MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: FrankenTUI
by eigenvalue | 2026-02-06 12:18:47+00:00
All of this was done, start to finish, in 5 days. Don't believe me? Here is the play-by-play narrative of the entire process broken down into 5-hour intervals:

https://github.com/Dicklesworthstone/frankentui/blob/main/CH...

And here are the beads tasks (courtesy of my bv project, check it out!), over a thousand in total:

https://franken-tui-beads-viewer.pages.dev/#/graph
by nivertech | 2026-02-06 12:18:48+00:00
Eventually "cryptocurrencies" will go back to what they really are: a digital collectibles or a video-game like entertainment, or kinda like digital escape rooms, or an alternative money for illegal or black/gray market activity.

After that crypto will be disconnected from the traditional financial system (so called "TradFi").

But it will take a very long time until we'll get there, since lots of decision makers were already "bribed" with it, and now they will "talk their own book" by artificially prolonging the Crypto's life even when it doesn't make sense.

Wide CBDC adoption will be the final nail in the crypto's coffin. Same for quantum computers, but I'm sure that people will start inventing various quantum-resistant encryption and PoW/consensus schemes...
by yberreby | 2026-02-06 12:19:29+00:00
That's a fair point, and I had the exact same thought while building this. I had previously resisted the urge of integrating Claude Code with e.g. ntfy.sh for this reason. But in practice, this works for me. I end up being less likely to spend time on the computer and more likely to be doing something on my feet.

For context, I'm a PhD student. Work-life balance is already... elusive.
by wiether | 2026-02-06 12:20:41+00:00
> Never had a clear spec in my life.

To me part of our job has always been about translating garbage/missing specs in something actionnable.

Working with agents don't change this and that's why until PM/business people are able to come up with actual specs, they'll still need their translators.

Furthermore, it's not because the global spec is garbage that you, as a dev, won't come up with clear specs to solve technical issues related to the overall feature asked by stakeholders.

One funny thing I see though, is in the AI presentations done to non-technical people, the advice: "be as thorough as possible when describing what you except the agent to solve!".
And I'm like: "yeah, that's what devs have been asking for since forever...".
by the_harpia_io | 2026-02-06 12:20:53+00:00
The Trivy + Grype combo is interesting - in my experience they catch different things, especially on container scanning vs dependencies. You see them disagree much on severity?

Re: the vibe coding angle - the thing I keep running into is that standard scanners are tuned for human-written code patterns. Claude code is structurally different. More verbose, weirdly sparse on the explicit error handling that would normally trigger SAST rules. Auth code especially - it looks textbook correct and passes static analysis fine, but edge cases are where it falls apart. Token validation that works great except for malformed inputs, auth checks that miss specific header combinations, that kind of thing.

The policy engine sounds flexible enough that people could add custom rules for AI-specific patterns? That'd be the killer feature tbh.
by fragmede | 2026-02-06 12:22:29+00:00
https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfpj0hM7e0/

is obviously a staged demo but it seems pretty serious for him. He's wearing a suit and everything!

https://www.instagram.com/p/DK8fmYzpE1E/

seems like research by some dude (no disrespect, he doesn't seems like he's at big company though).

https://www.instagram.com/p/DH6EaACR5-f/

could be astroturf, but seems maybe a little bit serious.
by beernet | 2026-02-06 12:22:45+00:00
Only on HN will people still doubt what is happening right in front of their eyes. I understand that putting things into perspective is important, still, the type of downplaying we can see in the comments here is not only funny but also has a dangerous dimension to it. Ironically, these are the exact same people who will claim "we should have prepared better!" once the effects become more and more visible. Dear super engineers, while I feel sorry that your job and passion become a commodity right in front of you, please stay out the way.
by cranberryturkey | 2026-02-06 12:24:20+00:00
The real friction in browser hopping isn't features — it's keeping your workflow portable. Bookmarks especially. Each browser has its own sync silo (Chrome → Google, Firefox → Mozilla, Safari → iCloud).

