, buying fabric online is a non starter for most folks.

My experience was similar to the author, bare shelves and 1 or 2 folks around to help customers…it honestly felt more like purposeful neglect on the part of the owners.
by kivuhub | 2026-02-23 17:50:20+00:00
L’Assistant.e chargé.e de la protection communautaire est membre de l’Unité de protection au sein d’une opération pays et peut rendre compte au/à la Chargé.e de protection, au/à la Chargé.e de protection communautaire ou à un autre membre du personnel plus senior de l’Unité de protection. Sous la direction générale de l’Unité de protection, et en coordination avec les autres membres du personnel du HCR, les autorités gouvernementales, les partenaires ONG et les autres parties prenantes, l’Assistant·e Chargé.e de la protection communautaire travaille directement avec les communautés relevant de la compétence du HCR afin d’identifier les risques auxquels elles sont confrontées et de mobiliser leurs capacités pour qu’elles puissent se protéger elles-mêmes, ainsi que leurs familles et leurs communautés.
Le/la titulaire du poste peut avoir une responsabilité directe de supervision d’une partie du personnel de protection et/ou de soutien, et appuie l’application des normes, procédures opérationnelles et pratiques de la protection communautaire dans la mise en œuvre des activités de protection communautaire au niveau du terrain. Pour remplir cette fonction, l’Assistant·e Chargé.e de la protection communautaire est tenu·e de passer une part substantielle de sa journée de travail en dehors du bureau, à établir et à maintenir des réseaux au sein des communautés de personnes relevant de la compétence du HCR (PoC). Le développement et le maintien de relations constructives avec les PoC, ayant un impact mesurable et positif sur la planification, la programmation et les résultats en matière de protection, constituent le cœur du travail du/de la titulaire du poste. Il/elle appuie également l’élaboration d’une stratégie de protection communautaire en veillant à ce qu’elle repose sur des consultations avec les PoC.
by latexr | 2026-02-23 17:50:29+00:00
> But the LLM has safeguards in place to stop transcribing of copyrighted material beyond fair use

And how’s that working out, considering the submission we’re on?

> how is the fact that the possibly have portions of copyrighted works "memorized", however do not reproduce it breaking copyright law?

I can’t believe this needs to be repeated so often, but machines are not people. Memorising a book is not the same thing as copying a PDF.

Furthermore, it’s not about the LLM training, it’s about how the companies who make them got the data in the first place.
by john_strinlai | 2026-02-23 17:50:39+00:00
>Your hypothetical 14-year-old needs to first be able to bypass the parental controls that come with every modern OS. You keep ignoring that.

because they dont matter. parental controls exist today but have been deemed ineffective for the age verification conversation, for whatever stupid reason. so we are stuck trying to figure something else out. do i wish we could just use the existing basic parental controls instead of whatever the hell we are going to end up with? obviously!

the easiest "something else" is to piggy-back on existing age-restriction regulations (i.e. smokes, alcohol, gambling) because they have broad (obviously not ubiquitous, but broad) support. we have decades of experience with them.

and, to that end, you create a little token and you show your id to the store clerk to buy it. the "protect the children" people are satisfied (its the same process everything else age-restricted!), and i dont need to send my id to a peter thiel company. it preserves privacy, it re-uses existing laws, it re-uses existing infrastructure, etc.
by jlarocco | 2026-02-23 17:51:10+00:00
I don't think that example works.

Theoretically a person who read and memorized a book and then typed out copies for people would be violating the copyright, but so few people can do that, and it's so cumbersome that it just doesn't matter much. The copyright holder could sue if they found out the person were distributing copies, but it's just not realistic. Certainly not for a large number of books.

But AI memorization scales, and it's possible to have an AI write out unlimited copies of different books to a large number of people. And how did the AI get a full copy in the first place?
by efskap | 2026-02-23 17:51:38+00:00
It's so bizarre to me when North Americans proudly claim "Viking ancestry", rather than Scandinavian. Like, beyond it not being an ethnicity, you're identifying specifically with violent raiders who killed peaceful monks, even if that's romanticized by media. It's like proudly claiming "pirate" or perhaps more poignantly in current times "ICE agent ancestry".
Show HN: I made a hub to fix how founders and investors connect online
by guglielmomave | 2026-02-23 17:51:50+00:00
Most founders waste hours switching between LinkedIn, AngelList, Twitter and job boards just to find the right people.

