MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by helaoban | 2026-03-06 22:36:48+00:00
>Another culture clash, this time between Discovery’s unscripted empire and Warner’s premium sensibilities, a wannabe mogul overpaying so he could cosplay as Robert Evans (ask Claude), and a 5x debt-to-EBITDA ratio. The good news? The sequel had a short runtime. CEO David Zaslav slashed costs, engineered a good bank / bad bank structure to spin WBD’s declining linear assets, and ultimately orchestrated a bidding war that restored shareholder value. As an operator, Zaz is Ed Wood (see: the worst branding decision in history, deprecating HBO), but as an investment banker, he’s Steven Spielberg.

WTF is this slop? I've never seen a an article so riddled with analogies and pop culture references that actively degrade the ability to understand whatever argument might be lurking behind the obscurantism.

What body of work has Scott Galloway produced that should cause me or any other reader to suffer this kind of self-indulgence normally found in a 8th grade creative writing class, in the hopes of learning something meaningful about these topics?

Gurus are going to guru I guess.
by TimorousBestie | 2026-03-06 22:37:00+00:00
> I know it's difficult for Westerners to grasp how someone could pray for their own death but this is what they do.

I think some Americans have familiarity with the concept. There’s a somewhat popular myth within Evangelical Christianity that reasons that the US itself needs to be destroyed before the Rapture can occur, because there is no mention of the US in any prophecy. (I’ve heard Micah 4 cited as one possible reference but it’s a flimsy one, even by apocalypse prophecy standards.)

Here is one variant of this myth in the context of the current conflict: https://baptistnews.com/article/the-end-times-theology-drivi...
by nerevarthelame | 2026-03-06 22:37:48+00:00
The author going to silly lengths to write in a way that will be perceived as non-artificial, even though they find those traits (improper capitalization, spelling mistakes, etc.) crude and distasteful. But they ultimately realize that they also need to transform their fundamental writing style, which would supposedly be impossible because it's a reflection of who they are. So the only way to do that, ironically, is to pass their writing through an LLM.

I do not think the author genuinely used an LLM to write the post.
by akudha | 2026-03-06 22:37:57+00:00
Can someone ELI5 how this would work? Is it possible to accurately calculate the amount, with the tariff percentages changing on a weekly basis? If companies do get refunds, do they just keep it? After all, it was the end user who paid/pays, isn’t it?

Also, do/will these companies drop prices if/when tariffs are reversed?
by BoorishBears | 2026-03-06 22:38:10+00:00
Your list is places that treat development as a cost center, but greenfield-only devs don't want to touch that work with a 10-foot pole.

And if your entire career is nothing maintenance and sustaining projects, you'll never know what decisions it takes to build a greenfield application that lives long enough to become a graybeard.

You'll think you do because you see all the mistakes they made, but you'll only have cynical reasons for why those mistakes get made like "they don't care, they just make a mess and move on to the next job" or "they don't bother learning the tools/craft deeply enough moving, it's all speed for them".

-

To indulge myself in the niceness a bit: I don't think you write comments like the one above if you've done both, yet having done both feels like an obvious requirement to be a well-rounded Staff/Principal.

Most maintenance work suffers because of decisions made at the 0 to 1 stage. And most greenfield work fails entirely, never maturing to the maintenance stage.

So both sides have to do something right in the face of challenges unique to their side. And having familiarity with both is extremely valuable for technical leadership.
by mothballed | 2026-03-06 22:38:40+00:00
Yes but the sleight of hand here is to just simply say "taxpayer."

The taxpayer that paid the tariff was the consumer. The fact Nintendo actually wrote the check is largely accounting, this was passed on to the consumer.

The taxpayer that receives the refund is Nintendo, straight into their profits.

So the taxpayer paying and the taxpayer receiving are totally different. This is basically like regressive welfare where consumer paid a private but government imposed tax to corporations.
by Spivak | 2026-03-06 22:38:46+00:00
This is why I said DNC. That wasn't just a cool synonym for Democrats. The leadership of the party sits way further right of the average Democratic voter. Someone who is right leaning has more in common with an establishment democrat than the new Conservative-led GOP.

This is also why capital-M Moderate Republicans (who have a near circle overlap with the "Never Trump" movement) are so attractive to Republicans and Democrats alike in purple states.
by matheusmoreira | 2026-03-06 22:39:41+00:00
ECC also reports error recovery statistics to the operating system. Lets you know if any unrecoverable errors happened. Lets you calculate the error rate which means you can try to predict when your memory modules are going bad.

