MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Jensson | 2026-02-06 16:31:50+00:00
Why is it good that you need self control to not get slop? Its much better if you can just turn that off and relax rather than having to stay alert to avoid certain content that it tries to trick you to serve you more slop.

Distancing yourself from temptations is an effective and proven way to get rid of addictions, the programs constantly trying to get you to relapse is not a good feature. Like imagine a fridge that constantly puts in beer, that would be very bad for alcoholics and people would just say "just don't drink the beer?" even though this is a real problem with an easy fix.
by xp84 | 2026-02-06 16:32:02+00:00
I try to react as “violently” as possible to any slop and low-quality crap (e.g. stupid “life hacks” purposely bad to ragebait the comments). On YouTube it’s called “Don’t recommend this channel” and on Facebook it’s multiple taps but you can “Hide All From…”
Basically, I don’t trust that thumbs down is sufficient. It is of course silly, since there are no doubt millions of bad channels and I probably can’t mute them all.
by skygazer | 2026-02-06 16:32:09+00:00
1Blocker, with their in-app tracker blocking turned on, will block Apple News ads on iOS/iPadOS and will also block ads in Google News and free to play games. I guess you can’t block tracking without also blocking the ads. It installs a local VPN profile that blocks connections to hosts typically blocked with dns based ad blockers. They’ve increasingly hidden the feature in the app, for some reason.
Show HN: A password system with no database, no sync, and nothing to breach
by KevinChasse | 2026-02-06 16:32:12+00:00
Hi HN,
Bastion Enclave is an experiment in removing centralized trust from password management by eliminating server-side state entirely.
Instead of storing an encrypted vault or syncing secrets through a backend, Bastion computes credentials deterministically on-the-fly using explicit cryptographic inputs. Given the same master entropy, service name, username, and version counter, the same password is reproduced across platforms. There is no account system, no database, and no persistent server storage — the server serves static code only.
Password generation uses domain-separated salts and PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512 (210k iterations) to produce a byte stream, followed by unbiased rejection sampling to avoid modulo bias when mapping to character sets. Nothing is stored; passwords are derived when needed and discarded immediately after use.
When users choose to persist data locally (vault state, notes, file keys), encryption is handled separately using Argon2id (64 MB memory, 3 iterations) to derive a master key, followed by AES-256-GCM for authenticated encryption. All plaintext exists only in volatile memory; closing the tab tears down the runtime.
Recovery and key escrow are handled via Shamir Secret Sharing over a large prime field (secp256k1 order) using a hybrid scheme: the secret is encrypted with a random session key, and only that key is split into shards. Invalid or mismatched shards fail cryptographically via AEAD tag verification.
The security claim here is architectural, not policy-based: no stored vaults, no encrypted blobs on servers, no sync endpoints, and no recovery infrastructure to subpoena or breach. Attacking Bastion means attacking individual devices, not a centralized honeypot.
This design intentionally trades convenience (sync, automated recovery) for reduced attack surface and deterministic guarantees. It assumes a trusted local execution environment and a strong master secret; it does not attempt to defend against a compromised OS or browser runtime.
Live demo: https://bastion-enclave.vercel.app
Spec / source / threat model: https://github.com/imkevinchasse/Bastion-Enclave-repo-V2
I’d appreciate critique of the threat model and whether this class of design meaningfully removes attack vectors inherent to cloud-based managers.
by jghn | 2026-02-06 16:32:21+00:00
I find this and Starship Troopers to fit in a similar niche for me. When I first saw them I found them very cringey, horrible, couldn't stand it. Hackers for the reasons being discussed here. ST because of how bastardized it was from the source material.