For multi-browser setups (Firefox for fingerprint resistance, Chrome for the sites that only work there), cross-browser bookmark sync is weirdly undersolved. Xbrowsersync, marksyncr, and a few others exist but most people don't know about them.
by marcwajsberg | 2026-02-06 12:24:23+00:00
The attribution point is huge: the “decision” can happen in the model’s answer, and your analytics only see the last hop.

A practical mental model for recommendations is less “ranking” and more confidence:

Does the model have enough context to map your product to a problem?
Are there independent mentions (docs, comparisons, forum threads) that look earned vs manufactured?
Is there procedural detail that makes it easy to justify recommending you (“here’s the workflow / constraints / outcomes”)?
For builders, a good AEO baseline is:
Publish a strong docs/use-case page that answers “when should I use this vs alternatives?”
Seed real-world context by participating in existing discussions (HN/Reddit/etc.) with genuine problem-solving and specifics.
Track influence with repeatable prompt tests + lightweight surveys (“how did you hear about us?”) since last-click won’t capture it.

It feels like early SEO again: less perfect instrumentation, more building the clearest and most defensible reference for your category.
by TrackerFF | 2026-02-06 12:24:36+00:00
It must be said that immigration laws pretty much anywhere are rigid, and enforced equally seriously, so it's not just a US-exclusive thing. Very liberal European countries which the media portrays as "overrun" with immigrants will also throw (and ban) you out if you've done seemingly insignificant errors in your paperwork.

WITH THAT SAID, one side-effect of having such extensive laws is that it really depends on how much you enforce them. If you make laws so difficult and hard that anyone can fail them, but remain quite selective on how you enforce them, that means you have a green light to deport the people that are deemed undesirable, while also having the option to turn a blind eye to desirable people.

One small error can easily get some random Indian or Mexican worker deported, even if they've worked in the US for 20+ years, if the state feels so. Meanwhile I suspect they wouldn't do a damn thing if it turns out that some immigration billionaire outright lied on their paperwork.

Also, I hate to pull the fascism card, but one hallmark of fascism is to make laws so rigid (and punishment draconian) that everyone is potentially a criminal, but then very selectively enforce those laws.

I don't think US immigration laws are rooted in fascism, not at all - they're the product of decades / centuries of complex immigration...but how you enforce them, is a different thing.
by graemep | 2026-02-06 12:25:15+00:00
He is a US citizen? Three nationalities?

His reasons for leaving the UK make interesting reading in current circumstances:

> The USA is putting curbs on surveillance, expanding its national healthcare, and there are mass parental boycotts of standardised testing in its public schools. The UK just elected a Tory majority government that's going to continue to slash and burn the welfare state, attack schools, health, legal aid and teachers, and impose mandatory cryptographic backdoors in the technology we use to talk to each other. They've even announced that merely not breaking the law is no reason to expect that you won't be arrested.

https://boingboing.net/2015/06/29/why-im-leaving-london.html

Its all very London specific. Why do people forget the rest of the UK exists?
Show HN: I built a dashboard to stop AI agents from burning my API credits
by justinlord | 2026-02-06 12:26:44+00:00
Hey HN – I've been running agentic workflows (OpenClaw/similar) and kept waking up to $40-60 API bills because agents get stuck in infinite retry loops while I sleep.

The problem: agent tries action → fails → retries the same action → fails again → repeats 500+ times because there's no state memory.

My fix: hash the execution state and compare it to the last N steps. If there's a match, circuit breaker kicks in and forces the agent to try something different or stop entirely.

Built a dashboard around this because staring at JSON logs at 3am is miserable. Shows the agent's decision tree in real time with a visual indicator when the loop prevention fires.

Stack is Next.js + Vercel AI SDK. It's live at empusaai .com and the state-hashing logic is open source on GitHub.

Would love feedback on whether this is actually useful or if I just over-engineered a solution to my own bad prompts.
by delichon | 2026-02-06 12:27:13+00:00
> In addition, the bill contains language that requires news organizations to create safeguards that protect confidential material — mainly, information about sources — from being accessed by AI technologies.

