MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by synctext | 2026-02-04 11:38:00+00:00
Indeed, graphene seems capable of .99 of black body radiation limit.

Quote: "emissivity higher than 0.99 over a wide range of wavelengths". Article title "Perfect blackbody radiation from a graphene nanostructure" [1]. So several rolls of 10 x 50 meters graphene-coated aluminium foil could have significant cooling capability. No science-fiction needed anymore (see the 4km x 4km NVIDIA fantasy)

[1] https://opg.optica.org/oe/fulltext.cfm?uri=oe-21-25-30964
by Triangle9349 | 2026-02-04 11:38:19+00:00
I was just looking for an active fork of LaurieWired/GhidraMCP.
I am currently using GhidrAssistMCP.

First impressions of the fork: everything has deviated too much from the original. look a bit sloppy in places. Everything seems overly complicated in areas where it could have been simpler.

There is an error in the release: Ghidra → File → Configure → Miscellaneous → Enable GhidraMCP. Developer not Miscellaneous.

I can't test it in antigravity there tools limit per mcp: Error: adding this instance with 110 enabled tools would exceed max limit of 100.
by kypro | 2026-02-04 11:38:21+00:00
Maybe this is just me, but I don't miss thinking so much. I personally quite like knowing how to do things and being able to work productively.

For me it's always been the effort that's fun, and I increasingly miss that. Today it feels like I'm playing the same video game I used to enjoy with all the cheats on, or going back to an early level after maxing out my character. In some ways the game play is the same, same enemies, same map, etc, but the action itself misses the depth that comes from the effort of playing without cheats or with a weaker character and completing the stage.

What I miss personally is coming up with something in my head and having to build it with my own fingers with effort. There's something rewarding about that which you don't get from just typing "I want x".

I think this craving for effort is a very human thing to be honest... It's why we bake bread at home instead just buying it from a locally bakery that realistically will be twice as good. The enjoyment comes from the effort. I personally like building furniture and although my furniture sucks compared to what you might be able buy at store, it's so damn rewarding to spend days working on something then having a real physical thing that you can use that you build from hand.

I've never thought of myself as someone who likes the challenge of coding. I just like building things. And I think I like building things because building things is hard. Or at least it was.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2026-02-04 11:40:14+00:00
This is really what it’s about.

As someone that started with Machine Code, I'm grateful for compiled -even interpreted- languages. I can’t imagine doing the kind of work that I do, nowadays, in Machine Code.

I’m finding it quite interesting, using LLM-assisted development. I still need to keep an eye on things (for example, the LLM tends to suggest crazy complex solutions, like writing an entire control from scratch, when a simple subclass, and five lines of code, will work much better), but it’s actually been a great boon.

I find that I learn a lot, using an LLM, and I love to learn.
by whatis991 | 2026-02-04 11:40:17+00:00
If X/Twitter was to be banned in the EU, and some of its citizens still wanted to access X/Twitter, let us say for the sake of getting alternative points of view on politics and news, would it be a good or a bad thing if accessing X/Twitter by IP was stopped?

As in, a citizen of an EU country types x.com/CNN, because he or she wants to know the other side of some political issue between the EU and the USA, and he or she feels that the news in the EU might be biased or have misunderstood something. Would it be good or bad if the user was met with a "This website is by law not available within the EU"?
by skydhash | 2026-02-04 11:40:22+00:00
Tests and type checking are often highway-wide guardrails when the path you want to take is like a tightrope.

Also the code is not a means to an end. It’s going to be run somewhere doing stuff someone wants to do reliably and precisely. The overall goal was ever to invest some programmer time and salary in order to free more time for others. Not for everyone to start babysitting stuff.
by aa-jv | 2026-02-04 11:40:43+00:00
In the piano-/synth-keyboard world, this is accomplished by 'interlocked blades', consisting of two curved blades interconnected with notches for each key, allowing the curve of the pressure mechanism to be tuned according to the depth and scale of the notches.