But over time I grew to love both of them. In both cases I started to appreciate how they weren't trying to be faithful representations, but rather capture a particular ethos in a cheesy & over the top way. And both of them I think hit their mark well in that regard.
by lemax | 2026-02-06 16:32:38+00:00
Yes, we're in for more headless interfaces and there are existing products that will struggle to serve these new interaction models due to organizational constraints. But I don't think it's as simple as asking "are they a system of record" as we think about the companies that will adapt and thrive and the new ones that will come. Enterprises are investing AI spend into improving core processes and responding to competitive pressure, not saving money and introducing risk into areas they have historically delegated to vendors. AI is going to give us more software, and increase spending as firms seek efficiency in new areas, and they're going to continue to knock on doors of vendors to do it as they always have. Not to mention the demand for auditable, repeatable workflows is still there and always going to be there and dedicated systems are needed to solve this in each problem domain.
by apparent | 2026-02-06 16:32:42+00:00
Sure, we do let people do that. The thing that's objectionable is when a suburban neighborhood is rezoned by people who live hundreds of miles away, and developers get the green light to build towers there. Why do people who don't live in a place think they're entitled to change the zoning of that place?

What's to stop them from saying that it should now be zoned for industrial, and a chemical treatment plant can open up next door to a school? It's the same line of thinking.
by antves | 2026-02-06 16:33:54+00:00
There are pros and cons to running the browser on your own machine

For example, with remote browsers you get to give your swarm of agents unlimited and always-on browsers that they can use concurrently without being bottlenecked by your device resources

I think we tend to default to thinking in terms of one agent and one browser scenarios because we anthropomorphize them a lot, but really there is no ceiling to how parallel these workflows can become once you unlock autonomous behavior
by iwanttocomment | 2026-02-06 16:34:14+00:00
I was hoping the comments would be full of similar stories, in which a demon makes a half-hearted effort to pull you into his clutches, only to be naively blown off, then not thought of again until his true nature was revealed.

Our story of this sort comes from when my partner interviewed at Theranos (!) long before the collapse or any public recognition, related the super-creepy interview process, and I was like "sounds like a big no to me." When the Theranos story blew up it was like "oh boy".
by colechristensen | 2026-02-06 16:34:17+00:00
>And leave those who don't in peace?

That's not what's happening.

People who are living like that are being invaded by high density people who want to live in high density in their communities. They want to take over and force people out.

And generally they just want to flip. Find somewhere cheap and make it expensive to make money by lowering everybody's quality of life and calling it progress.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-02-06 16:34:36+00:00
Before LLMs and now more than a decade ago in my career, I was assigned a task and my job was to translate that task into a working implementation. I was guided by the “guesses” that other developers made. I had to trust that they could do FizzBuzz competently without having to tell them to use the mod operator

Then my job became I am assigned a larger implementation and depending on how large the implementation was, I had to design specifications for others to do some or all of the work and validate the final product for correctness. I definitely didn’t pore over every line of code - especially not for front end work that I stopped doing around the same time.

The same is true for LLMs. I treat them like junior developers and slowly starting to treat them like halfway competent mid level ticket takers.
by dns_snek | 2026-02-06 16:34:37+00:00
Can you support this unfalsifiable reasoning beyond blaming a convenient political scapegoat? Which paragraph of which article of which regulation requires them to deliver low-resolution PDFs in Apple News, for example? What about all the other issues?

Your argument essentially boils down to: If Apple doesn't get to do whatever they want without compromise, their execs get too discouraged and depressed to innovate. The obvious conclusion is that the only way we can enjoy the unrivaled genius of Apple is to give them a blank check to do whatever they want.

Every act of consumer protection and every form of pro-competitive regulation is twisted and exaggerated, no matter how insignificant it is to their bottom line or product functionality. The world is ending any time they don't get their way and when the world doesn't end, this decision becomes the scapegoat for all of their future faults, missteps, and bad performance. They can never do anything wrong and nothing is ever their fault, it's so so incredibly tiring to listen to this.
Show HN: Daily-updated database of malicious browser extensions
by toborrm9 | 2026-02-06 16:34:39+00:00
Hey HN, I built an automated system that tracks malicious Chrome/Edge extensions daily.

