MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Built an AI tool that routes tasks to agents, humans. Am I crazy?
by rhelm-ai | 2026-02-24 09:04:34+00:00
Hey HN. I've spent 10 years doing IT work, mostly infrastructure and scripting, the stuff nobody writes blog posts about. No CS degree. This is my first startup and I have no idea if I'm doing it right.
Here's the problem that bugged me: every AI agent setup I looked at just blasts everything through GPT-4 or whatever the biggest model is. That's insane for 80% of tasks. You don't need a $0.03/1k token model to parse a CSV.
So I built two things. Rhelm is a web app for organizing AI work visually, boards and tasks, kind of like Linear but for agent workflows. goClaw is a companion mobile app (coming to App Store and Play Store) that lets you talk to your agents from your phone. Text or voice. "Hey, spin up the data cleaning job" and it figures out which model to route it to based on what the task actually needs.
The routing is the part I care about most. Task comes in, system looks at complexity, picks the cheapest model that can handle it. Sometimes that's a local model, sometimes it's an API call, sometimes it's "this actually needs a human." I built the core loop in about 4 days. I've been breaking and fixing it since.
I'm not going to pretend I have everything figured out. I definitely don't. But I'm mass rounding off the rough edges and I'd rather ship something and learn from people smarter than me than sit on it forever.
https://rhelm.io (waitlist is open)
What am I missing? What would make you actually use something like this?
by stevoski | 2026-02-24 09:04:49+00:00
My daughter spoke four languages at age 3. Not because she is gifted, but because she grew up in an immigrant environment. One language with me, another with my partner who speaks a different mother tongue than I do, and the two local languages where we live.

And this is utterly unremarkable where I live.

When we visit my family (who are all monolingual), they think she is a prodigy.

She’s not. She’s just a normal kid.
by streetfighter64 | 2026-02-24 09:05:13+00:00
Audit logging is different because it's actually more straightforward than "normal logging". You just make a log entry for each state change, basically. Especially if you're storing the log entries as "objects" instead of plain text.

Besides, do you think that a LLM would be better at deciding what to log than a human that has even just a little experience with the actual system in question?
by grey-area | 2026-02-24 09:05:21+00:00
I think the main objections are the effort mismatch between writing and reading, and the likely low informational content and errors in the text, which the author may or may not have read. Some of this like the bit I quoted below is pretty nonsensical, comparing lobsters and quiet engines.

The writing definitely has a stench and is full of breathless comparisons which pretend some very minor thing is a breakthrough. This is annoying and trite and people dislike it for that alone but also for the more important reasons above.

This blog post could have been a lot shorter. I’d honestly rather just read the prompt with a link to pi. People like this author should just publish their prompt IMO and they will continue to be called out on it till this bubble pops.
by interleave | 2026-02-24 09:05:51+00:00
Thank you for sharing.

As someone who also recently spun up a new VPS to fiddle with claws:

I personally fully support Hetzner on this because, as a on-and-off customer since 21 years, their service has been absolutely flawless and always worth every cent. They care so I'm totally happy to pay whatever they need to make it work for them, too.
by godelski | 2026-02-24 09:06:06+00:00
Why do I want length? Good docs are terse. Longer isn't better. When I read docs I want to get to know the developer and what they're thinking. I want to see their vision, not their calculator. It's not about quantity, it's about quality.

Just give your users and fellow devs some basic respect. I mean would you be okay with me just handing our conversation over to an LLM? Honestly I'd be insulted if you did that. Why is this any different? Docs are how you communicate to users and fellow developers
by afroboy | 2026-02-24 09:06:08+00:00
Binance is not an American company and sending money to Iran or Palestine or Hamas is something should not be up to Americans to decide, i personally will not accept Americans be the police of the world they did so much horrible things and terrorising Muslims for so many years.

I hope for the day the world will be decoupled from dollar as universal currency. That day countries will free to trade with each other without worrying about some orange head with low IQ.
by agenteo | 2026-02-24 09:06:56+00:00
An LLM without MCP is a brain thinking with its eyes closed.

