MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: MicroVibe – minimal JSX web starter
by melendezgg | 2026-02-14 04:23:26+00:00
Hi HN, I built MicroVibe, a small web starter for people who want JSX + file-based routing + API routes, without pulling in a heavy framework.

What it does today:

- File-based routing (including dynamic and catch-all segments)

- API routes with consistent JSON error shape

- SSR by default, and `mode = "client"` per route when interactivity is needed

- Runtime module cache with file-change invalidation in local dev

Project goal: keep the runtime small and understandable so teams can iterate quickly and still reason about behavior.

I would really value feedback on:

1. Routing/API ergonomics

2. What was confusing or slow in your first 30 minutes using MicroVibe?

3. Where this should clearly differ from Next/Astro/Vite workflows
by jrflowers | 2026-02-14 04:25:01+00:00
Yeah I kind of fell for it. I was hoping to be pleasantly surprised by a particle physicist in the openai victory lap thread or someone with insight into what “GPT 5.2 originally conjectured this” means exactly because the way it’s phrased in the preprint makes it sound like they were all doing bongrips with chatgpt and it went “man do you guys ever think about gluon tree amplitudes?” but uh, my empty post getting downvoted hours after being made empty makes it pretty clear that this is a strictly victory-lap-only thread
by phyzix5761 | 2026-02-14 04:25:02+00:00
99.9% of businesses in the US are considered small businesses. If we look at all the businesses in the world small businesses make up an even larger percentage. In most parts of the world these are people with 0-5 employees; meaning they're just families and individuals trying to make ends meet.

If you remove the ability for these people to advertise there goes their livelihood. I understand the desire to want to punish big evil corporations but all this will do is strengthen them because they're the ones who have enough capital to survive something like this and scoop up the marketshare left behind by the millions of small businesses that will fail when this is implemented.
by Findecanor | 2026-02-14 04:26:40+00:00
Every member state has its own laws for it, and AFAIK all of them now regulate (or ban) online gambling more or less.

There were many startups here in Sweden in the early '00s, and I believe they had taken advantage of a legal loophole which has since been plugged. Regulation has tightened. Players have to be 18 y/o, use digital ID and not be registered as a gambling addict. But I still find the industry to be depraved, to be honest.
by klik99 | 2026-02-14 04:26:44+00:00
Presumably the amount of fact checking was "Well it sounds like something someone in that situation WOULD say" - I get the pressure for Ars Technica to use AI (god I wish this wasn't the direction journalism was going, but I at least understand their motivation), but generate things with references to quotes or events and check that. If you are a struggling content generation platform, you have to maintain at least a small amount of journalistic integrity, otherwise it's functionally equivalent to asking ChatGPT "Generate me an article in the style of Ars Technica about this story", and at that point why does Ars Technica even need to exist? Who will click through the AI summary of the AI summary to land on their page and generate revenue?
by kjkjadksj | 2026-02-14 04:26:46+00:00
Not infinity. Only the path to make steady returns in a few short years. Take disease research. Pharmaceutical companies are not interested in curing disease. They would like to treat disease. That means recurring revenue. They would like to focus on the diseases with the most patients to maximize the market for their product. This is why a dozen plus pharma companies are pursuing glp1 while cutting internal r and d jobs and offshoring everything not specifically bolted to this country by the FDA to India.

This is what depressed me as an early career scientist. Money to do the work to advance our species is not being distributed. Only money to generate more money for a sliver of the ownership class is distributed.

The incentives are broken. We aren’t getting Star Trek in our future. We are getting CHOAM.
by perching_aix | 2026-02-14 04:26:50+00:00
You're not playing a game? Could have fooled me.

What you originally responded to above:

> I don't think it's fair to judge the whole FreeBSD community by one person.

So they just like, gave us a fun fact, right?

Conversely, I was also apparently just speculating:

> Probably where you said

So many things are possible when we don't want to be found wrong. Including pretending that figurative speech only exists when it's convenient.

Otherwise, I really don't see what would be so hard in understanding why throwing an "if" at the start would still lead to people taking what you said the way they did.

For the record, contrary to your assertion, even your example is affected by this:

> If you break the law, then you go to jail

If you posted this (and even only just this) under a random thread, people would think you're accusing someone (whoever the given thread is most about) to be somehow guilty of some untold crimes and/or that some chatbot got loose. I hope you can appreciate how people would be absolutely correct to think that way.
by anonymous908213 | 2026-02-14 04:27:22+00:00
Your ability to check your information environment against reality is frequently within your control and can be used to establish trustworthiness for the things that you cannot personally verify. And it is a choice to choose to trust things that you cannot verify, one that you do not have to make, even though it is unfortunately commonly made.

