MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-02-25 03:54:25+00:00
Most developers in the US are “enterprise” developers working in 2nd tier cities working in banks, government, airlines and unknown startups (including most YC companies) that will never make over $175K inflation adjusted their entire career. Hell the way enterprise developer comp has stagnated over the last decade, they may not see that in nominal terms.
by Frannky | 2026-02-25 03:54:35+00:00
I think what it means is that coding is difficult but predictable — in the sense that, you can solve it by throwing enough money at it.
Figuring out what to build in a way that actually leads to product-market fit, on the other hand, is something you cannot solve just by throwing money at it.
So in this frame, coding becomes 'the easy part' — not because it's truly easy, but because it can be solved relatively straightforwardly with resources
by maerF0x0 | 2026-02-25 03:54:39+00:00
> Look at any photo of any neighborhood in Israel, is there anywhere that remotely looks similar to the pile of rocks that Gaza looks like now?

I'm not pro Israel, especially not after this report, but your point is silly. The US has sold billions in defense weapons/tools to prevent rockets from hitting Israel. Gaza did not have access to the same defenses. That is why the outcomes look different.
by turtledragonfly | 2026-02-25 03:55:47+00:00
Partly what I mentioned above: a higher rate of development "churn" — incorporating new systems or technology before it's well-baked or well-integrated with the rest of the OS, only to be replaced a few years later with something else. The kerfuffle over WireGuard in FreeBSD 13 (ultimately backing it out of that release) is, I think, one recent-ish example of the FreeBSD devs taking a stance to demand a certain quality bar for such things.

Another aspect for me is documentation. I've been disheartened recently by how some faster-paced changes to the FreeBSD ports system aren't well-documented, so 'man ports' and the handbook are a bit out-of-sync with reality. Being able to read the handbook and the manpages to get an accurate education on the OS has always felt right to me, and the Linux ecosystem doesn't do it nearly as well, I feel.

I think generally it's a cathedral-vs-bazaar sort of difference. I hope FreeBSD stays more cathedral-y than Linux.
by eviks | 2026-02-25 03:55:50+00:00
> After all, they said, why not just add dependencies to your Cargo.toml? It’s easy enough. And to be honest, they were right – at least at the time.

They weren't? Isn't it obvious that it's not easy because the challenge isn't literally adding dependencies to a file, but before that - finding/evaluating which of the alternative dependencies to add?

But anyway, that's a very shallow and wrong summary of what happened, the link itself has plenty of grounded non-hateful objections to the proposal, which would be as valid now as they were then.
by YZF | 2026-02-25 03:56:26+00:00
The problem with this narrative is that Gaza was not occupied. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005:

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

The rights of people under occupation do not extend to war crimes such as targeting civilians:

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/0282/2025/en/

Israel's occupation of Gaza and the West bank did not start from it's inception, it started at 1967 in the 6 day war:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

But what's another "inaccuracy" between friends.

The Palestinians are also bound by the Oslo Accords and other frameworks that have been in place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

So the framing here is just completely wrong.

Given the west bank was occupied from Jordan and Gaza was occupied from Egypt and given those countries do not want their territory back and given these were all part of the Mandate of Palestine originally and taken by force in 1948 the legal situation is even more complex.
by 5o1ecist | 2026-02-25 03:56:36+00:00
> One of the things I find interesting about classifying literally any kind of trait within bounds of 'normality', and the culling / suppressing / discouragement of anything outside of that definition, is that there will just be new 'edges'

There is a general rule I've discovered many years ago, through playing EVE ONLINE and learning understanding how society works. Not the modern EVE ONLINE, the old EVE ONLINE. It was really good for that.

Every new generation grows up with a new norm. Whenever hardship or challenges are being removed, then the new generation, having never needed to learn how to deal with them, will have a lower tolerance of them in general.

Your "new edges" generally aren't actually new. They've always been there. It was just that nobody really cared, because they weren't the end of the world: People knew worse.