LLMs are trained on static data, then frozen. Ask one to query your production database or pull yesterday's error logs, and it can't. It's like Mr. Anderson living in the Matrix. It'll make something up that sounds plausible.

The jump from "chatting with AI" to "AI doing work" runs through this. Let your LLM take the red pill.
by theodric | 2026-02-24 09:08:04+00:00
I'm happy to see the IEEE talking about this, and to see the topic getting attention in the technical press. The problem is, I think (for the most part) that technical people already Get It. Who we need to convince are average, non-technical voters who don't know, don't understand, think it's a good thing, or would happily jump feet-first into a wood chipper if someone told them it would protect the children.

I also suspect that social media has damaging effects on kids, and they probably shouldn't have access to it, but not like this. I'd probably be quicker to support something like saying that individuals <18 aren't allowed to buy or possess a phone or tablet that has access to an app store or web browser, and only offers voice- and text-based communications channels. Ok, so now it all happens on a laptop? What's "a tablet?" Is a Chromebook a tablet? It's fucking impossible.
by fuzzfactor | 2026-02-24 09:08:04+00:00
>there's no hope of getting a world-wide, free, uncensored, unlimited IP4/6 network back. We never had it in the first place.

I'd settle for a maximally private totally uncensored IPV4 like there used to be. Broadband turned out to be over-rated in some ways.

One of the good things about dial-up was the way it was built on a peer-to-peer network that "everybody" already had, their land-line telephone service.

Way before actual "networking", anybody with a modem could connect privately with anybody else who had one.

An ISP could be formed by taking incoming calls from all active digital users simultaneously, and that was where the networking was done, plus connection to other networks around the world.

You could still contact any one computer user privately if you wanted to, without going through an ISP, just like it was before the web.

Also connect one network with another distant one, such as one office building to another, without ISP.

If anybody wanted to form their own working ISP, they could do it privately anytime as an interested group and not even tell anybody about it if they didn't want to. It might not be a commercial ISP but there was no mainstream to begin with where it was assumed that an ISP must be commercial or make any money at all.

These connections were intended to be "totally" private by law, it was well-established that a court order was required to do a wiretap, and the penalty for violation was based on the concept that spying on Americans was one of the worst crimes, and needed to deter those who acted to compromise the privacy & freedom that America cherished so deeply. And preserve citizen rights the country was chartered to uphold, no differently than before the telephone was invented.

There's nothing like this any more, land-line copper is in miserable disuse so the only remaining wire if any is TV cable. But the only way to do peer-to-peer contact over cable is through an ISP, how private is that and why is there not a court order necessary before privacy can be compromised and very select Americans be subject to espionage?

Cell phones won't help you now, they can be tapped without wires.

The options are far fewer than the possibilities offered when dial-up first got popular.
by No_CQRT | 2026-02-24 09:09:09+00:00
GyroidOS virtualization solution aims to secure embedded devices, ease cybersecurity certification
Maintained by Fraunhofer AISEC, GyroidOS is an open-source, multi-arch OS-level virtualization solution designed for embedded devices with hardware security features, and aiming to support security certification processes such as Common Criteria (ISO/IEC 15408), DIN SPEC 27070 – IDS Trust Security profile, and IEC-62443 cybersecurity standards.
by Karrot_Kream | 2026-02-24 09:09:20+00:00
Isn't plugging Wolfram algorithms into LLMs basically their current solution for the DX problem?

As far as society funding research, while I'm quite sympathetic to this view, Wolfram also puts in a significant amount of private dollars into the operationalization of their systems. My guess is there's a whole range of algorithms that aren't prominent enough to publish a paper on nor economically lucrative enough to build a company on that Wolfram products sell.

That said I do think LLM coding agents offer a great way forward to implement more papers on a FOSS manner.
by benrutter | 2026-02-24 09:09:39+00:00
History probably says I'm being naive, but I feel like I don't hate this possibility (hear me out!).