Its always curious to me that this technology hasn't been adopted in the QWERTY keyboard field, although that may be due to patents .. as I understand it the piano keyboard manufacturers are very aggressive about protecting these patents, and its one of the reasons that all synth manufacturers get their keybed mechanisms from the same supplier (Fatar TP9S) .. though recent technology has moved on to use piezo-electric switches.

https://www.fatar.com/products/tp9s/

(Some other interesting details here: https://www.fatar.com/products/)
by WillAdams | 2026-02-04 11:42:07+00:00
Given that quite simple G-code, say a pair of nested circles with code for tool changes/accessory activation, can make two wildly different parts depending on which machine it is run on:

- a washer if run on a small machine in metric w/ flood coolant

- a lamp base if run on a larger router in Imperial w/ a tool changer

and that deriving what will be made by a given G-code file in 3D is a problem which the industry hasn't solved in decades, the solution of which would be worthy of a Turing Award _and_ a Fields Medal, I don't see this happening.

A further question, just attempting it will require collecting a set of 3D models for making firearms --- who will persuade every firearms manufacturer to submit said parts, where/how will they be stored, and how will they be secured so that they are not used/available as a resource for making firearms?

A more reasonable bit of legislation would be that persons legally barred from owning firearms are barred from owning 3D printers and CNC equipment unless there is a mechanism to submit parts to their parole officer for approval before manufacturing, since that's the only class of folks which the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to, and a reasonable argument is:

1st Amendment + 2nd Amendment == The Right to 3D Print and Bear Arms
by rxt_ian | 2026-02-04 11:42:11+00:00
That would certainly make certification easier, but as I suspect you understand, wouldnt achieve it alone.

Even if every component was CE qualified, the combination would have to pass its own testing, plus there are a lot more to the standards than just not electrocuting you immediately upon contact.

I can't see any of the energy efficiency labelling that would be required in the UK or EU for example...
by sunshine-o | 2026-02-04 11:42:12+00:00
> What's new is that X automated the production of obscene or sexualised images by providing grok.

Yes we are now dealing with an automated Photoshop. And somehow the people in charge have decided to do something about it, probably more for political or maybe darker reasons.

So let me make a suggestion: maybe France or the EU should ban its citizen from investing in the upcoming SpaceX/xAI IPO, and also Microsoft, NVIDIA, OpenAI, Google, Meta, Adobe, etc. ?

Hit them hard at the money level... it wouldn't be more authoritarian than something like ChatControl or restricting access to VPNs.

And actually all the mechanisms are already in place to implement something like that.
by chrisjj | 2026-02-04 11:42:16+00:00
On the contrary, in Europe there is a huge difference. Child porn might get you mere community service, a fine - or even less, as per the landmark court ruling below.

It all depends on the severity of the offence, which itself depends on the category of the material, including whether or not it is CSAM.

The Supreme Court has today delivered its judgment in the case where the court of appeals and district court sentenced a person for child pornography offenses to 80 day fines on the grounds that he had called Japanese manga drawings into his computer. Supreme Court dismiss the indictment.

The judgment concluded that the cartoons in and of itself may be considered pornographic, and that they represent children. But these are fantasy figures that can not be mistaken for real children.

https://bleedingcool.com/comics/swedish-supreme-court-exoner...
by chuliomartinez | 2026-02-04 11:42:46+00:00
I guess it depends on what you build, i feel the most complex part of the deal, that makes me think the hardest, is to figure out what to build. Eg understanding the client, and creating a solution that fits between their needs and abilities. The rest is often a technical detail, yes sometimes you need to deep dive to optimize. Anyway if you miss debugging try debugging people;)
Show HN: Rust Monorepo Analyzer v0.16.0 and v0.17.0 faster scans and better TUI
by bumahkib7 | 2026-02-04 11:43:12+00:00
Hey HN, I’m building Rust Monorepo Analyzer (RMA): a Rust-native monorepo security scanner with cross-file dataflow (source→sink) and an interactive terminal UI.

v0.16.0

Tests excluded by default across languages (big perf win). Opt-in: --include-tests (and --skip-tests is deprecated).

TUI upgrades (rma scan --interactive): call-graph stats panel, security badges, source→sink highlighting, “danger edges only” filter, better edge/finding detail panels.

Incremental analysis caching (content-hash). --no-cache to force full re-run.