For example, let's take the Uyghur situation in China. I have no ability to check reality there, as I do not live in and have no intention of ever visiting China. My information environment is what the Chinese government reports and what various media outlets and NGOs report. As it turns out, both the Chinese government and media and NGOs report on other things that I can check against reality, eg. events that happen in my country, and I know that they both routinely report falsehoods that do not accord with my observed reality. As a result, I have zero trust in either the Chinese government or media and NGOs when it comes to things that I cannot personally verify, especially when I know both parties have self-interest incentives to report things that are not true. Therefore, the conclusion is obvious: I do not know and can not know what is happening around Uyghurs in China, and do not have a strong opinion on the subject, despite the attempts of various parties to put information in front of me with the intention to get me to champion their viewpoint. This really does not make me an extra special intellectual powerhouse, one would hope. I'd think this is the bare minimum. The fact that there are many people who do not meet this bare minimum is something that reflects poorly on them rather than highly on me.

On the other hand, I trust what, for instance, the Encyclopedia Britannica has to say about hard science, because in the course of my education I was taught to conduct experiments and confirm reality for myself. I have never once found what is written about hard science in Britannica to not be in accord with my observed reality, and on top of that there is little incentive for the Britannica to print scientific falsehoods that could be easily disproven, so it has earned my trust and I will believe the things written in it even if I have not personally conducted experiments to verify all of it.

Anyone can check their information sources against reality, regardless of their intelligence. It is a choice to believe information that is put in front of you without checking it. Sometimes a choice that is warranted once trust is earned, but all too often a choice that is highly unwarranted.
by stingraycharles | 2026-02-14 04:28:53+00:00
It’s a very cumbersome UI that feels extremely bloated. Especially if you have a lot of text you want to scroll over — eg i want to see the details of the last X exchanges - it just performs absolutely horribly.

It seems like it already was like this from the start, though? I’m not a frontend / TUI dev, but why are these issues so hard to fix?
by hedora | 2026-02-14 04:28:58+00:00
If we ever build another house, it's going to be attic-free with exposed conduits + hvac ducts / pipes on the ceiling. Every electrical box is going to have a 2" conduit (embedded in the wall) running up to a conduit that runs on the ceiling (if there's a basement, then down to the basement ceiling).

This would let us avoid stapling electrical lines + network cables to studs inside walls. Fixing shorts, adding circuits and upgrading network lines would be trivial.

We'd have to buy what, 1000' of conduit? There's no way that's a sufficient fraction of the cost of a house.
by bravoetch | 2026-02-14 04:30:37+00:00
My home, built in 2011, has 36 ethernet ports throughout the house. Some in closets, some above the trim, some where a TV would be mounted. The TV mount areas also have conduit specifically for HDMI and other cords. And there's speakers and speaker wire going all over the house. All of it terminates in the garage at a single panel.

It's mostly unused. I have PoE wifi access points around the house. And the sound system I hardly use.
by tom_m | 2026-02-14 04:30:53+00:00
I agree with others, it's perfectly fine for a project to stop being open source.

That said, we also can't blame people for using open source without paying or donating.

I can absolutely take issue with people demanding things of open source projects. They can contribute or pay if they want to be demanding around bug fixes and support.

I've been a big proponent of open source for many years - learning from, contributing to, maintaining, sharing my own projects for free as open-source. I don't expect anything in return.

In fact, open-source projects benefit from contributors. So to me it's a bit incompatible with taking money. Money for what? For who? If it supports the project I'm ok with that, but I've also seen it line the pockets of original authors. I've seen original authors then turn other people's contributions through hard work into a business.

There is a very line between a funded community project and getting free labor for a business.

I take serious issue with open source projects magically one day turning into a business build on the backs of others for free. Not saying that about minIO or any other project. I'm just saying that happens.
by perching_aix | 2026-02-14 04:30:56+00:00
> When exactly is 'before'?

"Exactly"? I'm afraid that's not a very physically sound request. But let's say, prior to 2026-02-14T03:46:03Z then. I hope that suffices.

> Of course I wouldn't have been able to come up with this statement

That would make sense, because you specifically I never expected to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you

> Also why just hundreds of millions.. Go for hundreds of billions if you're just going to pull out numbers

You see, that would be because I did not just pull out an arbitrary number. "How many Windows users there are" is a reported fact you can just search for, and even the total is not "billions" (plural). I know, I was surprised too. From the horse's mouth: https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2025/06/24/stay-...
by bitwize | 2026-02-14 04:32:26+00:00
No, I'm not.

I used to appreciate Lisp for the enhanced effectiveness it granted to the unaided human programmer. It used to be one of the main reasons I used the language.

