MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by taeric | 2026-02-24 15:47:23+00:00
I am not talking about the implementations in assembly, I'm talking about the way he lists them in prose.

I can accept that he lists them the way he does because of familiarity to a style of assembly, but that doesn't change the fact that his prose can be easier to read than some of the alternative schemes people have used. In particular, I have found them to be far more illuminating to what is happening. With some odd challenges on finding ways to convert them to the standard control structure of modern languages.

You don't have to make a larger explanation of the argument for the more common control structures we use today. I am largely bought off on them and I am not trying to argue for a return to "only using jumps."
by SilverElfin | 2026-02-24 15:47:36+00:00
Everyone needs to cut ties with those companies. Not just with Persona but any service linked to Peter Thiel, Joe Lonsdale, Palmer Luckey, Elon Musk, David Sacks, etc. The entire MAGA cultist ecosystem.

Unfortunately there will be companies that take their money and won’t care. It’ll be up to other companies and consumers to punish them for it. Maybe we need a website that lets you quickly check if you should or shouldn’t use some service based on the investors.
by Normal_gaussian | 2026-02-24 15:48:16+00:00
There is nothing here that really tells us the turnstile was security theatre? Or the various key card swipes.

There are many ways to skin a cat; and there are many ways to ensure authenticated / trusted access. If you have site wide security gates, it means you know everyone on site / on a given floor conforms to a given minimal security or trust level, so now you can conduct operations in that area with more freedom. This makes the risk assessments for other actions so much simpler. e.g. Now when the apprentice IT tech leaves the SLT's laptop trolley in the corridor it doesn't trigger a reflash of all of the machines. Or when a key individual misplaces their keyfob (e.g. in the kitchen) it doesn't trigger a lockdown of core systems, because they had it on the way in and its reasonable to trust that nobody stole it.

Obviously the implementation was botched in this case - but "feel secure" and "security theatre" are right as often as they are wrong.
by ileonichwiesz | 2026-02-24 15:49:16+00:00
That really hits home. I spent a couple weeks in primary school sketching my own blueprints for great inventions. Nothing that could've ever worked (I didn't know what a transistor actually was, but my machine certainly had a lot of them!), but in hindsight a good start for a curious tech-minded child - switches that opened/closed circuits, wires to connect the various imaginary lasers and electromagnets, and so on. On the back of the paper I scrawled documentation to remember what the darn thing was actually supposed to do (the biggest one? Save people who fall out of airplanes, which to my 9 year old mind was a big issue that needed to be solved)

One day my teacher noticed me doodling in the back, so she promptly grabbed all the "blueprints" I was so proud of, tore them up, and tossed them in the trash. I guess I get discouraged easier than you though, since I didn't design a thing for many years afterwards.
Show HN: Neuron – Independent Rust crates for building AI agents
by secbear | 2026-02-24 15:49:56+00:00
The core of every agent framework is the same ReAct loop. It's commodity code. What actually matters is everything around that loop — how you manage context windows, how you pipeline tool execution, how you handle durability and replay. These are hard problems with real design trade-offs, and yet every framework bundles them into one monolith where you buy all of it or none of it.

neuron is the layer below frameworks. It defines trait boundaries — `Provider`, `Tool`, `ContextStrategy` — and ships working implementations of each as independent crates. You get four context compaction strategies without pulling a single provider. You get the Anthropic provider without the tool registry. You get MCP support without the agent loop. The analogy is `serde` and `serde_json`: one crate defines the traits, the others implement them, and you compose what you need.

v0.3 is 12 crates. Three providers (Anthropic, OpenAI, Ollama), composable tool middleware with a `#[neuron_tool]` proc macro, four context compaction strategies, an agent loop with cancellation and parallel tool execution, full MCP support across both stdio and Streamable HTTP, sessions, guardrails with sandboxing and permission policies, and a dedicated OpenTelemetry crate following the GenAI semantic conventions. Rust 2024 edition, native async traits.