New: rma flows --interactive to browse taint/data flows directly.

v0.17.0

Release/packaging hardening: all 10 crates publish cleanly to crates.io, publish order fixed, metadata cleanup + ROADMAP.md.
by MASTER_shivam | 2026-02-04 11:43:26+00:00
1. The Concept: The Bottle Paradox
Modern physics calculates gravity assuming the universe is a fixed container. I believe this is a mistake.
Imagine a bottle that is constantly expanding.
* The water inside remains the same.
* But the pressure and density change because the container is stretching.
2. The Formula (The Metric)
I have developed a new formula to replace the standard gravitational calculation.
Current physics fails at the center of a Black Hole (Singularity). My formula fixes this by adding a limit based on the Event Horizon and Velocity.

*The Code uses this logic:*

> *G = (M1 * M2) / (r^2 * (1 + (M1 * M2) / (r^2 * c^2 * (1 - (v^2 / c^2)) * (1 + (v^2 / c^2 * (1 - (r^2 / R^2)))))))*

*Variables:*
* `v` = Velocity (Speed of the object)
* `R` = Radius of the Black Hole
* `c` = Speed of Light
* `r` = Distance

*Why this matters:*
This formula prevents the "Infinite Gravity" error. It shows that as speed increases, gravity changes.

3. About The Author & Funding
I am not a university professor. I come from a background of manual labor (Mazdoori).
I have built this because I see a logical flaw in how we understand the universe.

*My Request:*
I need resources to continue this research.
* If you support this project, I can dedicate my time to coding and simulations.
* If not, I will return to my daily labor work to fund my own research. I will not stop.

*To the scientific community:*
Run the code. Check the logic. If you find an error, tell me. If you find logic, join me.

---
*Status:* Experimental
*Goal:* To find the link between the Universe and Multiverse.
by DrScientist | 2026-02-04 11:43:29+00:00
Sure metrics can be gamed - I just wanted to acknowledge that some roles - like a forecourt car salesmen - the metrics are closer to performance reality than others.

An example of a near perfect metric is performance in an individual sport.

Your time in the 100 metres is your time in the 100m ( drug cheating aside ). However obviously that's the exception rather than the rule.

And those judgement things - like whether you are a team player etc ( you get the most sales, but that's in part by stealing them from others or actively sabotaging them ) - can also be really important ( but also unfair - they play golf at the same club ).

End of the day if a company isn't promoting on the right criteria, you are probably better off leaving - as the company isn't going to do so well long term, and your talents may be better recognised elsewhere.

That's also a judgement.
by peepee1982 | 2026-02-04 11:43:51+00:00
Standardization is needed for agentic coding harnesses to be able to parse the files and inject them into the context in a way that takes the least effort for the user.

This is true for MCP as well. You could just describe a bunch of command line tools in AGENTS.md and tell the LLM when and how to call them. It would simply take more effort to set up, at least for some tools.

This is where a comparison in productivity would return a meaningful result: how much does it make it easier to set up things like that.
by joe_mamba | 2026-02-04 11:44:38+00:00
>None of what you've said is true.

Everything I said is true.

>Deterrence is known to have a very limited effect on behaviour.

It is insanely effective when actually enforced. It's not effective when the goal is to make it seem ineffective so that people can evade the system.

>In this case, it's far simpler to prosecute the source.

The "source" is a tool that tomorrow can be in Russia or CHina and you can't prosecute.
by thephyber | 2026-02-04 11:45:22+00:00
Almost none of the parent’s bullet points are solved by building on the Moon instead of in Earth orbit.

The energy demands of getting to the 240k mile Moon are IMMENSE compared to 100 mile orbit.

Ultimately, when comparing the 3 general locations, Earth is still BY FAR the most hospitable and affordable location until some manufacturing innovations drop costs by orders of magnitude. But those manufacturing improvements have to be made in the same jurisdiction that SpaceXAI is trying to avoid building data centers in.