The database updates automatically by monitoring chrome-stats for removed extensions and scanning security blogs. Currently tracking 1000+ known malicious extensions with extension IDs, names, and dates.

I'm working on detection tools (GUI + CLI) to scan locally installed extensions against this database, but wanted to share the raw data first since maintained threat intelligence lists like this are hard to find.

The automation runs 24/7 and pushes updates to GitHub. Free to use for research, integration into security tools, or whatever you need.

Happy to answer questions about the scraping approach or data collection methods.
by Vagabundos | 2026-02-06 16:35:33+00:00
Location: Europe (Romania)

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python (primary), FastAPI, Django, Flask, PostgreSQL, DynamoDB, OpenSearch, AWS (Lambda, Step Functions, Kinesis), async APIs, REST/gRPC, LLM tooling (RAG), TypeScript (secondary), Docker/Kubernetes (working knowledge)

Résumé/CV:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RE7PQS71RwVrSEnvhvDImIKnuIG...

Email:ovidiumax1994@gmail.com
by munk-a | 2026-02-06 16:36:13+00:00
It is completely unreasonable for a society to do a careful cost-benefit analysis of everything in society - it's completely reasonable for a society to identify highly harmful things (especially those that hijack our brains through direct chemical or emotional addiction) and police those, or, as per Portugal's approach, make available societal supports to allow people to better cope with that addiction. The later isn't very reasonable to expect in a world of rising austerity due to financialization so the former seems more realistic.
by vee-kay | 2026-02-06 16:36:56+00:00
TLDR: so we all got your opinion then:

No need for American children to die or suffer due to risky unproven drugs (made by Western Big Pharma in partnership with American billionaires) as clinical trials, when it is far cheaper for the American billionaires and their Western Big Pharma coterie to just coerce those unproven risky drugs on tens of thousands of unsuspecting poor Indian minor girls without informed consent under guise of "study" (rather than "clinical trials" with all the constraints, medical insurance, scrutiny, requisite approvals, etc. mandated for clinical trials of drugs in development).

Who cares if poor Indians die, eh, is that your take? Let billionaire Bill Gates party with his child molesting pals on island getaway with their captive trafficked minor girls, while his risky unproven drugs kill or hurt minor girls in some poorer country across the world.

Yeah, we are able to connect the dots now, thanks.

Here's my TLDR: Evil is, as evil does.
by garciasn | 2026-02-06 16:37:12+00:00
I appreciate that, but for the audience here on HN, I’m fairly certain we understand the trade offs or potentially have more compute resources available to us than you might expect the general user to have.

Offer up the locally hosted option and it’ll be more widely adopted by those who actually want to use it as opposed to tinker.

I know this may not fit into your “product vision”, however.
by mothballed | 2026-02-06 16:37:15+00:00
My county eliminated code compliance checks (and building plan review) 2 decades ago for owner-builders and it's made things so much cheaper and easier to build. It is the only way I was able to afford a house.

We were warned by nay-sayers the county would burn down but that never came to fruition and meanwhile I've seen so many code-Nazi places in California burn down from wildfires.

It's hilarious watching the systematic destruction of the counter points when people tell me about the horrors

(1) "You wouldn't want to live in such a house, it would burn down." I already do, and have been.

(2) Your neighborhood would catch fire. I live in such a neighborhood, it didn't.

(3) Just wait long enough! It will happen eventually. Eventually you'll have bad luck! This has been going on for 20+ years*.
by WarmWash | 2026-02-06 16:37:20+00:00
Welcome to the sound of spring/summer/fall in the suburbs. 7am to 6pm, 6 days a week. BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Most landscaping teams have 2-3 dedicated guys who do nothing but leaf blow the entire time they are at a house. Towns have been largely unsuccessful in curbing this, mostly because demand for landscaping services is so high.
by cogman10 | 2026-02-06 16:37:35+00:00
Here's where I come out and maybe others end up in the same scenario.