Adding a provider is adding a crate. The existing provider crates serve as templates — implement the `Provider` trait from `neuron-types`, wire up streaming, and you have a first-class citizen in the ecosystem. The same goes for context strategies, tool middleware, and session backends. More provider and integration crates are on the roadmap, but the architecture is specifically designed so that you or your agent can add them without waiting on me.

That last point is deliberate. The repo ships with `CLAUDE.md`, `llms.txt`, and architecture docs written to be machine-readable. An LLM agent can pull the codebase, understand the trait boundaries, and start building against them. If you're using Claude Code or similar tools to scaffold new integrations, neuron is optimized for that workflow.

Looking for feedback on the crate boundaries and API surface. The docs site walks through the reasoning behind specific trade-offs — why axum-style middleware instead of tower, why `DurableContext` wraps side effects rather than observing them, why the flat `Message` struct instead of variant-per-role.

Repo: https://github.com/SecBear/neuron
Crates: https://crates.io/crates/neuron
by SilverElfin | 2026-02-24 15:50:00+00:00
Yep Epstein class. It’s a great phrase for the billionaire elites who have corrupted our society through their wealth. We need heavy taxes on them now to preserve our democracy.

And also, Thiel is literally in the Epstein files. Meeting with Russian officials repeatedly on the island. One is said to be his handler so he may just be an asset tasked with destabilizing America.
by vunderba | 2026-02-24 15:50:13+00:00
From the tween embedded in the article:

> Stupidly late realization on why LLMs are so good at reasoning: human's reasoning capability is bottlenecked by language! It's not that languages are good at reasoning; reasoning ended up being defined by language first and foremost. The medium truly shapes the message.

Sounds like they just discovered the whorfian hypothesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
by compumike | 2026-02-24 15:50:21+00:00
> Schematics also help explain your circuit because the idioms of drawing them communicate intent.

I think this is a key point. One could imagine three layers:

(1) NETLIST: a list of text-only descriptions, like "R1 1 0 1k", or even a sentence description "connect a 1k resistor between node 1 and node 0"

(2) SCHEMATIC: a 2D drawing with canonical symbols, straight lines for wires, and labels/notes

(3) LAYOUT: a 3D (or multi-layer 2D) physical representation for PCB, or in this case breadboarding

All three layers are useful. (Obviously you need layout to make a PCB, and you need a netlist for simulation.)

But for most humans, where we have 2D visual representations baked in, if you're trying to understand or communicate what's going on:

- It's really really hard to keep track of a bunch of text sentences like a netlist and node numbers/names for all but the simplest circuits -- maybe 3-5 elements?

- It's really really hard to follow a 3D layout of PCB tracks that leads to pads, and then having to remember pin orders etc.

- It's easiest to follow a schematic diagram. It's browsable. It contains "idioms", as you say, about signal flow, logical block groupings, etc.: purpose and intent and functionality, in a way that netlists and physical layouts don't.

FYI, for medium-large digital circuits, I don't think this is true: probably just reading VHDL/Verilog, like reading source code, makes more sense. This is closer to the "netlist" level. I think that's because you'd name modules and inputs/outputs in a way similar to how you'd name functions and arguments in software, which doesn't really apply to "Resistor" or "Capacitor" as primitives.

But for a pretty big practical range of mixed-mode and analog things, I'd argue that schematics really are the easiest level for our brains.

(Disclosure: I'm one of the founders of CircuitLab https://www.circuitlab.com/ (YC W13) where we've been building an online circuit simulator & schematic editor for a long time. Although I'm mostly on the simulation engine / netlist side. My cofounder and other teammates have done most of the schematic GUI work.)

IMHO solderless breadboards still have their place for prototyping some slow circuits, ballpark maybe < 1 MHz signals, if you're aware of the extra capacitance and limitations. :)
by wrqvrwvq | 2026-02-24 15:50:29+00:00
Every time someone announces a major ai breakthrough, the utility mode becomes a wall of ai-generated soc3 advice:

> SANDBOX YOUR AGENT. Seriously. Run it in a dedicated, isolated environment like a Docker container, a devcontainer, or a VM. Do not run it on your main machine.

