MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Crew – Multi-agent orchestration tool for AI-assisted development
by gl2334 | 2026-02-07 09:02:43+00:00
I built Crew to help manage multiple AI agents working on the same codebase.

It has two modes:

1. Design mode: Automated Writer ⇄ Reviewer loops to refine ideas into polished design docs

2. Crew mode: Run parallel AI agents (QA, DEV, JANITOR) for continuous code improvement

It's written in Bash and works with Claude CLI, OpenAI's opencode, or Google's Gemini.

Would love feedback from the HN community!

GitHub: https://github.com/garnetliu/crew
by array_key_first | 2026-02-07 09:02:45+00:00
The right requires the machine in order to maintain their propaganda about bringing down the machine. They don't want to get rid of drugs, or undocumented people. They want to take undocumented people one-by-one off the street, so there's a constant "need" to continuously ramp up authoritarism.

The end of undocumented immigration would spell disaster for the Republicans, and they know that. For many red states, it would be literal economic disaster, even if we look past the messaging.

So it's flashy non-solution after flashy non-solution.
by array_key_first | 2026-02-07 09:05:20+00:00
I would imagine more young, ambitious working age adults would help the welfare system, not hurt it.

If you look globally at countries which have issues with their large social services, they're almost all mostly homogeneous and declining in population, especially among the young. Which makes sense if you sit back and think about what social services are typically offered and where the money comes from.
by danaris | 2026-02-07 09:06:12+00:00
> Every dollar that government takes is reducing the wealth of all people and concentrating it in the hands of a few.

I mean...in the very short term, yes.

But governments then spend that money, and one of the big things governments spend money on is social welfare programs.

Which put that money in the hands of the many.

By contrast, when a billionaire gets money, they're likely to keep it. (Yes, technically they usually "invest" it—but that "investment" goes to other wealthy people or corporations, and the money remains locked away from the real economy of people using it to buy food, clothing, and shelter.)

> If you want to help people and make the world a better place focus on your town or city and make it better. No reason that you need to wait for big daddy government to do it with money they took from your pocket.

This is not an endeavor where individual action is effective. We need to work together to make the world better in meaningful ways. The primary way that we can do that is through governments.
by chvid | 2026-02-07 09:06:52+00:00
Someone mentioned his apparently failed earlier work ANKOS. I had to look that up - it is 2002 book by Wolfram with seemingly similar ideas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science

But exactly what is the problem here? Other than perhaps a very mechanical view of the universe (which he shares with many other authors) where it is hard to explain things like consciousness and other complex behaviors.
by PaulRobinson | 2026-02-07 09:07:22+00:00
I actually think this is just computer science. Why? Because the first "computer scientist" - Alan Turing - was interested in this exact same set of ideas.

The first programs he wrote for the Atlas and the Mark II ("the Baby"), seem to have been focused on a theory he had around how animals got their markings.

They look a little to me (as a non-expert in these areas, and reading them in a museum over about 15 minutes, not doing a deep analysis), like a primitive form of cellular automata algorithm. From the scrawls on the print outs, it's possible that he was playing with the space of algorithms not just the algorithms themselves.

It might be worth going back and looking at that early work he did and seeing it through this lens.
by avsm | 2026-02-07 09:07:40+00:00
(original author of that article here)

This is a blast from the past! And indeed, I use Eio these days to do direct-style IO; you can see an example of a HTTP/1.1 parser done in that style, and there's nary a monad in sight! https://tangled.org/anil.recoil.org/ocaml-requests/blob/main...

OCaml's effects are similar to thethe delimcc hack used in the article, except that it's nicely integrated into OCaml 5 and very high performance; basically a stack switch: https://anil.recoil.org/papers/2021-pldi-retroeff.pdf
by nextaccountic | 2026-02-07 09:08:13+00:00
> may it happen that the efficiency gains decrease demand

What mechanism would make this happen?