I think it's definitely a good thing to build up more high density housing. I've got no complaints there.

However, a major problem we are having locally is that while that local housing is being built like gangbusters, the infrastructure to support that housing, such as the roads and public transport, hasn't been upgraded in tandem. 10 years ago, I could drive to work in 20 minutes. Today during rush hour it's a 40 to 60 minute affair. It's start/stop traffic through the neighborhood because there's no buses, interstate, etc to service the area where all the growth is happening.

It also doesn't help that promised projects, like new parks, have been stuck in limbo for the last 15 years with more than a few proposals to try and turn that land into new housing developments.

What I'm saying is housing is important and nice, but we actually need public utilities to be upgraded and to grow with the housing increase. It's untenable to add 10,000 housing units into an area originally designed to service 1000.
by triceratops | 2026-02-06 16:38:16+00:00
> They want to take over and force people out.

How do you "force" people out? The existing owners have to sell land, and once they do the new owners have as much right to decide as the other residents. Are there thugs going door to door forcing sellers to sign papers?

Allowing higher density construction doesn't mean higher density must get built there. That's still up to the property owner to decide. True freedom.
by shoxidizer | 2026-02-06 16:38:23+00:00
The use of "back yard" refers to the local area, not the literal extent of one's property. This usage is not unique to NIMBY and it's derivatives. YIMBY sentiment also clearly extends beyond developers themselves and simple libertine principles. Many people want development to occur around them, in their back-yard so to speak, because they prefer it occurs. The semantic change you're arguing for erases this concept just to sidestep the notion of local community. It's a needlessly aggravating approach when the simple answer is just that both NIMBY and YIMBY advocates can support their cause beyond their own area because they believe their cohort is right and deserves it.
by btown | 2026-02-06 16:38:43+00:00
Yea, the Monolith paper by Bytedance uses Flink but they only say it's in use for their B2B ecommerce optimization system. Maybe this is intentional ambiguity, but I'd believe that they wouldn't rely on something like Flink for their core TikTok infrastructure.

My hunch is we start to learn a lot more about the core internals as Oracle tries to market to B2B customers, as Oracle is wont to do!
by gylterud | 2026-02-06 16:39:34+00:00
I owe so much to this blog! It was such an inspiring read when I started out programming in Haskell back in 2007.

Today I am a professor in computer science and still draw on it for examples in my advanced functional programming course. Just last week we did the loeb function, as an example of interesting use of Functor.

Loeb function:
http://blog.sigfpe.com/2006/11/from-l-theorem-to-spreadsheet...
by dualogy | 2026-02-06 16:39:38+00:00
> 90s/early 2000s breakbeat songs

Can recommend such a mix, too. Gather select works of The Chemical Brothers, The Dust Brothers, Bassbin Twins, Crystal Method, DJ Krush, Dub Pistols, Lunatic Calm, Meat Katie... and you're Somewhen Else during it. Works for commutes/trips, too.
by DavidYoussef | 2026-02-06 16:39:42+00:00
The article nails the core issue but I think misdiagnoses the solution space.

The problem isn't that AI code review exists - it's that current tools are
solving the wrong problem. They review code that humans wrote. The actual
crisis is reviewing code that AI wrote.

When AI increases code volume by 10x but reviewer count stays flat, you
don't need better review tools. You need risk triage. Not every PR deserves
the same attention:

- Typo fix to a README? L0. Auto-approve with an evidence log.
- New utility function with tests? L1. One model scans it, posts findings.
- Changes to auth middleware or payment flow? L3. Three models have to reach
consensus before a human even looks at it.
- Production deployment config? L4. Models + mandatory human sign-off.

We've been building this (codeguard-action on GitHub, MIT licensed) - a
GitHub Action that classifies PR risk, runs multi-model review proportional
to that risk, and produces a cryptographic evidence bundle proving what was
checked. The evidence is hash-chained and independently verifiable offline
with a separate tool.