> "Docker access = root access." This was OP's critical mistake. Never, ever expose the host docker socket to the agent's container.

> Use a real secrets manager. Stop putting keys in .env files. Use tools like Vault, AWS SSM, Doppler, or 1Password CLI to inject secrets at runtime.

> Practice the Principle of Least Privilege. Create a separate, low-permission user account for the agent. Restrict file access aggressively. Use read-only credentials where possible.

In order to use this developer-replacement, you need accreditation from professional orgs. Maybe the bot can set all this up for you, but then you are almost definitely locked out of your own computer and the bot may not remember its password.

I'm not sure what we've achieved here. If you give it your gmail account, it deletes your emails. If you "sandbox" it, then how is it going to "sort out your inbox"?

It might or might not help veteran devs accelerate some steps, but as with vibeclaw, there's essentially no way to use the tool without "sandboxing" it into uselessness. The pull requests for openclaw are 99% ai slop. There's still no major productivity growth engine in llm's.
by scrumper | 2026-02-24 15:51:13+00:00
A bit of scorn coming your way in the replies but it's not necessarily intuitive if you haven't thought about it. Some analogies that might help:

- If I play roulette in a casino today, I might win big, break even, lose a little or lose a lot. If I play roulette in a casino every day for a decade, I can be nearly certain I will lose a lot.

- Consider an ant walking on a rough stone road built up the side of a hill. If you look at the ant at any particular second, its body might be pointing up (head higher than tail) or down (vice versa) or level, depending on what particular angle of rock it's on at that time. But measured over minutes its likely to be at a greater altitude above sea level than where it started. Measured over the hours it takes to get from the bottom to the top, it's definitely higher.

- A random day of the year (pick from 1-365) in England might be sunny or rainy, but the chances of it being sunnier are higher if the day picked is in the summer.

The point is that there's a tremendous amount of noise in short-term measurements which tend to smooth out over longer term where trends are more clearly revealed. That's the counterpoint to your argument and the reason why climate prediction is not the same as weather forecasting. Going back to the casino analogy, climate prediction is looking at your bank balance over decades; weather forecasting is deciding how to bet on a particular poker hand.

(And finally, we actually kind of do mostly know what's going to happen tomorrow, but not a week out; that's not the point you're making though.)
by danielmarkbruce | 2026-02-24 15:51:16+00:00
>> people generally don't like to listen to stories that suggest that nurture and hard work aren't as important as they presume

Having grown up in australia but living in the us, this attitude is very american. It's quite funny to see when you don't grow up thinking it. I married into a very athletic family and have a child who is a precocious athlete. Many parents ask us what training regime or practice sessions we do. The answer is nothing. People don't react well.
by zoeysmithe | 2026-02-24 15:52:01+00:00
Back then the working class was simply more powerful. Companies had to have good PR, hence feeling 'magical' or 'mysterious.' Of course now in the later stage of capitalism, these execs, investors, etc can just do full-on mask slips.

I think some of this is definitely childhood nostalgia, but its also very different world today. I don't know any kid that sees Nintendo as magical as I did. The Legend of Zelda was this weird, dark, and mysterious thing. So many games were oddly mysterious or weirdly ported from places like Japan, which had their own design language and often the translation was odd which only added to the mystique. Games came out with little to no fanfare and you just had to sort of figure them out. There were cheat books and magazines and such, but generally you had to approach this art with an open heart and open mind and sort of drink it in. If everything is a google or AI search away, then there's no real mystery anymore.

Kids today are forced to be savvy and 'realpolitick' at a young age. They just complain about the pricing and more 'inside baseball' about games and absolutely get a little brain fried by youtube gaming culture that often runs on outrage so no game is good enough. Suddenly, everyone is a critic and magic and love are hard to cultivate in a highly critical environment. Its like everyone is stuck in a Philosophy 101 class with an overly argumentative professor, forever, and its unrelenting and makes us miserable.