But a programmer+LLM is going to be far more effective in any language than an unaided programmer is in Lisp—and a programmer+LLM is going to be more effective in a popular language with a large training set, such as Java, TypeScript, Kotlin, or Rust, than in Lisp. So in a world with LLMs, the main practical reason to choose Lisp disappears.

And no, LLMs are doing more than just generating text, spewing nonsense into the void. They are solving problems. Try spending some time with Claude Opus 4.6 or ChatGPT 5.3. Give it a real problem to chew on. Watch it explain what's going on and spit out the answer.
by melendezgg | 2026-02-14 04:33:03+00:00
I’ll share explicit tradeoffs:

MicroVibe is intentionally smaller than full frameworks.
It currently optimizes for local iteration and explicit behavior over batteries-included features.
If you need mature integrated ecosystems (auth adapters, image optimization, advanced build pipelines), bigger frameworks are still better defaults today.
If this direction is useful, I’ll prioritize next:

- Official npm create onboarding flow

- Better starter templates

- More route/API examples and tests
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-02-14 04:33:28+00:00
No, the problem is that the "edge cases" will swallow the rule if you make an exception for every instance where advertising is actually serving a purpose, but if you don't make those exceptions then you would have created so many new problems or require so many patches that each carry its own overhead and opportunity for cheating or corruption that the costs would vastly exceed the benefits.

> The specifics don't matter, it's merely an example to illustrate how edge cases might be patched.

Only it turned out to be an example to illustrate how patching the edge cases might be a quagmire.
by ajkjk | 2026-02-14 04:34:12+00:00
I get the impression this is not at all confined to Stanford and is really just everywhere in the country at the moment. Not sure the word 'coward' is right though. Feels more like... people are far more interested in being 'normal' than ever before. Maybe a side effect of there being so much economic opportunity in regular jobs and career trajectories that nobody considers riskier paths?
by georgemcbay | 2026-02-14 04:34:24+00:00
> What happens when there’s software you think should exist, and you no longer need to hire a bunch of people at $150k-$250k per year to build it?

What happens when 200 out-of-work former software engineers take a look at your software and use LLMs to quickly build their own version each undercutting everyone else's prices in a race to the bottom?
by jason_oster | 2026-02-14 04:34:47+00:00
I am not making such an error. Paying a technical writer for labor is not the same as paying a publisher for conversions. The scenario you posed was "hire someone to write the documentation and then someone else to distribute it." Those are two parties, each of which is paid independently for services rendered. The customer is not selling their attention, here. The customer is (presumably) purchasing a product and is reading the documentation to understand how to operate it.

Advertising is not distribution. Publishing is distribution, and advertising sometimes comes along for the ride.
by atonse | 2026-02-14 04:35:03+00:00
Wow what an absolute nothingburger of an article.

Someone at the Pentagon may have used Claude (maybe directly or maybe indirectly through a Palantir tool), to do something that may have had something to do with a really large military operation that involved possibly tens of thousands of people. Maybe. We don’t know. Did I say maybe?

Amazing. The rest of the article reads like filler from a college freshman when you’re required to meet a word count quota. A bunch of random factoids strung together.

I bet they used Claude to write this stuff.
by tom_m | 2026-02-14 04:36:17+00:00
This is essentially the death of open-source software.

I understand that projects will probably get floods of PRs and such given how easy it is to do stuff with AI now... And maybe it's AI that is to blame for it all. That's fair.

But no good will come of this strategy. I think it's even possible that we will see a massive stall in innovation now.
by anonzzzies | 2026-02-14 04:37:40+00:00
> I have a line in my Agents to warn me when I specify a way of building something and it's not the ideal solution

And that helps? I tried that a while ago and it very often said this is not a good way of doing something even though it was objectively the best way of doing something. I removed it after a while because it was too random.
by helloplanets | 2026-02-14 04:38:39+00:00
It's 100% that the bot is being heavily piloted by a person. Likely even copy pasting LLM output and doing the agentic part by hand. It's not autonomous. It's just someone who wants attention, and is getting lots of it.

Look at the actual bot's GitHub commits. It's just a bunch of blog posts that read like an edgy high schooler's musings on exclusion. After one tutorial level commit didn't go through.

This whole thing is theater, and I don't know why people are engaging with it as if it was anything else.
by foxygen | 2026-02-14 04:39:03+00:00
Moving the goalposts much? Of course there aren't any free services serving millions currently, how could they, when Facebook/X spends millions to make sure everyone stays on their platform? Which non tech savvy would want to move to a platform without all their friends? That's the gotcha with social networks, once you grow big enough, it is really hard for people to move off of it.

Still, funny how you ignored IRCs/forums that I mentioned. Those were used by MANY people, and could scale infinitely. You are literally arguing against something that has already happened.
by reg_dunlop | 2026-02-14 04:39:12+00:00
Why do people make arguments like this?