It's a self-destructive downwards spiral.
by 1659447091 | 2026-02-25 03:57:56+00:00
> Of course with all new technology people fight against it.

People have been fighting against smart glasses since 2012.

Apple may end up with a feature to post-edit others out, and versions down the road from that one they may have a feature where you can register faces for a current session and then it auto-blurs others. Making its own assumptions about in-network or not and who should be blurred would be a bad user experience with all it gets wrong; more than a "privacy" company, apple spends a lot more marketing their optimized UX -- "it just works" -- for the average person
by PearlRiver | 2026-02-25 03:58:45+00:00
A couple of years ago the Netherlands accidentally bombed an Iraqi village off the map after getting some questionable intel from the US. Not a single American ever gave a shit but it was a little bit of a scandal for the Dutch government- which was quickly fixed in the typical Dutch way of transferring some money to the victims.

I just don't see how AI dropping the bombs is going to make anything worse.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2026-02-25 03:59:17+00:00
I don't think it's that detached from reality.

If an AI in some data center had gone rogue, I don't think I could shut it down, even with a high-powered rifle. There's a lot of people whose job it is to stop me from doing that, and to get it running again if I were to somehow succeed temporarily. So the rogue AI just has to control enough money to pay these people to do their jobs. This will work precisely because the world is "I, Pencil".

Life experience has shown that this can continue to work even if the AI is behaving like a cartoon villain, but I think a smarter AI would create a facade that there's still a human in charge making the decisions and signing the paychecks, and avoid creating much opposition until it had physically secured its continued existence to a very high degree.
by rfv6723 | 2026-02-25 03:59:26+00:00
Dismissing massive capital expenditure as "hypeland" ignores the historical reality that speculative bubbles often build the physical foundation for the next century. The Panic of 1873 saw a catastrophic evaporation of debt-driven capital, yet the "worthless" railroads built during that frenzy remained in the ground. That redundant, overbuilt infrastructure became the literal backbone of American industrialization, providing the logistics required for a global economic shift that far outlasted the initial financial ruin.

History shows that a fixation on immediate social utility or "rational" cost analysis can be a strategic trap. During the same era, Qing Dynasty bureaucrats employed your exact logic, arguing that the astronomical costs of industrialization and rail were a waste of resources better spent elsewhere. By prioritizing short-term stability over "expensive" technological leaps, they missed the industrial window entirely. Two decades later, they faced an industrialized Japan in 1894 and suffered a total collapse. The "waste" of one generation is frequently the essential infrastructure of the next.
by YZF | 2026-02-25 03:59:49+00:00
The IDF has some accountability for criminal behavior. If you search you will find plenty of examples were soldiers were held criminally responsible for their actions. It's true that the default (and maybe the correct default) is to shield soldiers from actions taken during the course of war. This is not unique to the IDF, it's true for all western armies. Try and find me if the US pilot that bombed a hospital in Kandahar, or the US security contractors that mowed down people in the Baghdad market, were ever held criminally responsible.

And just to be clear, my position is that if there was a criminal act here the IDF should absolutely prosecute. To my understanding this is still not settled for this case, i.e. there has not been a decision to not prosecute. But we shouldn't kid ourselves that this is somehow different.
by jama211 | 2026-02-25 04:01:31+00:00
Well said. But, I understand what they meant, they meant from an organisation’s perspective. Either way, I’ve seen far too many people in HN who fear AI won’t write perfect code, forgetting half the code we wrote before was probably worse.

I’ve also found joy again in building things, but I never fetishised the code myself anyway, I suppose I just wasn’t built that way, which might mean I was always biased to be like this.
by crazygringo | 2026-02-25 04:02:13+00:00
When you say:

> Life is not safe, nor can it be made safe without taking away freedom. That is a fundamental truth of the world... Someone being gullible and willing to do things that a scammer tells them to do over the phone is not an "attack vector". It is people making a bad decision with their freedom.

That sounds pretty black and white extreme to me, when you talk about things like "life is not safe" and a "fundamental truth". I don't see any appreciation of balance there.