Personally, I'd always choose to use a distribution with open source userland packages and utils, but if closed source alternatives exist and conform to the same specifications (i.e. we get "embrace" without the "extend and extinguish") then I don't mind if a company has closed sourced tech, especially if it'll help there business case, potentially boosting funding for open source linux projects.

Maybe that's all naive, I guess we'll find out if ubuntu really do go for more and more closed source options.
by alexhans | 2026-02-24 09:09:57+00:00
It doesn't disappear but it does easy up some instances of fighting configuration, documentation, syntax or even comparing three approaches that are similar but you don't know their full effect.

I think it's a very fun space, finally being able to empower many people who in the past wouidve been bottlenecked unless they were using very simple tools for their domain and upskilled enough. Those 2 things will still be true, but the speed at which some things can happen at the exploration and other layers has seen a significant speedup.

Other problems like entropy/slop, security, system testing, lack of automation fundamentals arise but it's a good problem to start tackling.

I'm very focused on evals [1] because is what allows me to not to be the bottleneck with economists who I want to empower to code end to end and I'd like that mental shift to happen for anyone becoming a builder so non traditional developers and developers by trade have a common language for product building [2]. That part of speaking to different audiences and combating hype that promises to do everything for you Vs the intent that's actually needed is hard, but trying gets you to advance quite a lot.

[1] https://alexhans.github.io/posts/series/evals/measure-first-...

[2] https://ai-evals.io
by donkeybeer | 2026-02-24 09:10:03+00:00
Also funny things in black metal like American bands using german names, and yes often overlaps with white power stuff too. Norwegian or Swedish I can understand, a bit, as that was a key wave of black metal, but think what if a band that loved brazilian bm usee Portugese names (I do remember a band using spanish even though its members weren't latino but it does sound odd doesn't it?)

And the funnier thing is, among all thr cultural roots of white or other people, these bm bands it's always German if you know what I mean.
by eesmith | 2026-02-24 09:10:04+00:00
I believe the ChatGPT code has a bug, in that it accepts three spaces or tabs before a code fence, while the Google Markdown spec says up to three spaces, and does not allow a tab there.

I also see that the tests generated by ChatGPT are far too few for the code features implemented. The cannot be the result of actual red/green TDD where the test comes before the feature is added.

For examples, 1) the code allows "~~~" but only tests for "```", 2) there are no tests when len(fence) < fence_len nor when len(fence) > fence_len, and 3) there are no tests for leading spaces.

There's also duplicate code. The function _strip_closing_hashes is used once, in the line:

text = _strip_closing_hashes(m.group("text")).strip()

The function is:

def _strip_closing_hashes(s: str) -> str:
s = s.rstrip()
# remove trailing " ###" style closers
s = re.sub(r"[ \t]+#+\s*$", "", s).rstrip()
return s

The ".rstrip()" is unneeded as the ".strip()" does both lstrip and rstrip.

I think that rstrip() should be replaced with a strip(), the function renamed to "_get_inline_content", and used as "text = _get_inline_content(m.group("text")).

Also, the Google spec also says "A sequence of # characters with anything but spaces following it is not a closing sequence, but counts as part of the contents of the heading:" so is it really correct to use "\s*" in that regex, instead of "[ ]*"? And does it matter, since the input was rstrip'ped already?

So perhaps:

def _get_inline_content(s: str) -> str:
s = s.rstrip(" ") # remove trailing spaces
s = s.rstrip("#") # removing "#" style closers
return s.strip() # remove leading and trailing whitespace

would be more correct, readable, and maintainable?
by tpm | 2026-02-24 09:10:23+00:00
It's anecdotal - you have no way to know what would happen otherwise. I have seen plenty of young people smoke weed in their teens while gradually stoppping later and leading completely 'normal' lives, while a few didn't stop and went to heavy polydrug abuse etc. What exactly does that say about weed? Not much I'm afraid.

Similarly, I know of several persons that went schizophrenic after car accidents, but were the car accidents the cause?
by johnnyanmac | 2026-02-24 09:11:58+00:00
> Quite impressive just how resilient it seems to be.