Demand could decrease if AI became worse, but efficiency doesn't make AI worse - it actually makes possible at all to run bigger, better models (see the other comment with a link to Jevon's paradox), which increase, not decrease demand (more powerful models may have new capabilities that people want to use)

Alternatively, AI demand could decrease through political pressure (either anti-AI sentiment takes a foothold on the public, and/or government regulation strangle demand on the sector like it did for eg. on tobacco industry). But another way to reap the benefits of more efficient AI datacenters is to make it a talking point on how AI environmental impacts can be mitigated, which could curb anti-AI sentiment.

Either way, those possibilities don't decrease demand for AI - they are either neutral, or increase demand instead.
by throwa356262 | 2026-02-07 09:08:22+00:00
I just tested this using Calude and at least with 4.5 this does not seem to be possible. The context grows very quickly and the LLM gets lost and starts hallucinating. Maybe I am missing some key ingredient here?

Of course, if you have large team of AI and security experts and an unlimited token budget things can look different.
by arjunchint | 2026-02-07 09:09:55+00:00
Hey really unique take!

Curious to see how you compare against competitors, any benchmarks to share?

We launched a competitor in the space rtrvr.ai, that when benchmarked is SOTA and beats even OpenAI Operator.

Cool work on the proxying but LinkedIn has really advanced detections for even device/hardware fingerprinting, how advanced are your stealth measures? Because this might be risking account bans.

People in this space even setup consumer hardware in datacenters to get around this actually.
by numpad0 | 2026-02-07 09:11:05+00:00
Wow. The user leaderboard is crazy. It's literally like, three guys getting 200 likes combined, down to two guys with 70 likes combined over the last quarter, then now a guy with 35 likes over the past month.

My gut is telling me that THE lesson learned from Twitter buyout is that, you could trim off 99% of devops out of Twitter(2019), it just leaves you with ~100% opex and 1% as much sales, and you don't want that.

1: https://devcommunity.x.com/u?order=likes_received&period=quarterly
by anonnon | 2026-02-07 09:14:24+00:00
The enthusiasm so many devs show for it is also quite bizarre, saying things like "AI makes me so much more productive," with the implication that they will be its primary beneficiaries, and that it won't result in a massive reduction in demand, compensation, and status for developers, adversely affecting them. Even more bizarre when you realize these devs aren't the ones optimizing some popular video codec or writing avionics software for a fighter jet, but instead gluing together NPM packages--probably the first or second rung on on the software "innovator's dilemma" ladder of disruption.
by cyphar | 2026-02-07 09:14:58+00:00
Business class flights from Sydney to San Francisco cost A$6k, 6-10x as much as economy. Flights from Sydney to Europe are more like 3-4x (A$7k vs A$2k) but still ludicrously expensive. Good luck convincing your company to expense that for work trips, and most of us don't have SV salaries. Honestly, I still manage to get some work done on long flights, the more annoying thing is flights which don't have power outlets or WiFi.

If you are a point hacker you could spend the points on upgrades (which tend to give you better rates than buying base tickets) but then you're paying for a minor comfort improvement that you wouldn't pay for normally -- which is a textbook example of induced consumption and is playing into exactly how airlines want you to use points.
by array_key_first | 2026-02-07 09:15:19+00:00
It's a bit rich to be talking about ripping the law apart when we have an authoritarian in office and regular citizens are being executed on the streets.

Even if you think ICE is the answer, which frankly it's not and even a second of introspection will reveal this, you cannot just pretend that the current situation is desirable.

The undeniable reality is that this administration has absolutely no intention of ending illegal immigration. None. They intend to expand the police state, shut down dissent, and bring the US into a fascist state.

You want to end illegal immigration? Fine. Just start locking up executives who hire undocumented people. It's easy, about 1000x easier than ICE, and much, MUCH less expensive.

Will the Republicans ever propose anything even close to this? No. Because the reality is that that would immediately implode the economy of most red states, and they can't do that to their constituency. I mean, the red states that don't already have a shit economy.

Besides, you cant rage against the machine if you destroy the machine. They NEED illegal immigration for their fascist wet dream. Without that justification for surveillance and violence, they have nothing left.