I built Startupage to bring everything in one place , founder profiles, opportunities, and revenue-verified leaderboards powered by Stripe.

Still early, feedback welcome.
Show HN: Personal Vault – Own your personal context, let AI agents query it
by lovincyrus | 2026-02-23 17:52:00+00:00
Every AI agent I use asks for the same context — my name, preferences, addresses — and I keep pasting it into different apps that each store their own copy.

Personal Vault is an encrypted local store for personal data with an MCP server so AI agents can query it with scoped access. You own the keys, the data never leaves your machine unless you allow it.

This isn't about agents talking to agents. It's about making the agent that works for you actually know who you are — with your permission, on your terms.

Use cases that click immediately:
- Travel booking: agent pulls passport, loyalty numbers, seat pref, TSA PreCheck, dietary requirements
- Form filling: government forms, insurance, visa docs — agent fills 90% of the fields from your vault

Technical details:
- AES-256-GCM per field, Argon2id KDF, HKDF subkeys per category
- Sensitivity tiers control what agents can see (public → standard → sensitive → critical)
- Every access is audit-logged, tokens are scoped and revocable
- Written in Go, no CGO, single binary, ~2500 lines

Install: curl -fsSL https://www.personalvault.dev/install.sh | sh
GitHub: https://github.com/lovincyrus/personal-vault
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2026-02-23 17:52:32+00:00
>Then throw the executives who authorized such programs in jail.

Gee, I wonder if the executives who are suspected of doing such things haven't spent the last 100 years building the infrastructure necessary to avoid charges, let alone jail time? Large corporate legal departments, wink-wink-nudge-nudge command and control hierarchies where nothing incriminating is ever put into writing, voluminous intra-office communications that bury even the circumstantial evidence so deeply no jury could understand it even if the plaintiffs/state could uncover it, etc.

Anyone over the age of 12 that thinks corporate entities can be made to be accountable in a meaningful way is more than naive. They are cognitively defective. Or is it that you realize they can't be held accountable but you'd rather maintain the status quo than contemplate a country which abolished them and enforced that all business was the conducted by sole proprietorships and (small-n) partnerships?
Show HN: OmniGlass – An open-source, sandboxed Visual Action Engine
by goshtasb | 2026-02-23 17:53:09+00:00
Hey HN,

We’ve reached peak "chat interface." Claude Desktop and OpenAI are amazing at coding, but they are terrible for repetitive, blue-collar, or legacy enterprise workflows.

You cannot deploy Claude Desktop to a warehouse floor or an auto repair shop and expect workers to prompt-engineer their way through a proprietary GUI or a locked PDF every 5 minutes. They don't want a conversation; they want a button that does the job.

So I built OmniGlass (Rust/Tauri). It is an open-source, local-first runtime that lets developers turn any MCP (Model Context Protocol) tool into a 1-click OS-level visual action.

How developers use it:
You write a standard MCP server (e.g., a 30-line Node script that queries an internal database). OmniGlass handles the visual pipeline:

The Trigger: The user snips a region of their screen.

The Vision: Native OS OCR (Apple Vision) extracts the text locally (no screen streaming).

The "Brain": An LLM dynamically maps the raw OCR text to your MCP tool’s strict JSON input_schema.

The Action: OmniGlass instantly renders a native button on the screen. The user clicks it. The tool executes. Zero prompting.

The Real-World Use Case (Why this matters):
I found a $1,000 bounty on ProblemHunt from an auto shop. Mechanics are wasting hours looking at informal WhatsApp messages ("left radiator plug, Chery Tiggo") and manually cross-referencing them against messy, unsearchable Chinese auto-part PDFs.