Also kids aren't ignorant, in fact they can be very savvy. Games constantly begging them to buy DLCs or sell them microtransaction items absolutely hurt the 'magic.' How can you develop these feelings when you feel like you're locked in the room with a shady used car salesman constantly?

I don't know if kids today can even experience that old magic. At least not in games. It seems now its only in books and getting lost in novels where magic exists now. A book can't beg you to buy an extra chapter or make you pay gems for the next sentence.
by asynchronous13 | 2026-02-24 15:52:33+00:00
I think altium has taken over as the top tier commercial offering in this space.

I always disliked Orcad. Especially because cadence had excellent software that predated OrCAD, and for reasons that I cannot fathom chose to promote OrCAD after they acquired it instead of the better software.

Here's a specific example in the interface. If you wanted to draw a wire, the keyboard shortcut of the old software was 'w' but orcad required you to type 'ctrl + w'. Why are you forcing me to use control when w doesn't do anything on its own? It was filled with similar tiny annoyances that just slowed things down. (Admittedly, it's been years since that was my primary work, and free stuff is good enough for what I do now.) I sincerely hope that orcad has continued to improve over the years.
by lich_king | 2026-02-24 15:52:55+00:00
Since the discussion here focuses mostly on child prodigies in general, I'd note that there are many studies showing that the outcome for gifted kids are not all that great.

I think the issue is that it's just harder to fit in. I remember being way ahead in some classes in middle school, and I actually ending up drawing the ire of some teachers when I had answers to every question (let alone corrected them). I eventually learned to disengage and just look out the window. But if you develop that attitude, you never learn how to cram in knowledge for tests, which actually increases the odds of failing some "less interesting" classes down the line.

Another problem that I've seen with a lot of really clever folks is that if you're told your entire childhood you're smarter than others, but you see these "others" sometimes get more successful, it's really easy to fall into profound cynicism. You never try anything nad just undermine others on the internet.

Ultimately, stories like this are an exception, not a rule, even for kids who are truly brilliant. And yeah, it's easy to underestimate the role the parents play, mostly in creating the right opportunities and instilling the right way of thinking about the world and the kid's gift.
Show HN: Noodles – Turn any codebase into a diagram with Claude and Tree-sitter
by unslop | 2026-02-24 15:53:20+00:00
I built a CLI tool that turns codebases and PRs into diagrams so you can quickly understand how things fit together. Originally made it because I couldn't follow my own AI-generated repos.

Just shipped a big update:

- Switched from D2 to Mermaid for rendering
- Tree-sitter AST parsing + agentic flow instead of raw LLM calls. ~50x faster.
- Works on any GitHub repo or PR, not just local
- Dropped the web frontend, it's just a CLI now
- Published as a pip package

Still a ton to improve and I'm building fast. Feedback, issues, PRs all welcome.
Show HN: Forecasts as GIFs (Free Lifetime Access)
by Brzzy | 2026-02-24 15:53:37+00:00
I had a slightly absurd realization: despite all the UI polish on iOS, most weather apps are still just the same numbers in slightly different rectangles. So I built Brzzy. The idea was simple: what if checking the weather felt less like reading a spreadsheet and more like opening something fun? Brzzy turns forecasts into customizable GIFs you can tweak and share. Pick your vibe, set your tags (Star Wars, Harry Potter, whatever), and your forecast stops feeling alive!

I’m currently offering free lifetime access to Brzzy+ for anyone curious to try it.

Lifetime Brzzy+ code: monkey

Redeem inside the Brzzy+ section of the app, scroll down to secret code.
by Nevermark | 2026-02-24 15:53:39+00:00
The benefits of coordinated cooperation are called “civilization”.

While meritocracy in high dimensional humans is a muddy thing, as being capable, and being capable at what is actually needed, are generally very different things, the market place of organizations is a more responsive (although not perfect) meritocracy. And it strongly selects for companies with highly coordinated cooperation. (Not to be confused with micro-management which over-coordinates the wrong things.)

Cooperation has so many efficiency and effectiveness benefits. Institutionalizing the right kinds of cooperation, i.e. coordinating it, even more so.