I think this sort of reporting is a pretty basic feature that should come standard on all hardware. No idea why it's an "enterprise" feature. This market segmentation is extremely annoying and shouldn't exist.
by jadebound | 2026-03-06 22:39:52+00:00
If anyone else is looking for a video generator with zero restrictions, this is the one.
I’ve been playing around with Unbound AI for the last few days and honestly, it’s a total breath of fresh air. It’s the first time I’ve used an AI video tool that doesn't sanitize my prompts or block me every five seconds. I’m getting quality and fluid motion, but the best part is that it actually generates exactly what I type in.

I also found a promo code UNBOUND15AI for 15% off.
by whilo | 2026-03-06 22:39:55+00:00
Hi HN - I’m the author of Stratum.

Stratum is a columnar SQL engine built on the JVM exploring two ideas:

• SIMD execution using the Java Vector API

• copy-on-write branching for tables

It speaks the PostgreSQL wire protocol, so tools like psql, JDBC, and DBeaver work out of the box.

The engine is pure JVM (no JNI). In benchmarks on 10M rows it performs competitively with DuckDB on many analytical queries.

GitHub repo:
https://github.com/replikativ/stratum

Benchmarks and methodology are described in the docs.

Happy to answer questions - feedback very welcome.
Show HN: Sqry – semantic code search using AST and call graphs
by verivusai | 2026-03-06 22:40:36+00:00
I built sqry, a local code search tool that works at the semantic level rather
than the text level.

The motivation: ripgrep is great for finding strings, but it can't tell you
"who calls this function", "what does this function call", or "find all public
async functions that return Result". Those questions require understanding code
structure, not just matching patterns.

sqry parses your code into an AST using tree-sitter, builds a unified call/
import/dependency graph, and lets you query it:

sqry query "callers:authenticate"
sqry query "kind:function AND visibility:public AND lang:rust"
sqry graph trace-path main handle_request
sqry cycles
sqry ask "find all error handling functions"

The `sqry ask` command translates natural language into sqry query syntax
locally, using a compact 22M-parameter model with no network calls.

Some things that might be interesting to HN:

- 35 language plugins via tree-sitter (C, Rust, Go, Python, TypeScript, Java,
SQL, Terraform, and more)
- Cross-language edge detection: FFI linking (Rust↔C/C++), HTTP route matching
(JS/TS↔Python/Java/Go)
- 33-tool MCP server so AI assistants get exact call graph data instead of
relying on embedding similarity
- Arena-based graph with CSR storage; indexed queries run ~4ms warm
- Cycle detection, dead code analysis, semantic diff between git refs

It's MIT-licensed and builds from source with Rust 1.90+. Fair warning: full
build takes ~20 GB disk because 35 tree-sitter grammars compile from source.

Repo: https://github.com/verivusai-labs/sqry
Docs: https://sqry.dev

Happy to answer questions about the architecture, the NL translation approach,
or the cross-language detection.
by aeonfox | 2026-03-06 22:41:17+00:00
> You could just as easily describe someone with bootstrapping experience as being like an FAA crash investigator who investigates take offs.

Takeoff systems aren't analogous to prototype development. I don't know you'd build a prototype plane that's feasible to take to market, without having deep knowledge about how planes are built.

Early design decisions matter. And you don't get to that realisation without dealing with legacy systems where some upstart made terrible decisions that you're now responsible for.
by vaxman | 2026-03-06 22:41:27+00:00
Are we in the Cathedral or the Bazaar now? I get that confused. Everyone upload their code to GitHub --keep your truth (philosophically AND mathematically) in the Cloud ;) Oh and don't forget to document your critical thinking, on Slack. It goes much deeper tho.

[cue the POS https://youtu.be/SP-gN1zoI28]
by zackmorris | 2026-03-06 22:41:56+00:00
Yours is maybe the first good post on managing a team of AIs that I've read. There is no spoon.

I've been shifting from being the know-it-all coder who fixes all of the problems to a middle manager of AIs over the past few months. I'm realizing that most of what I've been doing for the last 25 years of my career has largely been a waste of time, due to how the web went from being an academic pursuit to a profit-driven one. We stopped caring about how the sausage was made, and just rewarded profit under a results-driven economic model. And those results have been self-evidently disastrous for anyone who cares about process or leverage IMHO. So I ended up being a custodian solving other people's mistakes which I would never make, rather than architecting elegant greenfield solutions.

For example, we went from HTML being a declarative markup language to something imperative. Now rather than designing websites like we were writing them in Microsoft Word and exporting them to HTML, we write C-like code directly in the build product and pretend that's as easy as WYSIWYG. We have React where we once had content management systems (CMSs). We have service-oriented architectures rather than solving scalability issues at the runtime level. I could go.. forever. And I have in countless comments on HN.

Anyway, none of that matters now, because AI handles the implementation details. Now it's about executive function to orchestrate the work. An area I'm finding that I'm exceptionally weak in, due to a lifetime of skirting burnout as I endlessly put out fires without the option to rest.