The point isn't to replace human reviewers. It's to stop burning them out
on L0-L1 changes so they have capacity for the L3-L4 ones that actually
matter.

The 786-PR-backlog problem mentioned upthread isn't a review problem. It's
a triage problem.
by xp84 | 2026-02-06 16:39:45+00:00
I am just as uncomfortable with this banning of ideas, or to look at it another way, banning designing it this way simply because it’s effective. I assume this exact same design would not be made illegal if it were terrible at increasing engagement. However I also have to acknowledge that I already can’t stand what TikTok and its ilk have done to attention spans and how addictive they are even across several generations. People just end up sitting there and thumb-twitching while the algorithm pipes handpicked slop into their brains for hours a day. I really don’t want a world where everything is just like this, but even more refined and effective. So, it’s tough to argue that we should just let these sociopaths do this to everyone.

Arguably, the best reason for the government to care is that whoever controls this algorithm, especially in a future when it’s twice as entrenched as it is today, has an unbelievably unfair advantage in influencing public opinion.
by toss1 | 2026-02-06 16:40:07+00:00
>>everyone (even governments/corporations!) is free to observe everyone else in that same setting

If you want to manually observe me in public, as in WITH A HUMAN PERSON'S LIVING EYEBALLS, go right ahead.

Even if you want to use a manually-operated still or video camera and microphone, one device per person, go ahead. Or even a radar gun operated by a human, one observer with one device.

But if you start littering the entire planet with cameras and create a panopticon, even if it is absolutely in public space, that is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT, and absolutely infringing on any reasonable concept of public/private space!

Consider simple speeding. An ordinary person who usually follows speed limits will rarely get stopped and fined, even if they occasionally exceed a limit in an emergency or when doing the safest thing in dense traffic that is over the speed limit, match the speed of traffic. But with universal surveillance, even watching 100% in public spaces, that person in an emergency could get dozens of tickets for minor infractions.

This is setting up Cardinal Richlieu's ideal tyranny: "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged."

With a panopticon of all public spaces, any petty tyrant can find enough evidence in six minutes to imprison anyone.

[0] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu
by wat10000 | 2026-02-06 16:40:13+00:00
Those are policy decisions not really connected to the sandboxing technology. They control what sort of signing the system will accept and make it so that it only runs things they approve, and they only approve things that are sandboxed a certain way. The exact same sandboxing could be used with a system where an admin user can decide what gets to run and what kind of sandboxing is required for each thing.
by eigen | 2026-02-06 16:40:26+00:00
> Year over year price hikes with minimal improvements

did you have a specific example in mind? It seems that the price of the hardware generally stays the same from year to year.

for example, from iphone 3g to iphone 6s was $199. and iphone 12 through today's iphone 17 is $799. I think the change in the middle was due dropping carrier subsidies and going to full-screen with face id.
by shauhss | 2026-02-06 16:40:45+00:00
Because testing at this level is a likely impossible across all domains of programming. You can narrow the set of inputs and get relatively far, but the more complex the systems the broader the space of problems becomes. And even a simple crud app on an EC2 has a lot more failure modes than people are able to test for with current tools.

> passes a real test suite (not toy tests)

“not toy tests” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Like an immeasurable amount of lifting.
by Erem | 2026-02-06 16:41:05+00:00
State law recently increased my neighborhood’s density. It’s obliging these towns to do the same. I’m happy about both, which makes me YIMBY like the people in this organization

Let’s remember, CA is in a housing CRISIS. I feel an immediate urgency to build as many houses as possible in this state so that my young children can feasibly afford to live here without being an AI engineer when they are adults
by xnorswap | 2026-02-06 16:41:07+00:00
Isn't the very worst aspect of that very scene, the CGI part rather than the practical effects part?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI

Sure, the tank rolling at the bottom looks a bit like a model, but it isn't nearly as jarring as the part where the shot of the guy in the tank looks like it came from another world entirely and has been badly edited in on top.