I watched a few analyses on this and it really comes down to faith.

I really wish it weren't kidding. The resistance against this economic downturn comes a large part due to conservative skewing financiers who believe "Trump won't let the economy crash". And that faith somehow keeps people pushing their chips in in times where they'd have probably long pulled out of Biden.

2025-6 will truly be a "vibe-cession" in so many ways.
by vintagedave | 2026-02-24 09:12:39+00:00
This is fantastic to read. LLMs feel like black boxes and for the large ones especially I have a sense they genuinely form concepts. Yet the internals were opaque. I remember reading how LLMs cannot explain their own behaviour when asked.

I feel this would give insight into all that including the degree of true conceptualisation. I’m curious if this can demonstrate what else the model is aware of when answering, too.
by jeppester | 2026-02-24 09:13:02+00:00
> I wonder what sort of user testing made them decide that what Firefox users really need is a chat bot in the site bar. Isn't a chat bot in a tab good enough?

If it wasn't because I find myself using the AI-sidebar all the time I would probably have shared your opinion.

I guess it's just quite convenient to have it separated from the "regular" tabs and their history.
by raxxorraxor | 2026-02-24 09:13:45+00:00
Innovation doesn't need a big brother looking over your shoulder all the time. We have enough tracking tech on the web, no need to make it official as well. So yes, the "will" is missing, especially with the many misbehaviour states have shown towards privacy and surveillance.

A little legislative change and you can kiss your zero-proof goodbye if any infrastructure is established. This is about making intelligent decisions in your life. Your suggestion is far from innovative.

We will see real innovation in mechanisms to sideline age verification.
by input_sh | 2026-02-24 09:13:51+00:00
"You people"? Take a look at my comment history and see my takes on AI please, but this is like the least harmful way of integrating it and yet "you people" are the loudest about it.

Can you do the same on Windows? Is it tucked away in settings on macOS? Can you disable it on Google? Can you disable it anywhere else? Why are you the most vocal about the integration that is literally the easiest to turn off? You need two clicks to do it right now, you're gonna need at least three once this kill switch is in settings.
by audunw | 2026-02-24 09:14:04+00:00
How is he taking it at face value? He’s saying it doesn’t matter. Which it really doesn’t.

The reason solid state is exciting is the promised high energy density, and in some cases better safety. We shouldn’t care if it’s really “solid state” or not. That’s just marketing fluff. It doesn’t even really have a good definition as some chemistries are somewhere in between (sometimes described as semi-solid state).

This test confirms the charging speed and basically confirms the energy density (estimates people have done based on the video/report put it in the ballpark of what’s claimed)

You and I should really not demand a test that it’s actually solid state. That just doesn’t matter. We need energy density tests, cycle life tests, puncture tests, etc. If all those specifications are confirmed, whether it’s solid state or not becomes completely moot.

And in the end what truly matters is if it can be mass manufactured at low cost, which can’t be tested anyway. All these social media demands for tests are kind of ridiculous, since the only thing publishing the tests does is give Donut more PR. They’re basically laughing all the way to the bank considering how easy it has been to manipulate YouTube, Reddit and HackerNews into giving them free press. We will have another round in a week when the next test is published. I’m honestly impressed.

Personally I reserve all judgement until the promised bikes are on the road and torn down by third parties.
by yorwba | 2026-02-24 09:14:10+00:00
I doubt that a regulator would be satisfied by the kinds of explanations this provides and the interventions it enables.

Suppose somebody put an LLM in charge of an industrial control system and it increased the temperature so much that it caused an accident. The input feature attribution analysis shows that the model was strongly influenced by the tokens describing the temperature control mechanism, concept attribution shows that it output tokens related to temperature, industrial processes and LLM tool-call syntax.

The operator proposes to fix this by rewriting the description and downweighting the temperature concept in the output, and a simulation shows that with these changes the model doesn't make the same decisions in this situation anymore. Should the regulator accept this explanation as sufficient to establish that the system is now safe?