So I think the challenge now is to unlearn everything we've learned. Somehow, we must remember why we started down this road in the first place. I'm hopeful that AI will facilitate that.

Anyway, I'm sure there was a point I was making somewhere in this, but I forgot what it was. So this is more of a "you're not alone in this" comment I guess.
by Barrin92 | 2026-03-06 22:42:09+00:00
turns out it is for a lot of players which is why the kind of game is extinct. Just like in the real world, there's a fine line between risk and adventure and walking into something that looks like Liu Cixin's the Dark Forest.

You want enough friction to generate interesting interactions, you don't want so much freedom that the worst exploiters start to crowd out every honest player, because then, just like in a rundown lawless neighborhood, you're getting a lesson in the broken window theory and you're only left with the scammers.
by squidbeak | 2026-03-06 22:42:24+00:00
Read the comment I replied to to see where the bread came from.

But on your point (which seems to hinge on wish thinking), this infinity of new features you propose for every product still needs those new markets you take for granted to justify their inclusion in the product. However cornering a new market isn't as straightforward as deploying a new feature - we all wish it was. The tech that makes it trivial for one firm to develop these features, makes it trivial for everyone else to build them. This means any new market will be immediately saturated.

Even if the leap of finding new markets was as easy as you think, you still need to explain why this hypothetical company would keep paying millions in avoidable salaries. Because whatever jobs you assign to AI, it won't be any less available to do the work of the human labor.
by sigseg1v | 2026-03-06 22:42:43+00:00
Ya I could see where framework patterns and stuff will need a lot of corrections in post after that type of migration. For mine it was the other direction and only the server portion (Express server written in typescript for a Phaser game, and porting to Kestrel on C#, which was able to use pretty much identical code and at the end after it was done I just switch and refactor ba few things to make it more idiomatic C#).

For the tests, I'm not sure why we have such different results but essentially it took a codebase I had no tests in, and in the port it one shot a ton of tests that have already helped me in adding new features. My game server for it runs in kubernetes and has a "auto-distribute" system that matches players to servers and redistributes them if one server is taken offline. The integration tests it wrote for testing that auto-distribute system found a legit race condition that was there in both the old and new code (it migrated it accurately enough that it had the same bugs) and as part of implementing that test it fixed the bug.

Of course I wouldn't use it if it wasn't a good tool but for me the difference between doing this port via this method versus doing it manually in prior massive projects was such an insane time save that I would have been crazy to do it any other way. I'm super happy with the new code and after also getting the test infra and stuff like that up it's honestly a huge upgrade from my original code that I thought I had so painstakingly crafted.
by mothballed | 2026-03-06 22:42:49+00:00
The smartest comment I've seen was a proposal to use a negative tariff until the refunds are offset. At least in that case there is some bit of chance that the consumer gets their money back since the supply curve should shift up lowering apparent prices until the negative tax fades off. I'm sure many will point out all the flaws with that and the fact some of it will be captured as profit anyway, but it seems better than dumping 100% of it to profit which is what happens if you just refund to the importer of record.
by Aerroon | 2026-03-06 22:42:59+00:00
And why would countries adopt this? So that other countries can use this cartel to push their own agenda? If anything it seems like it would be in every country's best interests to make sure such an organization doesn't exist.

In my opinion one of the reasons why European economies have been struggling for a long time is because energy has been much more expensive than elsewhere. Part of it is the excise tax on gasoline because it drives up the price of everything.

Even to this day EU countries where people earn less than a third of what Americans earn still pay more for gasoline.
by boca_honey | 2026-03-06 22:43:04+00:00
Your 26% figure refers to the Total Consumer Compute Market 14 years ago (not 10, it's now 30% btw)... but that includes smartphones and tablets, not just PCs.

You specifically mentioned

> when was the last time you knew someone that went out and bought a Windows-based computer for anything other than gaming?

So, lets talk about that:

https://safeitexperts.com/en/2025-desktop-operating-system-m...

You are being deliberately opaque, but this is HN and your jerry-rigged data won't fly without scrutiny.
by wisty | 2026-03-06 22:43:10+00:00
Yes I too have seen the 2022 Perun video where an Australian Youtuber gives a lesson on Russian linguisics, but I'm not certain he's right.

English also has more than one words for lies - lies, falsehoods, fibs, bs, prevarication.