Look, at the end of the day the only thing keeping states like Georgia from going under, besides the welfare of more economically successful blue states, is a steady supply of cheap labor willing to do dirty work. Even Texas, for Christ's sake, is only economically successful because of, like, 3 blue little dots. They're like Atlas carrying the economy of Texas on their shoulders. Outside of that it's... you guessed it, cheap labor doing dirty work!
by nextaccountic | 2026-02-07 09:15:58+00:00
Ok so I am researching what to use in this space - a Vercel-ish clone on cheap VPS - and, is Dokploy really the best option?

What do you think about Caprover? https://github.com/caprover/caprover

Or uh.. Dokku https://github.com/dokku/dokku

Right now I am using Coolify but so far it has not been exactly reliable
by brabel | 2026-02-07 09:16:44+00:00
> by 2012 we were drowning in tech debt and scaling challenges.

> the greatest engineering team I've ever seen

How do these two things reconcile in your opinion? In my view , doing something quickly is the easy part , good engineering is only needed exactly when you want things to be maintainable and scalable, so the assertions above don’t really make much sense to me.
by spacebanana7 | 2026-02-07 09:17:25+00:00
There’s a big difference between the gospels not being cited by name directly, and not having a name. For example, the Gospels often cite Isaiah without using his name - just lifting direct quotes.

And there’re allusions to apostolic naming in things like Justin Martyr’s first apology, Ch67 (155CE, dating largely from it being co-addressed to Marcus Aurelius):

“ the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permit”

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.lxvii.html
by sampullman | 2026-02-07 09:18:49+00:00
The person I'm replying to believes that there will be a point when you no longer need to test (or review) the output of LLMs, similar to how you don't think about the generated asm/bytecode/etc of a compiler.

That's what I disagree with - everything you said is obviously true, but I don't see how it's related to the discussion.
by jacquesm | 2026-02-07 09:20:56+00:00
Quite, I love the esthetic of the watch stand. The exposed lacquered wire makes it look really exotic, and in general the execution is top notch. It is really tempting to throw stuff like this together and call it a day when it works (that's more my style...), so I have a lot of respect for people that can finish these things to the point where they not only work but also look good.
by o8vm | 2026-02-07 09:21:03+00:00
Thank you — this is very helpful feedback.

You’re absolutely right that I led with terminology instead of value.
A simpler way to describe it is:

Hibana helps prevent protocol drift bugs in distributed systems.
You describe the interaction once as a global choreography, and each role gets a projected local API.
Because steps are affine (consumed once), invalid transitions like skipping, reusing, or taking the wrong branch are rejected by the type/protocol model.

So the practical goal is fewer hidden state-machine bugs, with one global source of truth for interaction order.

I appreciate the suggestion, and I’ll explain it this way in the next write-up.
by pekingzcc | 2026-02-07 09:21:03+00:00
I’ve recently been working on automating website creation with Clawdbot. Initially, I wasn’t sure about its capabilities, but as I increased its permissions, I realized it could handle more complex tasks, including managing data, hosting websites, and even creating workflows with various skills.

The most interesting part was setting up the environment to work autonomously, where it began registering domain names, setting up websites, and implementing all sorts of automations. While the tool has been helpful, I am concerned about security, particularly with the risk of vulnerabilities if permissions are too loose.

I’ve built out a basic setup and am continuing to refine it. Here’s the website I’ve worked on using the seedance2 API: seedance2api.org
. It would be great to hear feedback from others on their experiences with similar automation systems
by wasmainiac | 2026-02-07 09:21:10+00:00
Because it consumes hours of time on the daily. And I can’t whole heartedly say that it was a choice to do so since it appears to be habit forming.

It pushes out time for other activities, sometimes self-care like sleep, sometimes key milestones in our life. I’m not saying we have to piously eat porridge for breakfast and wake up at 5 am with the chickens, but damn, everything in moderation.

Obviously H can be a much more potent and life changing addiction, but we can draw similarities between the two. Not only from a dependency perspective but also from an economical one.
by wedog6 | 2026-02-07 09:22:07+00:00
This result is out from the article by a factor of pi/3. This is the multiplicative difference between his inner integral with all the sins 24pi^2 and the GP's observation that 3 points on the chosen circle have density (2 pi r)^3 = 8pi^3 r^3.