This whole things screams a solution in search of a problem. We have to solve the traditional data center issues (power supply, temperature, hazard resilience, etc) wherever the data centers are, whether on the ground or in space. None of these are solved for the theoretical space data centers, but they are all already solved for terrestrial data centers.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2026-02-04 11:45:26+00:00
Space is not cold. Space is not hot either. Temperature is a property of matter. Empty space does not have a temperature. It is also a perfect insulator for conduction and convection, and as for radiation: it's a problem because of the sun heating up objects via its radiation.

This is the basics, I'm not an expert. But I don't think that you have anything useful at all to say here.
by DemocracyFTW2 | 2026-02-04 11:45:56+00:00
I don't think your comment assumes the right givens. I just tried in Vivaldi (i.e. Chrome) and this snippet:

<!doctype html>
A<!—- Don't count <hr> this! -—> but do count <hr> that -->Z

gets fixed and rendered as

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html><head></head><body>A<!--—- Don't count <hr--> this! -—&gt; but do count <hr> that --&gt;Z</body></html>

Another surprise is that

<!doctype html>
A<!—- Don't count this! -— but do count that -->Z

gets rewritten to

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html><head></head><body>A<!--—- Don't count this! -— but do count that ---->Z</body></html>

Note the insertion of extra `--` minus-hyphens.

This is what MDN (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Guides/Com...) has to say:

Comments start with the string `<!--` and end with the string `-->`, generally with text in between. This text cannot start with the string `>` or `->`, cannot contain the strings `-->` or `--!>`, nor end with the string `<!-`, though `<!` is allowed. [...] The above is true for XML comments as well. In addition, in XML, such as in SVG or MathML markup, a comment cannot contain the character sequence `--`.

Meaning that you can recognize HTML comments with (one branch of) a RegEx—you start wherever you see `<!--` and consume everything up to one of the listed alternatives. No nesting required.

Be it said that I find the precise rules too convoluted for what they do. Especially XML's prohibition on `--` in comments is ridiculous taken on its own. First you tell me that a comment ends with three characters `-->`, and then you tell me I can't use the specific substring `--`, either? And why can't I use `--!>`?

An interesting bit here is that AFAIK the `<!` syntax was used in SGML as one of the alternatives to write a 'lone tag', so instead of `<hr></hr>` or `<hr/>` (XHTML) or `<hr>` (HTML) you could write `<!hr>` to denote a tag with no content. We should have kept this IMO.

*EDIT* On the quoted HTML source you see things like `-—` (hyphen-minus, em-dash). This is how the Vivaldi DevTools render it; my text editor and HN comment system did not alter these characters. I have no idea whether Chrome's rendering engine internally uses these em-dashes or whether it's just a quirk in DevTool text output.
by krater23 | 2026-02-04 11:46:03+00:00
I don't think the the conclusion is right. It's just that the security had cost money, why pay a developer for 5 days when he can do it in 3 without proper security? There is no proper security needed, so don't pay for it. And thats exactly the same that happens with bigger software too. As long as it doesn't creates pain for the seller to sell insecure tools, they will stay insecure.
by adornKey | 2026-02-04 11:46:17+00:00
The political mainsteam and the data on my side... Illinois is the one doing the fringe thing - against data and common sense.

There was plenty of time to notice what is going on with WHO. Lots of data, lots of stories... Everything was open and obvious for such a long time, that now even mainstream politics finally got it.

The take from this story is that Illinois is most likely just some backwater hill billy state that embraces corruption.
by WillAdams | 2026-02-04 11:46:55+00:00
The actual wording of the law, and the way it was interpreted when I was young was that a person who does not hold an FFL may not make a firearm with the intention of selling it, but after making it, they could change their mind and then sell it.

Since, the BATF decided to interpret the prohibition as a thought-crime, enforcing a prohibition making such sales illegal, since like The Shadow, they know what lurks in the hearts of men.

The one transfer which has not yet been tested in the courts to my knowledge is an individual having made firearms, passing away, then leaving them in their will to their heirs....
by entech | 2026-02-04 11:47:00+00:00
I am with you. I think that it is more likely to be related to Japanese carry trade unwind starting to worry the banks, while continuing to drive the “AI disrupt everything” narrative via mainstream news.