This is why billions of people can spend their days doing other things than food production, and can live in places with no food production in sight.
by bayindirh | 2026-02-24 15:54:28+00:00
> have the courage to make an actual statement.

Well, that's funny. Considering all the comments I have written for this submission.

First of all, most of the arguments I'd make is already addressed by lelanthran. Do I need to write the same things over and over? It's bad etiquette to write the same things said by someone else. This is why we have the voting mechanism here.

So, since you insist, let me reiterate the same thing.

No I don't refuse to use C, because most of the GPL software which is enabling everything we do today is written in C or a C-descendant language. However, as I write everywhere, I refuse to use Rust because of two reasons:

1- LLVM only for now (I don't use any language which doesn't have a compiler in GCC)
2- Rust's apparent rewrite in rust, in MIT, replace the thing and beat it with a club if it refuses to die attitude.

For reference, uutils and sister projects use "drop-in-replacement" and "completely replace" leisurely, signaling their clear intentions to forcefully replace GPL code with more permissive, business-friendly bits.

I tend to reluctantly accept Rust in the Kernel since gccrs is in the works and progressing steadily, and Rust guys are somewhat forced to write a proper reference for their language and back it with proper PLT, since it's a hard requirement if you want your programming language to be a long-living, dependable one.

Similarly, you use words like courage and non-sequitur leisurely. I'm not sure it's fitting in this instance.
by SV_BubbleTime | 2026-02-24 15:54:49+00:00
Can I replace Outlook yet?

I don’t buy the “oh well, kinda sort of for like 60% of mail features and possibly a read only calendar in Two Weeks”

I switched away from Thunderbird to Outlook TWO FULL DECADES AGO, and in that time they have never once given me a possibility to switch back.

Like it or not, business runs on Office/Outlook.
by horsawlarway | 2026-02-24 15:54:56+00:00
> Parents that want to restrict their kids struggle with ineffective parental controls: https://beasthacker.com/til/parental-controls-arent-for-pare.... Optional parental controls would fix this

I don't think they will, and this is because there's an inherent conflict of interest from these large tech companies about actually protecting my kids.

To be blunt: They don't give a fuck, they make money. They will pick money over kids EVERY time.

My current answer is that absolutely none of my children are allowed anywhere near these devices. Mandating shitty age verification laws isn't going to somehow make these companies act responsibly... it's just going to drive alternatives that are actually respectful out of business with additional legislative burden, while Google and Apple continue to act irresponsibly and unethically.

Further - it continues to enshrine the idea that parent's aren't responsible for their kids (see your first point)... The parents that are already neglecting this space will point to laws like this and go "look, the government is doing this for me!". Which is exactly wrong, and exactly what these companies want parents to think (again - the alternative, that parents actually engage and realize just how fucking morally bankrupt these bastards are, hurts bottom lines)

If you want change - remove the damn duopoly. Break them up. Force open markets. Force inter-compatibility.

This is not rocket science. This is basic political science we've known about for literally hundreds of years, the only difference is that our government in the US has been fucking useless because of regulatory capture (of which this will worsen) and the perceived national security & economic value of "owning" the tech stack used internationally.

"Security" when used in these contexts has very little to do with protecting you, or me, or our kids. It has a whole lot to do with protecting corporate bottom lines and governmental control.
by kakacik | 2026-02-24 15:55:10+00:00
Apologies I am not a native speaker so sometimes more complex thoughts take long sentences to explain.

We are discussing his parent's contribution to his growth. Some, like me, tend to agree they just gave him (good) tools and he found his interest and way through and beyond due to superior analytical skills and overall intelligence, not through some super duper tutoring by them.

I have cca such cousin. He was way ahead of his class (which was already math-focused class from secondary school), geniune interest in deeper math, physics and philosophy from early age. Even very good at software development in old Pascal or C. Nobody was tutoring him in any way, he just went to public library and borrowed what he liked.

The stuff thats not hard but still counts as discovery and learning must be self-motivating in way more average folks simply don't experience, not with same topics.