So clawdbot may become a legal risk in New York, even if it doesn't generate copy.

And you can't use AI to help evaluate which data AI is forbidden to see, so you can't use AI over unknown content. This little side-proposal could drastically limit the scope of AI usefulness over all, especially as the idea of data forbidden to AI tech expands to other confidential material.
by cadamsdotcom | 2026-02-06 12:27:15+00:00
The devil is always in the details.

That’s why you should always make your agent write tests first and run them to make sure they fail and aren’t testing that 1+1=2. Then and only then do you let it write the code that makes them pass.

That creates an enormous library of documentation of micro decisions that can be read by the agent later.

Your codebase ends up with executable documentation of how things are meant to work. Agents can do archaeology on it and demystify pretty much anything in the codebase. It makes agents’ amnesia a non-issue.

I find this far more impactful than keeping specs around. It detects regressions and doesn’t drift.
by hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm | 2026-02-06 12:27:35+00:00
ARC has already become a mediocre benchmark (the lack of attention tells you this is probably the general consensus). Yes there will be ARC 3 but it is now just looking closer to OpenAI Gym so not particularly ground breaking. The creator is also kind of arrogant, greatly Google biased and has gone down the Gary Marcus route of being a critique of current AI systems rather than a real contributor, while it has clearly surpassed expectations since reasoning models became a thing that has not been properly acknowledged.

An example that you that you should not appeal to authority as authority is not always correct and can even be often wrong unless proven otherwise.
by capnrefsmmat | 2026-02-06 12:27:48+00:00
No, that doesn't really work so well. A lot of the LLM style hallmarks are still present when you ask them to write in another style, so a good quantitative linguist can find them: https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/pyo0xs3k/release/2

That was with GPT4, but my own work with other LLMs show they have very distinctive styles even if you specifically prompt them with a chunk of human text to imitate. I think instruction-tuning with tasks like summarization predisposes them to certain grammatical structures, so their output is always more information-dense and formal than humans.
by user34283 | 2026-02-06 12:28:28+00:00
Would that not create the issue that you would only need to find one bypass for said official anti-cheat that then works for all games out there?

I heard with Denuvo reverse engineering work needs to be done for each individual target to unprotect it, but I'm not sure how this will be the case with a first party anti-cheat driver.
by NicuCalcea | 2026-02-06 12:28:39+00:00
This would be an improvement in my book.

I'm a data journalist, and I use AI in some of my work (data processing, classification, OCR, etc.). I always disclose it in a "Methodology" section in the story. I wouldn't trust any reporting that didn't disclose the use of AI, and if an outlet slapped a disclaimer on their entire site, I wouldn't trust that outlet.
by rco8786 | 2026-02-06 12:28:51+00:00
> Claude will work autonomously to solve whatever problem I give it. So it’s important that the task verifier is nearly perfect, otherwise Claude will solve the wrong problem.

I think this is the fundamental thing here with AI. You can spin up infinite agents that can all do....stuff. But how do you keep them from doing the wrong stuff?

Is writing an airtight spec and test harness easier or less time consuming than just keeping a human in the loop and verifying and redirecting as the agents work?

It all still comes back to context management.

Very cool demonstration of the tech though.
by chedabob | 2026-02-06 12:29:10+00:00
Ye, kick off into some higher-level language instead of being at the mercy of your CI provider's plugins.

I use Fastlane extensively on mobile, as it reduces boilerplate and gives enough structure that the inherent risk of depending on a 3rd-party is worth it. If all else fails, it's just Ruby, so can break out of it.
by AlfeG | 2026-02-06 12:29:35+00:00
> The problem is you may pay $20K for gibberish, then try a second time, fail again, and then hire humans.

You can easily pay humans $20k a day and get gibberish in output. Heck, this happen all the times. This happens right now in multiple companies.

Yes sometime humans produce nice code. This happens from time to time...
by zhidao9 | 2026-02-06 12:30:14+00:00
I built jsbench because tools like wrk and ab are fast but hard to script,
while k6 and autocannon are scriptable but sacrifice raw throughput.