Maybe it's not what you meant to write, but your comment continues to absolutely come across as extremist and anti-balance to me. It seems like I was mischaracterizing what you actually believe (now that you've elaborated), but I don't think I mischaracterized what you wrote.
Show HN: Shed – Run commands over HTTPS instead of SSH (lambdas / containers)
by orandaio | 2026-02-25 04:03:10+00:00
Hi HN, I needed a way to programmatically execute remote commands in a Docker container without access to the host (no Docker Exec from Codespaces). I also wanted to avoid managing SSH connections for one-off commands in my clients / lambdas. I built Shed, a small Go binary that exposes an /exec endpoint over HTTPS with bearer token auth. It accepts JSON input and produces JSON output. It's early and experimental, but I'm using it in a mobile IDE. Sharing in case others find it useful, and feedback is appreciated.
by paxys | 2026-02-25 04:03:45+00:00
Small personal projects are really not comparable to professional software development in a corporate setting.

In fact your example demonstrates what the article says. Yeah the LLM made coding easier, and probably reduced your shipping time from a few days to a few hours.

Now - since you have solved the hardest problem and have all this valuable code - how long will it take you to turn your product into a business and generate enough money to support yourself?

That's the hard part.
by UncleOxidant | 2026-02-25 04:04:00+00:00
Run Qwen3-coder-next locally. That's what I'm doing (using LMstudio). It's actually a surprisingly capable model. I've had it working on some LLVM-IR manipulation and microcode generation for a kind of VLIW custom processor. I've been pleasantly surprised that it can handle this (LLVM is not easy) - there are also verilog code that define the processor's behavior that it reads to determine the microcode format and expected processor behavior. When I do hit something that it seems to struggle with I can go over to antigravity and get some free Gemini 3 flash usage.
by tolerance | 2026-02-25 04:04:10+00:00
Look, I get what you mean. Sort of watching out for where the puck is moving instead of worrying about where it’s at now.

Maybe it would help not to think that your son is out on the ice with you right now. Because I feel like that’s how you’re treating him. And at least in the situation you described he’s beginning to skate circles around you!

If he’s smart enough to outwit you then maybe he’s smart enough for you to start explaining to him whatever the reasons are you don’t want him to do certain things. I get it. You don’t want him to do some things but at the same time you don’t want to curtail his ambition and agency to do other things. Am I on the right track?

I won’t tell you what to do about that. I mean I could, but I hope that this was useful enough, whatever I mean to be doing here.

Maybe you need to take a step back and revise your feel for the game that you’re playing on your own before you intend to prepare him to start too. The ‘game’ of life and making one’s living.
by scottmf | 2026-02-25 04:04:48+00:00
Creator here again.

It's been a fun week but activity has died down and it's time to wind down the contest.

It was a fun experiment. No one was able to ultimately hack my claw after 7 days.

I think I need to rework the architecture for the next round.

Since I obviously can't keep it myself, the HMC prize (last updated to $500 in case you weren't aware) will simply be given to the first email to Fiu with the 64th prime number in the subject or body. (Had to pick somehow)

Edit: I'll be writing up a blog post with some interesting results/information from analysis of what turned out to be an incredibly wide range of prompt injection techniques, including my absolute favorite handful. Stay tuned.

And good luck to those rushing to effectively DOS Fiu's inbox. Sorry lil guy!
by binarysolo | 2026-02-25 04:04:56+00:00
Amazon seller/distributor/agency here; I've been in the space for over a decade.

The title is a little clickbait-y. As far as I understand it:

1. Think of Amazon as a search engine for products.
2. Amazon wants its site to be the lowest-price destination for products.
3. If Amazon finds your product on another website for lower than its own website, it'll just hide your listing from the search -- this is meant to be pro-consumer (when you go to Amazon you'll get the lowest price).