A standard AI chat app fails here because of the friction. But with OmniGlass, a developer can build a "Find Auto Part" MCP plugin. You deploy it to the mechanic's Mac. The mechanic just snips the WhatsApp message, clicks the "Find Part" button that pops up, and the plugin queries the supplier API. The mechanic never talks to an AI. It just executes.

The Security Sandbox (Why not just use Claude's MCP integration?):
Claude Desktop runs MCP tools with raw user permissions. A hallucination or prompt injection can read your ~/.ssh keys. Since OmniGlass is meant to be deployed in businesses, it runs entirely Zero-Trust. Every MCP plugin is locked inside a macOS sandbox-exec kernel profile. The /Users/ directory is default-deny.

My Asks for HN:
This is infrastructure for developers to build on, and I need help pushing it forward:

The Auto Parts Bounty: I want to build the Chinese auto parts plugin to prove the platform. If anyone here has experience scraping or querying B2B auto supplier databases, let's collaborate and claim this bounty.

Break my sandbox: If you can write an MCP plugin that escapes my sandbox-exec profile and reads a protected file, please open a GitHub issue immediately. I want this bulletproofed.

OS Ports: The Rust core is solid, but if any low-level devs know Windows AppContainer or Linux Bubblewrap, I’d love help porting the security moat.

Repo: https://github.com/goshtasb/omniglass
Docs/Plugin Guide: https://github.com/goshtasb/omniglass/blob/main/docs/plugin-...

What legacy enterprise workflows would you build a visual tool for?
by julianeon | 2026-02-23 17:53:26+00:00
I was using cruise control on the highway yesterday and thinking: this is like very cheap very crude self-driving. And you know what? In its limited UNIX-like way, it's great: the car does a much better job of gradually injecting fuel than I, with my brick-like human foot, can do. Robot 1, human 0.

And from there it's easy to think: couldn't the car also detect white lines and stay within them? It doesn't have to be perfect; it can be cruise control++. If it errs a little, I can save it. But otherwise, this is a function I'd really like to use if only it was available.
by Oras | 2026-02-23 17:53:29+00:00
> It’s simple and minimal

This. All LLM code I saw so far was lots of abstraction to the point that it’s hard to maintain.

It is testable for sure, but the complications cost is so high.

Something else that is not addressed in the article is working within enterprise env where new technologies are adopted in much slower paces compared to startups. LLMs come with strange and complicated patterns to solve these problems, which is understandable as I would imagine all training and tuning were following structured frameworks
by nine_k | 2026-02-23 17:53:36+00:00
This is very right. There are two obstacles.

(1) Security. An always-on, externally accessible device will always be a target for breaking in. You want the device to be bulletproof, and to have defense in depth, so that breaking into one service does not affect anything else. Something like Proxmox that works on low-end hardware and is as easy to administer as a mobile phone would do. We are somehow far from this yet. A very limited thing like a static site may be made both easy and bulletproof though.

(2) Connectivity providers should allow that. Most home routers don't get a static IP, or even a globally routable IPv4 at all. Or even a stable IPv6. This complicates the DNS setup, and without DNS such resources are basically invisible.

From the pure resilience POV, it seems more important to keep control of your domain, and have an automated way to deploy your site / app on whatever new host, which is regularly tested. Then use free or cheap DNS and VM hosting of convenience. It takes some technical chops, but can likely be simplified and made relatively error-proof with a concerted effort.
by chfritz | 2026-02-23 17:53:37+00:00
Sure, let's instead encourage them to reinvent the wheel (TF, simulation, architecture, navigation, localization, SLAM, 2D map representation, etc.) that seems much smarter. ROS might be like democracy ("the worst form of government except for all the others we've tried"), but it's still the only stake in the ground around which we've manage to corral a community.

For this question specifically: there are many ways to approach robotics, incl. from the hardware side. But approaching it from the software (sim) side is not invalid, so I don't think down-voting my comment was warranted.
by stego-tech | 2026-02-23 17:53:45+00:00
We absolutely fucked up there. There definitely needs to be protections for shareholders to reduce the chance of exploitation and fraud, but part of the “free market” as it were is for shareholders to fuck off to other companies if they don’t like how one is run.