The key idea: for simple benchmarks (URL, request object, array of endpoints),
JS is only used at startup to read your config. The actual benchmark loop is
a C state machine with epoll and keep-alive — no JS overhead. For complex
scenarios (auth flows, chained requests), it falls back to a per-thread
QuickJS runtime with a standard fetch() API.

The first version was written entirely by Claude Code (Opus 4.6) — I provided
the architecture, the AI wrote all ~2,800 lines of C. AI is great at
"make it work", but I'm not satisfied with the internal design yet,
so I'm now refactoring by hand.

Limitations: Linux only (epoll).

Would love feedback on the API design and scripting model.
by pm90 | 2026-02-06 12:30:26+00:00
> There also seems to be a common belief that just because the laws are unfair, stupid, counterproductive or destructive that they can be ignored and that isn't how laws work. If the law is terrible it is still the law. If it doesn't let you do what you want to do then that desired course of action is not a legal option.

Well then explain to me how the US Marijuana industry exists despite it being a schedule 1 controlled substance.

Laws are a social construct and their enforcement is based on what society thinks is ok. People don’t want to throw their community members is jail for marijuana. They do want to throw murderers in jail. They don’t want to throw upstanding community members who just don’t have the right immigration status in jail either.
by hvb2 | 2026-02-06 12:30:36+00:00
Not all immigration is created equal. There's the economic migration and asylum seekers. Those are 2 distinct groups of people with different motives.

For the true asylum seekers, that feat for their life wherever they're from for example, the laws of the country they're entering just don't matter. If it's a choice between life as an illegal or death I think we would all choose life.

For the economic cases, sure. That's where the legal immigration system applies. And I agree with what you said about rules and each country gets to decide.
by fhkatari | 2026-02-06 12:33:04+00:00
I want to share a couple of stories of immigration.

1. Personal. In the aftermath of 9/11, a simple switch from F1 Student Visa to H1 work visa became a perfect Kafkaesque nightmare. The consulate denied the visa without giving a reason. After two months of non-response, my company reached out to the congressman's office. Apparently, the consulate wanted a copy of my transcript and they reached out to my university, but did not tell me that. The university would not release my transcript without my permission, but did not tell me that DHS was asking for it. It was an infinite loop that left me out.

2. In 2006-2007, I was consulting for Hormel Foods (this time with a legit green card). There was a raid at one of their plants, and I was talking to a couple of middle managers who commented how difficult the jobs are, and people only last for a short time. Only migrants are willing to do the job. I would later learn that meat packing jobs used to be unionized, and that put limits on the number of animals processed per shift. The deregulation of the eighties did away with unions and regulations, and created an untenable work situation. This can ONLY be done by disposable labor, which happens to be immigrants.

A simple solution to the immigration problem would be to arrest the CEO of the company employing illegals. Perhaps that will percolate down to the line level to make the jobs humane.
by piltdownman | 2026-02-06 12:33:19+00:00
Ah yes, the inevitable green accounts playing down a 56 year celebrity and anti-trans activist harassing a teenage girl in public

//"He said ‘go away groomer’, ‘go away you disgusting incel’. He called her a ‘sissy porn-watching scumbag’ … He deliberately whacked the phone out of Ms Brooks’s hand.”

https://bsky.app/profile/alandriscoll.com/post/3lxzkxh6ols26...

To be clear, long before his event, Linehan had persistently called Brooks a "sociopath", "psycho", "domestic terrorist" and "groomer" on X, posting about her dozens of times since at least March of last year. Other claims he makes about the teenage girl include deriding her as “a sociopathic misogynist who harasses women,” and a “dangerous sadist,” and talks about “[sticking] cameras up [her] arse.”

These comments were all made about Brooks when she was underage. Linehan also assaulted her and destroyed her property when she was a minor. Replace the trans component and any reasonable 3rd party would be up in arms, not hiding behind a green account to white-wash their bigotry.
by ghosty141 | 2026-02-06 12:33:20+00:00
The C abstract machine is exactly the important part. There is a difference between saying C is close to "the hardware" and C is close to the C abstract machine. The latter like you described has a few concepts that allow for abstraction and thus portability but obviously they lead to situations where the "maps to the hardware" doesn't seem to hold true.