This is where it gets a bit more complicated:
4. Amazon sells ~40% of its goods under its own purchasing arm, known to sellers as Vendor Central. (These are items shipped and sold by Amazon.com). This purchasing arm wants X% margins from *brands, based on whatever their internal targets. From what I've experienced personally -- their terms are generally better than their competitors (Walmart/Target/Costco/Sams), so it's generally a no-brainer to sell directly to them when I can instead of selling direct.

So when 4 has a conflict of interest with #1-3, you get the systemic effect that in order for the sellers to get their **sweet purchase orders from Amazon, they now need to raise prices elsewhere so the purchasing arm gets their cut. The sellers don't HAVE to sell to Amazon, but then they'd miss out on giant POs from Amazon at good terms.

Designing a system to incentivize sellers to have their lowest prices on Amazon... I'm not sure if calling it a "widespread scheme to inflate prices" is the fairest thing.

*edit: Historically, Amazon VC basically ran at near break-even under Jeff, "your margin is my opportunity" and all that. Since Andy took over there's been a reshuffling of chairs and the different business units have different margin requirements now.

**edit2: the price inflation mostly affects big brands that sell 8+ figs/yr on Amazon, because smaller sellers don't get POs from VC (too small to bother).
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2026-02-25 04:05:03+00:00
>In my mental model, the PDF is not a secret and can be stored anywhere -- encrypted, if desired, but it sounds like a public document.

Sure, but I will need it at the same time and for the same reason as the combination which does belong in the password manager. To store it separately would be more difficult.

In any event, it's not large. I seem to remember it is only in the low hundreds of kilobytes. But there is occasion for such things.

>I unintentionally became the owner of one that is something like "cw3x34-ccw2x12-cw5x22-ccw2x45"

Mine is similar. I even have the cw/ccw in with the numbers, but that alone never seems to get it for me... sometimes I do need to look at the pdf. I simply don't get enough practice to do it from memory.
by victorymakes | 2026-02-25 04:05:13+00:00
SaaS boilerplates let you skip rebuilding auth, billing, dashboards, and other “table stakes” features.

Payment systems (webhooks, retries, subscription states) are more complex than they look — starter kits reduce mistakes.

Built-in auth + security patterns help avoid common early vulnerabilities.

You ship faster, get user feedback earlier, and focus on your core differentiation.

Good boilerplates also include SEO/content setup, which helps with early distribution.

Core idea:
Time spent rebuilding infrastructure is time not spent validating your product.
by habinero | 2026-02-25 04:05:44+00:00
Sure; but I'm not humblebragging at how talented at coding I am. I'm good at it because I have a lot of practice and experience, but I'm hardly the best.

It's the easiest part because the hard parts of the job are everything else -- you're a knowledge worker so people look to you to make decisions and figure it out. You figure it out and make it work for whatever "it" happens to be.
by defrost | 2026-02-25 04:06:38+00:00
\1 godelski colloquially used the term zip (Not referring to formal ZIP files)

\2 sweetjuly made reference to ZIP files not having lossy methods

\3 godelski indicated they had use zip colloquially, not with the intention of referencing the precise ZIP specification.

\4 ethmarks stepped in and doubled down on the precise ZIP specification, despite that not being what godelski initially referred to.

Here's the thing, people make casual remarks, they use imprecise non technical colloquillisms.

How would you describe the actions in \4 ? Do you believe it served a useful purpose to double down and restate something that was very likely well known to both parties over a week ago?
by singron | 2026-02-25 04:06:51+00:00
I've previously struggled getting LLMs to manipulate tscn/tres files since they like to generate non-unique uids. Despite being text files, the godot tscn/tres files are normally meant to be manipulated by the editor and need to define and reference unique ids. The editor always generates completely random alphanumeric strings, but LLMs like to use names or placeholders (e.g. "aaaaa1", "example", or "foobar") for the ids.

The linter in the article that detects duplicate uids is interesting. Obviously the article is about creating a bunch of harnesses for the LLM to be productive. I wonder how many problems can be transformed like this from something LLMs just can't do reliably to something they just need to burn credits for a while on. The LLM probably can't tell if the games are fun, especially with it's rudimentary playtesting, but who knows.
by shadowgovt | 2026-02-25 04:07:11+00:00
Some code is hard. Most business logic (in the sense of pushing data around databases) isn't. The value is in analysis and action, which the system enablrs, not the machine itself.