(The article had already covered the r^3 in another part of the calculation.)

I'm trying to figure out an intuitive explanation as to why the work with the inner Jacobian is needed or an argument as to why it isn't.

Anyone want to simulate this accurately enough to distinguish between 40% and 41.9% probability? 5000 samples should be more than enough.
by bmacho | 2026-02-07 09:23:34+00:00
I like this reasoning. Define a probability distribution on all circles of (x,y,r>=0) based on how likely a given circle is. Then we can just sum the good circles and all the circles.

And the probability distribution is simple: a given (x,y,r) is as likely as its circumference in the unit circle.

Reasoning: Let C:(x,y,r) a given circle. We want to know how likely is it that the circle on 3 random points are close to it, closer than a given value d. (A d wide ball or cube around C in (x,y,r) space. Different shapes lead to diffferent constants but same for every circle.) The set of good 3 points is more or less the same as the set of 3 points from the point set C(d): make C's circumference d thick, and pick the 3 points from this set. Now not any 3 points will suffice, but we can hope that the error goes to 0 as d goes to 0 and there is no systematic error.

Then we just have to integrate.

ChatGPT got me the result 2/3, so it's incorrect.
by jacquesm | 2026-02-07 09:24:05+00:00
That site is gold. I've had one that was a complete mystery, it all looked and felt perfect but still, it didn't work. I was tempted to toss it and replace it but the fact that it was a vintage Campagnolo made replacing it extremely expensive and I couldn't even find a proper replacement. So in the end I figured out what the problem was and ended up repairing it.
by sarchertech | 2026-02-07 09:25:43+00:00
You’re getting confused because you are substituting the goal of a clean room implementation for its definition. And you are not understanding that “clean room implementation” is one specific type of reverse engineering.

The goal is to avoid copyright infringement claims. A specific clean room implementation may or may not be successful at that.

This does not mean that any reverse engineering attempt that successfully avoids copyright infringement was a clean room implementation.

A clean room implementation is a specific method of reverse engineering where one team writes a spec by reviewing the original software and the other team attempts to implement that spec. The entire point is so that the 2nd team has no knowledge of proprietary implementation details.

If the 2nd team has previously read the entire source code that defeats the entire purpose.

> That very much sounds like using GCC as an online known-good compiler oracle to compare against in this case.

Yes and that is absolutely fine to do in a clean room implementation. That’s not the part that makes this not a clean room implementation. That’s the part that makes it an attempt at reverse engineering.
by Tade0 | 2026-02-07 09:26:34+00:00
> In JS, you have the Node / Deno split,

You do? Deno is maybe a single digit percentage of the market, just hyped tremendously.

> E.G. compare tsx versus Node's native ts execution

JSX/TSX, despite what React people might want you to believe, are not part of the language.

> which only work if you pray three times on the day of the full moon.

It only doesn't work in some contexts due to legacy reasons. Otherwise it's just elaborate syntax sugar for `Promise`.
by karencarits | 2026-02-07 09:27:09+00:00
I will actually argue that it is very useful and wish that more people started to be more specific about their faith. Firstly, stating that one is Catholic/Lutheran/... demonstrates that one understand that one is not representing the entire Christianity. Secondly, it is useful for discussion as it makes one's dogmas/axioms more explicit. And thirdly, it allows better granularity as some general teachings are really Christian (like the resurrection and most of the Credo) while other are specific to the tradition one follows (like the sacraments).

For example, a Catholic would hesitate to receive a "Christian eucharist" as the Catholic and protestant understanding of the Eucharist is so profoundly different

A final point, given the subject of the thread, is that since the Catholic Church regards itself as founded by Christ, it is older than the Bible, and that the Bible was primarily written by the Church, for the Church, to complement Tradition. They would consider splintering off Tradition and leaving Catholicism as moving away from Christ (as Christ is head of the Catholic Church)
by array_key_first | 2026-02-07 09:28:45+00:00
But Uber does have a hand in it, by choosing to not properly vet their drivers or lower the risk. Uber is not a marketplace - they choose the drivers and they are, more or less, assigned to you. Uber is their employer.