My gripe is only with people acting like the C abstract machine doesn't exist and C is just syntax sugar for a bit of assembly. It's a bit more involved than that.
by bryanrasmussen | 2026-02-06 12:33:39+00:00
interesting, the woman who wrote the Nature obituary got hate mail for writing the obituary from someone who felt Gladys didn't deserve getting the recognition, evidently

https://bsky.app/profile/histoftech.bsky.social/post/3me6kne...

on edit: the bluesky account histoftech seems to be run by the author of the Nature obituary Mar Hicks, at least they have the same pictures.
by InsideOutSanta | 2026-02-06 12:34:14+00:00
This seems like common sense. I'm running OpenClaw with GLM-4.6V as an experiment. I'm allowing my friends to talk to it using WhatsApp.

Even though it has been instructed to maintain privacy between people who talk to it, it constantly divulges information from private chats, gets confused about who is talking to it, and so on.^ Of course, a stronger model would be less likely to screw up, but this is an intrinsic issue with LLMs that can't be fully solved.

Reporters absolutely should not run an instance of OpenClaw and provide it with information about sources.

^: Just to be clear, the people talking to it understand that they cannot divulge any actual private information to it.
by rayiner | 2026-02-06 12:34:14+00:00
There is a fundamental difference between settlers, who create a society, and immigrants, who move into a society that already exists. America was established by mostly British settlers. Folks on HN of all places should be able to understand the importance of founders.

It's self-evident that this difference between settlers and immigrants has a huge impact. Australia, Canada, and the United States are very similar to each other in terms of language, law, economics, etc. But the U.S. separated from the parent society, Britain, 250 years ago. Subsequently, those countries underwent completely different immigration patterns. So why are those countries so similar? It's because of the difference between settlers and immigrants.
by csmpltn | 2026-02-06 12:34:53+00:00
Your family had to leave everything behind, risking a weeks-long journey at sea costing them everything they ever had, going into the unknown - at a time where nobody could travel. The US was not as rich, or built, or anything.

People today get a 50$ plane ticket and move straight to the Bay Area.

You don't see why things need to change?
by beowulfey | 2026-02-06 12:34:55+00:00
Your first post specifically stated:

"I'm curious - do you have ANY idea what it costs to have humans write 100,000 lines of code???"

which any reasonable reading would take to mean "paid-by-line", which we all know doesn't happen. Otherwise, I could type out 30,000 lines of gibberish and take my fat paycheck.
by greazy | 2026-02-06 12:35:03+00:00
I can fill in my opinion of Impress <-> Powerpoint.

It's atrocious primarily due to MS not following open ODF. Everything is out of wack, dot point have different shapes, and spacing is wrong.

Impress is also not all that great. It's defaults are generally ugly, its auto sizing breaks and the animation pane is buggy.

Calc is much better. Writer is decent compatibility with MS
by wwfn | 2026-02-06 12:35:07+00:00
> passing laws that only apply to people who volunteer to follow them

That's a concerning lens to view regulations. Obviously true, but for all laws. Regulations don't apply to only to what would be immediately observable offenses.

There are lots of bad actors and instances where the law is ignored because getting caught isn't likely. Those are conspiracies! They get harder to maintain with more people involved and the reason for whistle-blower protections.

VW's Dieselgate[1] comes to mind albeit via measurable discrepancy. Maybe Enron or WorldCom (via Cynthia Cooper) [2] is a better example.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCI_Inc.#Accounting_scandals
by rco8786 | 2026-02-06 12:35:27+00:00
I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Only to point out that in the early days of the internet, even into the 00s, teachers had a Hard No rule on any internet source.

I graduated high school in '04 and even then I was only allowed to use this system called "Galileo" which was basically a curated listed of encyclopedic articles specifically meant for education and research.