If the controller has just a few parameters and responds approximately linearly to changes in its inputs, you can in principle guarantee that it'll stay within a safe zone. But LLMs have a huge number of parameters and by design highly nonlinear behavior. A simple explanation is unlikely to reflect model behavior accurately enough that you can trust its predictions to hold in arbitrary situations.
by adebayoj | 2026-02-24 09:14:41+00:00
Good point. Historically, people have thought that there is a interpretability vs quality/performance tax. This is not true; at least not in this case.

Here are a bunch of questions you can answer without any quality degradation with interpretable models: 1) what part of the input context led to the output chunk that the model generated? 2) what part of the training data led to the output chunk?

In this case, we go more invasive, and actually constrain the model to also use human understandable concepts in its representations. You might think this leads to quality trade-offs. However, if you allow for the model to discover its own concepts as well (as long as they are not duplicates of the concepts you provided it), you don't see huge degradation.

I agree with the other commenters that this now gives us a huge boost in debugging the model.
by theodric | 2026-02-24 09:15:29+00:00
> how would I use this on Linux

Governments and businesses have already decided that it's fine to mandate that you own an unmodified smartphone made by one of the major manufacturers, so it's not much of a stretch to assume that they will also eventually require you to run an attested OS image made by one of the two major manufacturers. The fact that some run Linux internally isn't going to help your case: governments do a lot of things internally that you're not allowed to do. I used to watch cops in Amsterdam park on the sidewalk to go get a kebab, for example.
by alexhans | 2026-02-24 09:15:39+00:00
Nice to see you here (Just reached out on bluesky over sandboxing - gandolin). I follow your work and agree and am hoping that you and others who have well earned audiences based on awesome open source work, can help with the advocacy on mental shifts, not just for developers but also non Devs that become builders.

I'm very focused on their minimalistic building experience as a way to make me and other traditional developers, not the bottleneck and empowering them end to end.

I think AI evals [1] are a big part of that route and hope that different disciplines can finally have probable product design stories [2] instead of there being big gaps of understanding between them.

[1] https://alexhans.github.io/posts/series/evals/measure-first-...

[2] https://ai-evals.io
by ileonichwiesz | 2026-02-24 09:15:47+00:00
> Would you ever be tempted to make such a claim (that everyone is close to the same in ability and effort is the main determiner of success) about athletes?

Well yes, absolutely. People don’t do quadruple axels on the ice because they were somehow born with the ability, they can do it because they practice figure skating every day for years. Innate ability (or in this case, let’s be honest, mostly genetics determining body shape) certainly makes the difference between becoming an Olympic gold medalist and just being very good at the sport, but you need to get very far in the field before it truly holds you back.

I don’t have a lot of experience with high-level professional sports, but I’m a classically trained violinist, and I’ve seen first-hand how a lot of the abilities that many people chalk up to “talent” (sense of rhythm, perfect pitch, composing music) are just skills that can be learned. Some students might need to practice more than others, sure, and some might reach a higher ceiling, but I firmly believe anyone can reach a high level with applied effort.

“I don’t have the talent to paint so I won’t learn to do it” is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
by anonnon | 2026-02-24 09:15:55+00:00
A lot of the interest in Ladybird and its parent project, SerenityOS, stemmed from the bespoke, "from scratch" approach Andreas advocated. If they're going to start vibe-coding everything, then what's the point of the top-to-bottom wheel reinvention they're doing? E.g., why even bother maintaining their own, custom XML parser instead of using any of the multitude that already exist (including in Rust) if they're going to develop their own using AI to laundering the code of previous implementations?

This project, of all of them, throwing in the towel on AI makes me fear AI abstainers have no future.
by antitoxic | 2026-02-24 09:16:44+00:00
That is exactly the trust I mean. You need to trust that country X gives out valid IDs. If you have sketchy company Y giving out IDs to everyone, you probably would not trust any attributes derived from that ID. If you trust that a country gives out valid IDs, you can trust the information derived from that ID. You do not really need to trust your government any more than that for this system to work.