I might be not across the detail, but to me the legal plugin seems like it’s mostly adding some skills (prompts) that are fairly basic that any technically minded people could do, and is not enough of an improvement for completely non technical people to use.
by lxgr | 2026-02-04 11:47:09+00:00
This seems like it's missing the forest for the trees. The point of security measures is to make executing the attack more expensive than the expected payoff of successfully executing it.

What is the payoff here? Is the projector sold below cost and is the manufacturer recouping that via the cartridges? If not, what's the loss to them?

Regarding the proposed mitigations, I'm very doubtful on whether they would substantially change anything here:

> Use real crypto (AES-128 or lightweight stream) and make the cartridge carry per-title key (or an IV)

> Copying now requires cloning/extracting the original token secrets.

Sounds like a great idea, and fortunately we don't even need to speculate about whether it would work: Nintendo did this with Amiibo.

> If true anti-cloning matters, this requires an authenticated token (DESFire / NTAG 424 DNA class).

And where do you securely store the validation key for a symmetric encryption/authentication scheme? This would require adding a SAM to the projector as well.

The "use non-default NFC keys" suggestion shares the same problem: Where would you securely store these?
by monooso | 2026-02-04 11:47:41+00:00
I have no expertise is this area, so I'm not getting into whether or not this idea makes sense.

That being said, this statement strikes me as missing the point:

> Solving cost of launching mass has been the entire premise of SpaceX since day one and they have the track record.

As I understand it, SpaceX has a good track record of putting things into space more cost effectively than other organisations that put things into space.

That is not the benchmark here.

It doesn't matter if Musk can run thousands of data centres in space more cost effectively than (for example) NASA could. It matters whether he can do it more cost effectively than running them on earth.
by sspehr | 2026-02-04 11:47:44+00:00
Location:Berlin
Remote:Appreciated, no requirement
Willing to relocate: Depending on role
Technologies: AWS, Python, JS, Java, C, Docker, SQL, LLVM, Infra as Code, CI/CD, AI compilers (TVM etc.), Agentic systems
Résumé/CV: Currently SDE intern at Amazon building BE systems and working on agentic ai, previously founding eng at startup leading freelancer teams and doing aws architecture and implementation. Also interested in compiler research and work, published paper at Acm sigplan CC '26 incl. experience with LLVM
Email:spehr.sv@gmail.com

(Typed on phone, sorry about typos)
by kimixa | 2026-02-04 11:48:25+00:00
Yup - I've related it to working with Juniors, where you often have to step back and correct things regularly. But then the "junior" you work with every day changes, so you have to start again from scratch.

I think there needs to be a sea change in the current LLM tech to make that no longer the case - either massively increased context sizes, so they can contain near a career worth of learning (without the tendency to start ignoring that context, as the larger end of the current still-way-too-small-for-this context windows available today), or even allow continuous training passes to allow direct integration of these "learnings" into the weights themselves - which might be theoretically possible today, but is many orders of magnitude higher in compute requirements than available today even if you ignore cost.
by keiferski | 2026-02-04 11:48:27+00:00
This title and the first half of the post (before the AI discussion) just makes me miss the intellectual environment of college.

So I’m tempted to say that this is just a part of the economic system in general, and isn’t specifically linked to AI. Unless you’re lucky enough to grab a job that requires deep intellectual work, your day job will probably not challenge your mental abilities as much as a difficult college course does.

Sad but true, but unfortunately I don’t think any companies are paying people to think deeply about metaphysics (my personal favorite “thinking hard subject” from college.)
by ben_w | 2026-02-04 11:48:55+00:00
> cancelled

Mid Jan this year? Yes, I was focussing on my German language course.

> It wasnt close to fsd.

Except it was. Failure modes make FSD a level-2 system, not even level 3.

> Ask your local llm for the earnings of a $.20/.30 per mile autonomous vehicle

I mean, I can do that in my head because 100,000 miles/year is a lot of driving even at motorway speed, and 1e5 times any cost per mile is trivial mental arithmetic, and even at 30¢/mile it still doesn't get you $50k/year/car.

30,000 miles/year is more likely, given constraints about when people most need vehicles and the relative fraction of time spent on motorways vs. urban areas, at which point 30¢/mile gets you more like $9k/year.