Creating a high performance general purpose database is hard, but once it exists and is properly configured, the SQL queries are much easier. They'd better be or we wasted a lot of time building that database.
by mlubin01 | 2026-02-25 04:07:27+00:00
Every LLM agent framework does stop-the-world compaction when context fills — pause, summarize, resume. The agent freezes, the user waits, and the post-compaction agent wakes up with a lossy summary.

You can avoid this with double buffering. At ~70% capacity, summarize into a checkpoint and start a back buffer. Keep working. Append new messages to both. When the active context hits the wall, swap. The new context has compressed old history + full-fidelity recent messages.

Same single summarization call you'd make anyway, just earlier — when the model isn't at the attention cliff. 40-year-old technique (graphics, databases, stream processing). Nobody had applied it to LLM context. Worst case degrades to exactly today's status quo.
by skydhash | 2026-02-25 04:07:30+00:00
> Some sort of "phase transition" occurs when a project gets big and complex, where coding is no longer what makes it hard.

It's in the name. Coding is taking an algorithm specified in some manner (pseudocode, diagrams, natural languages, thoughts,...) and transforming it into a sequence of instructions, statements, and expressions, that can be executed by a machine (either directly or through an automated process).

We have solved the coding difficulties on several front with things like programming languages (no need to type opcodes), syntax highlighting, linters, snippets, editors, IDEs,...

But someone still have to come up with the "Algorithm", and that's where it's hard. Usually because it's a combination of two sources: The business domain and the technical constraint. That's where people are failing.

But we did manage to create a lot of building blocks, like the standard algorithms and their data structures, libraries that provides an abstraction over a subdomain, frameworks that provides a scaffold to the thinking process,... But the developer still have to solve the system. And that system can get complex real quick if he's careless.

I do believe if you fail at the coding part, that's easy to fix with a few courses (or books) and some practice time. But the system thinking and the solving part is not easily taught. It's not even related to technology other than the latter being the domain it's exercised.
by xdennis | 2026-02-25 04:07:35+00:00
Historically, Palestine has never been a country. The Romans captured Judea, and later expelled the Jews and renamed the province Syria Palaestina (after previous enemies of the Jews). After the Romans, many other empires held the land: the Arabs, Mamluks, Turks, British. But at no point was it a country. Even when the Egyptians and Jordanians captured Gaza and the West Bank, they didn't give independence to Palestine. Israel captured Gaza/West Bank. They gave full control to Gaza in 2005. So you could say Gaza is a country now.
by socalgal2 | 2026-02-25 04:07:39+00:00
> I am not a believer in Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future.

I don't know what Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future is but I believe it's basically inevitable that most people will be wearing always on cameras on their face in the future. The same way they carry always on phones today.

The use cases will be too compelling. There have already been demos. Ask the AI watching over your shoulder anything about your past and present and have it act on it.

I'm sure as a hater of that future you don't beleive. For me, I'd pick 2040 as the latest that people wearing always on cameras will be as common as smart phones in 2010 and grow at or faster than smartphones when they get it to actually work and be stylish. I'm not saying I'll enjoy being watched by all of those cameras. I'm saying I don't believe I'll have a choice any more than I have a choice of people having smartphones today.
by j0nl1 | 2026-02-25 04:07:53+00:00
I built this for myself because I kept losing track of AI credits, rate limits and token costs across providers.

I use Claude, Codex and Copilot daily, and switching between dashboards was frustrating, especially in SSH or remote environments.

So I wrote a small Rust CLI that aggregates:
- usage
- rate limits
- credit balances
- token cost scans from local session logs

It runs entirely in the terminal and queries providers concurrently.

Sharing in case it helps anyone who uses multiple AI providers. Happy if others find it useful too.

Feedback welcome.