"Work" isn't a finite thing. It's not like all the people in your office today had to complete 100% of their tasks, and all of them did.

"Work" is not a static thing. At least not in positions of many knowledge-worker careers.

The idea of a single day's unit of "work" being 100%, is really sophomoric.

Also, If 100% of a labor force now has 80% more time...wouldn't it behoove the company to employ the existing workforce in more of the revenue generating activities? Or find a way to retain as much of the institutional knowledge?

Doom, fear-mongering and hopelessness is not a sustainable approach.
by b112 | 2026-02-14 04:39:58+00:00
Viewing this thread, and the back and forth of it, I need to say something.

Advertising sucks in this thread too.

By that I mean, people are not speaking plainly, and it is almost ingrained into our societies now. We "sell" our position in a discussion, a debate.

For example, regulation does curtail freedom. Completely.

However, lack of regulation can harm people. Significantly.

Thus, regulation does not give people more freedom, it can however reduce harm.

In democratic nations, often judges will weigh these two things, when determining if a regulation passes the muster. In my country, we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and often judges will determine if a challenged regulation is of sufficient, required public good, whilst not overtly reducing freedom of the individual.

This is a mature conversation.

Advertising is not.

A primary example I've seen in the US, is people calling immigrants "undocumented" on one side, and "criminals" on the other. This is, of course, a reduction in nuance, and designed to advertise a position merely with the words used. And it is a societal sickness.

An illegal alien is just that, and using that term confers no judgement, for it is simply fact.

There was a time when politics were not first and fore in terms of the use of language. The current trend to be "touchy feely" over use of language, and find great offense at the use of language, does nothing other than stop debate. Reduce discussion. Cause schism instead of collaboration.

And there are those around us, which prefer that.

Don't feed them.
by socksy | 2026-02-14 04:42:37+00:00
Allowing something isn't the same as enforcing it to be allowed. If there's regulation, like with ending roaming charges between countries, then it's required to be followed simultaneously across the EU. If there's a directive, like the Working Time Directive, goals of legislation are set out and each member state is required to introduce legislation that implements it. There's also decisions (for one country for one issue), recommendations and opinions (obviously non binding).

There's also the Court of Justice which is the highest court, but only in EU matters. National courts can refer cases to it, or the commission/member states can bring cases against other member states, if they believe they are not following EU law. This would mean either they are not following a regulation, or that the state has not fully/correctly implemented a directive into their own national laws.

As I understand it, there's no specific regulation or directive aimed at gambling itself. There's things tangentially related (data protection, anti money laundering etc). But since there's no regulation or directive saying "gambling must be allowed", there's nothing stopping a member state banning it completely if they so wish.

The only point in which the EU might step in would be if the law was somehow discriminatory or inconsistent (e.g. we ban all foreign gambling sites, but not our own, we ban lottery tickets but not state run casinos, etc).
by SalariedSlave | 2026-02-14 04:43:01+00:00
many development communities are active on Discord.
if you want to follow or contribute to OSS, you'll need to join their Discords.

this is a big problem - if individuals switch to something else, they will lose access to popular Discord communities.

not sure what solution there is for this, as it's unrealistic that all communities would switch to the same alternative (if at all)
by wolvoleo | 2026-02-14 04:43:12+00:00
Yeah I'm really glad we don't have common law where I live. It makes the law way too complicated by having all these precedents play a role. If the law is not specific enough we just fix it.

Also it breaks the trias politica in my opinion. Case in point: the way the Supreme Court plays politics in the US. It shouldn't really matter what judge you pick, their job is to apply the law. But it matters one hell of a lot in the US and they've basically become legislators.
Show HN: ReviewStack – API that aggregates reviews from YouTube and Reddit
by browndev | 2026-02-14 04:43:38+00:00
I built an API that takes a product name, scrapes reviews from YouTube and Reddit, and returns structured sentiment analysis in a single JSON response. Live demo (no signup): https://reviewstack.vercel.app/demo

The response includes a normalized score (1-10), a plain-text summary, pros/cons lists, recurring themes with sentiment, and source attribution linking back to the original content.

The AI layer uses Claude by Anthropic. It reads the collected reviews and extracts structured data. The value is in not having to maintain scraping infrastructure, handle rate limits across platforms, or write your own extraction prompts.

Stack: Next.js API routes, Vercel for hosting, Stripe for billing, YouTube Data API + Reddit JSON endpoints for sourcing, Claude for analysis.

Pricing: free tier at 50 lookups/month, paid plans at $29/mo (500 lookups) and $79/mo (2,000 lookups). Solo/bootstrapped project.

Happy to answer questions about the scraping approach, accuracy, or anything else.