The “shareholder value” mandate is one of the greatest perversions of the “free market” out there, miles above any discourse about minimum wages or worker protection laws. Undo that decision along with the Reagan-era ruling permitting share buybacks, and you’d substantially weaken the Boardroom and C-Suite while turning off the two single biggest incentives to the current system of exploitation.
by amarant | 2026-02-23 17:53:48+00:00
If I'm reading the implication right, you're having a pretty terrible idea. Glossing over what running a server would do to your battery, it would never work because of the routing issues you'll run into.

With IPv6 it would theoretically be possible, but currently with ipv4 and NATs everywhere, your website would almost never be reachable, even with fancy workarounds like dynDNS
by d-us-vb | 2026-02-23 17:54:22+00:00
Probably not much: the requirement is exact equivalence of program inputs to outputs, and as such the agents are performing very mechanical translation from the existing C++ code to Rust. Their prompts aren't "implement X browser component in rust", they're "translate this C++ code to Rust, with these extra details that you can't glean from the code itself."
by candiddevmike | 2026-02-23 17:54:22+00:00
If this could ever happen, there will be no point in GUI apps anymore, your AI assistant or what have you will just interact with everything on your behalf and/or present you with some kind of master interface for everything.

I don't see a bunch of small agents in the future, instead just one per device or user. Maybe there will be a fleeting moment for GUI/local apps to tie into some local, OS LLM library (or some kind of WebLLM spec) to leverage this local agent in your app.
by alex-nt | 2026-02-23 17:54:26+00:00
> Code has always been expensive. Producing a few hundred lines of clean, tested code takes most software developers a full day or more. Many of our engineering habits, at both the macro and micro level, are built around this core constraint.

> At the macro level we spend a great deal of time designing, estimating and planning out projects, to ensure that our expensive coding time is spent as efficiently as possible. Product feature ideas are evaluated in terms of how much value they can provide in exchange for that time - a feature needs to earn its development costs many times over to be worthwhile!

Maybe I am spending my life working at the wrong corporations (not FAANG/direct tech related), but that doesn't match at all my experience. The `design` phase was reduced to something more akin to a sketch in order to get faster iterating products. Obviously that now, as you create and debate over more iterations, the time for writing code is increased (as you built more stuff that is discarded). What is that discarded time used for? Well, it's the way new people learn the system/business domain. It's how we build the knowledge to support the product in production. It's how the business learns what are the limits/features, why they are there, what they can offer, what they must ask the regulators etc.

Realistically, if you only count the time required to develop the feature as described, is basically nothing. Most of the time is spent on edge-cases that are not written anywhere. You start coding something and 15m in you discover 5-10 cases not handled in any way. You ask business people, they ask other people. You start checking regulation docs/examples, etc. etc. Maybe there are no docs available, so you just push a version, and test if you assumptions are correct (most likely not...so go again and again). At the end of this process everyone gains a better understanding on how the business works, why, and what you can further improve.

Can AI speedrun this? Sure, but then how will all the people around gain the knowledge required to advance things? We learn through trial and error. Previously this was a shared experience for everyone in the business, now it becomes more and more a solitary experience of just speaking with AI.
by fxtentacle | 2026-02-23 17:54:39+00:00
Scathophagidae are flies that really like eating shit. We know how to cheaply produce massive amounts of shit.

But that doesn't mean we solved world hunger. In the same way, AIs churning out millions of lines of code doesn't mean we have solved software engineering.

Actually, I would argue that high LOCs are a liability, not an asset. We have found a very fast way of turning money into slop, which will then need maintenance and delay every future release. Unless, of course, you have an expert code reviewer who checks the AI output. But in that case, the productivity gains will be max 10%. Because thoroughly reviewing code is almost the same amount of work as writing it.
by robotresearcher | 2026-02-23 17:54:58+00:00
> Starting up a car brand is orders of magnitude worse.