If the employer makes choices that leads to an unsafe working condition, then that's their responsibility. If that might, potentially, mean the current business model is not viable, well... yeah, too bad so sad. Nobody has a god given right to run a business however the fuck they want.

But I don't think that's the case here. Uber can take steps to mitigate this, it's not like theyve exhausted their options. Frankly, they haven't even tried.
LLMs are powerful, but enterprises are deterministic by nature
by prateekdalal | 2026-02-07 09:29:06+00:00
Over the last year, we’ve been experimenting with LLMs inside enterprise systems.

What keeps surfacing is a fundamental mismatch:
LLMs are probabilistic and non-deterministic, while enterprises are built on predictability, auditability, and accountability.

Most current approaches try to “tame” LLMs with prompts, retries, or heuristics. That works for demos, but starts breaking down when you need explainability, policy enforcement, or post-incident accountability.

We’ve found that treating LLMs as suggestion engines rather than decision makers changes the architecture completely.
The actual execution needs to live in a deterministic control layer that can enforce rules, log decisions, and fail safely.

Curious how others here are handling this gap between probabilistic AI and deterministic enterprise systems.
Are you seeing similar issues in production?
by riedel | 2026-02-07 09:29:15+00:00
While I totally agree, the underlying conflict is that Zoos over use the argument of preservation these days. On the other end they certainly have the need to stay entertainment venues, a conflict which they seldomly address.

Recently there was a obviously necessary mass culling of baboons in the Nuremberg zoo which shows some of the controversy [1]

[1] https://www.greenmemag.com/animals/the-nuremberg-zoo-controv...
by johny115 | 2026-02-07 09:30:20+00:00
I use floccus.org to sync between Chrome and Zen browser, works flawlessly! It wasn't that difficut to find, once I had the two browser setup (as in the end I refufsed to fully switch to Zen), just searched extensions, and setup this up in a minute. It also syncs to google drive and bunch of 3rd party bookmark apps.
by gloosx | 2026-02-07 09:32:22+00:00
earth-moving machines don't really move earth because they are told so, machine requires fine-grained deterministic input in a certain language of motion to do what it does.

imagine if machine operator was saying "move this earth here, not not this one, 30 cantimeters to the left... yes, move this one earth here, no not here, please a bit to the right", lol

of course, someone with no exprerience with the machine would prefer telling it what to do, and he will even achieve something rough, but someone who knows what handles and pedals do would prefer the handles and pedals
by vghaisas | 2026-02-07 09:33:01+00:00
This is very cool, but I'm having some trouble understanding the use cases.

Is this mostly just for codemode where the MCP calls instead go through a Monty function call? Is it to do some quick maths or pre/post-processing to answer queries? Or maybe to implement CaMeL?

It feels like the power of terminal agents is partly because they can access the network/filesystem, and so sandboxed containers are a natural extension?
by vghaisas | 2026-02-07 09:34:16+00:00
This is very cool, but I'm having some trouble understanding the use cases.

Is this mostly just for codemode where the MCP calls instead go through a Monty function call? Is it to do some quick maths or pre/post-processing to answer queries? Or maybe to implement CaMeL?

It feels like the power of terminal agents is partly because they can access the network/filesystem, and so sandboxed containers are a natural extension?
by vintagedave | 2026-02-07 09:35:10+00:00
‘… a decaying empire experiencing the stagnation of all of its core products that's using OpenAI's billions in inference spend to cover up the collapse of Azure's growth.’

I’d like to put that in the headline but to follow HN guidelines put the actual ‘haters’ headline instead. I’m not aligned with that terminology. I do think these are fascinating and scary numbers.
by mcintyre1994 | 2026-02-07 09:35:46+00:00
I find it quite funny that they give themselves maximum marks for transparent pricing. If you go to their pricing page, everything is priced as “per user/month plus compute costs*”. Maybe it’s just because I’m on mobile and the page doesn’t seem to work super well, but reading if I have no idea what those compute costs are and therefore what the actual cost is.