Tesla did it, and is more valuable than most other car brands added together. They had a novel product: a good EV that was fun to drive. Is that a unique situation? Could a truly autonomous car launch do it?

Your arguments make sense in themselves, but maybe underestimate the revolutionary value that a level 4 car would provide.
by axus | 2026-02-23 17:55:00+00:00
It's very easy to lock up alcohol/cigarettes, a child should never have access. Internet usage is more like broadcast media, a child should have regular access.

The positives and negatives of Internet usage are more extreme than broadcast media but less than alcohol/guns. The majority of people lack the skills to properly censor Internet without hovering over the child's shoulder full-time as you would with a gun. Best you can do is keep their PC near you, but it's not enough.

We agree that a creepy surveillance nanny state is not the solution, but training parents to do the censorship seems unattainable. As we do for guns/alcohol/cigarettes, mass education about the dangers is a good baseline.

EDIT: And some might disagree about never having access to alcohol!
by Teever | 2026-02-23 17:55:06+00:00
Yes, what you observed is people making unrealistic and disingenuous responses in reply to equally unrealistic and disingenuous reefer madness type propaganda.

What happened is that the people making these disengenuous comments in bad faith did not realize that so many others would watch them and without understanding hte context woudl pick up those same disingenuous arguments and take them as truth.

This is all the long term consequences of allowing Reefer Madness tier propaganda be published and not repudiated immediately.
by ecshafer | 2026-02-23 17:55:22+00:00
I am firmly against marijuana legalization. This is partially because of this insanity of the pro-legalization arguments. When I would see friends/family that started smoking regularly become noticeably less intelligent while pro-legalization proponents would argue there are no negative side-effects, or people who were obviously compelled to smoke every day or as often as they could.... like some sort of addiction, while pro-legalization proponents argued it was totally not-addictive.

The anti-legalization side had a few odd arguments as well, and some old claims that were unfounded. So no hands were totally clean.
by tavavex | 2026-02-23 17:55:36+00:00
> the author is seemingly living in a self-imposed box in which capital has an inalienable right to rule the world. "owners must be convinced to share" - No sir, they're not kings, nor were they elected into any position, and we don't have to "convince" them of anything.

That box was something that humans imposed on themselves on the scale of a civilization. At this point, I agree with the author's view because I can't see how it can ever change. Every little additional bit of the scales tipping in their favor means an exponential amount of additional effort that will be needed to undo the imbalance.

By the time society wants to talk about transitioning to a different model (if they ever want to talk about it - remember, humans are shockingly vulnerable to informational warfare and many opinions can be changed with the tweak of an algorithm), the amount of power will be more imbalanced than it likely has ever been in history. If this future comes to pass, they'll be 10x as powerful by that point. And they will have effectively endless amounts of money and power to buy themselves the best armies, automated defenses, production facilities, employees, bunkers, drones, whatever, to ensure their safety. In this worst-case scenario where demand for human labor is a shadow of what it is today, how is this in any way winnable? They could take whomever they need and clock out, automatically overseeing the rest to ensure they won't have anyone threatening them ever again.
by gcanyon | 2026-02-23 17:55:42+00:00
But the crime in the human instance is the reproduction, not the storage. So the crime in the AI circumstance would not be in the training, but in prompting the output.

And of course AIs are excellent at taking direction, so:

If I prompt it with "Harry Potter, but Voldemort wins: dark, and Hermione is a sex slave to Draco Malfoy" and get "Manacled," that's copyright infringement, and on me, not on the LLM/training.

If I prompt it with "Harry Potter, but Voldemort wins: dark, and Hermione is a sex slave to Draco Malfoy, and change enough to avoid infringing copyright," and get "Alchemised," then that should be fine. I doubt the legal world agrees with me though.
by anematode | 2026-02-23 17:55:44+00:00
Maybe, but I think the OP is submitting this in bad faith (or got utterly bamboozled by the AI). I tried with recent clang and the specified flags, and the behavior is the same.

(I think it's unlikely that it can be straight-up optimized out because it dirties the workspace thread local, and compilers generally don't optimize out writes to thread local variables.)