Yeah sometimes we know stuff is a load of crap at work, but we gotta humour the process. Maybe it's 10x as bad in Russia. But I've seen little independent evidence those words Perun used mean completely different things, I think he's just accidently exhaggerating a possible bit of nuance.
by phasnox | 2026-03-06 22:44:00+00:00
> Switch to EV

Most people can't afford one

> -Migrate from gas appliances (range, furnace, water heater) to electric (induction, heat pumps)

Electricity is considerably more expensive, people that leave paycheck to paycheck would not be able to afford it

Here are somethings YOU can do personally to help:

- Never fly in an airplane again

- Never use ANY vehicle again, walk everywhere(yes EVs also pollute)

- In the winter, don't turn on the heat.

- Eat only vegetables and things you don't need to cook

- etc

If you are not doing ALL OF THESE you have no right on telling other people how they produce their CO2.
Show HN: key-carousel - Key rotation for LLM agents
by EmptyDrum | 2026-03-06 22:44:01+00:00
I think in-process key management is the right abstraction for multi-key LLM setups. Not LiteLLM, not a Redis queue, not a custom load balancer.

The failure modes are well-understood: a key gets rate-limited, you wait, you try the next one. Billing errors need a longer cooldown than rate limits. This is not a distributed systems problem — it's a state machine that fits in a library.
The problem is everyone keeps solving it with infrastructure instead. Spin up LiteLLM, now you have a Python service to maintain. Reach for Redis, now you have a database for a problem that doesn't need one.
key-carousel manages a pool of API key profiles with exponential-backoff cooldowns: 1min → 5min → 25min → 1hr for rate limits, 5hr → 24hr for billing. Falls back to OpenAI or Gemini when Anthropic keys are exhausted. Optional file persistence. Zero dependencies.
Show HN: Flompt – Visual prompt builder that decomposes prompts into blocks
by hkonte | 2026-03-06 22:45:03+00:00
Anthropic's research shows prompt structure matters more than model choice. Flompt takes any raw prompt, decomposes it into 12 typed blocks (role, context, objective, constraints, examples, chain-of-thought, output format, etc.), and compiles them into Claude-optimized XML.

Three interfaces: web app (React Flow canvas), browser extension (injects into ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini toolbars), and MCP server for Claude Code.

Stack: React + TypeScript + React Flow + Zustand, FastAPI + Claude API backend, Caddy.

Free, no account, open-source. Demo: https://youtu.be/hFVTnnw9wIU
by SpicyLemonZest | 2026-03-06 22:45:08+00:00
The way that tariffs work is, some specific person (often a corporate person) performs the act of importation into the United States, and that person is charged an amount which they need to pay before they're allowed to take their goods from the warehouse. In this case Nintendo is that person, and both they and the government presumably have records of what they paid.

Whether some downstream consumer of those imported goods paid a price that would have been lower if not for the tariff is a commercial question between them and whoever they paid. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't have. There isn't any objective way to calculate what the price of suchandsuch Nintendo product would have been in the counterfactual.
by coliveira | 2026-03-06 22:45:34+00:00
There is a kind of business people who do most of their money engineering failed business takeovers and mergers. A good example is John C. Malone. This guys is always involved in some takeover or merger of companies, most of the time leading to no gain for investors, but he himself became billionaire with this strategy. Media companies are some of the best ways to engineer these business "opportunities".
by shagie | 2026-03-06 22:45:48+00:00
Most of the money that Nintendo paid and is entitled to have be returned to them has not gone into the government's coffers.

The money that has passed various deadlines may be more difficult to return, however it is still money that is due to Nintendo. That may be more difficult to obtain, but it isn't the government's money in the first place.

US tax payers aren't paying money to Nintendo - they're paying for the government's lawyers to try to argue against not paying back illegally collected tariffs.

https://realeconomy.rsmus.com/ieepa-tariffs-struck-down-what...
by skybrian | 2026-03-06 22:46:10+00:00
The company that paid the tax gets their money back. Whether they decide to make any refunds to their customers is up to them. A few companies have said they would.

This is no different from any other cost. Their cost of goods is lower in retrospect than they thought it was, so it will show up as a gain on their income statement.

What's the economic effect, though? One way to model a tariff that's later refunded is that it's sort of like if a cartel colluded to temporarily keep prices higher. Competition between firms often keeps prices close to costs, but this wouldn't be true for a monopoly or a cartel.
by ivan_gammel | 2026-03-06 22:46:40+00:00
Bias: A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.

Let’s say there are parties A, B and C. A and B offer something populist solutions Sa and Sb to very important problem X, C does not promise anything on it, but offers solution for less important problem Y (single issue party). If voter thinks that Sa and Sb are the only choices, they may choose A or B, because it feels right. If voter was informed that neither Sa, nor Sb solve the problem, but some other solution Sx not supported by any party would do it, party C could become a reasonable choice - at least you get something done this way. This would be impartial judgement. Wahl-O-Mat inhibits this scenario, so yes, it is biased, it is deceptive.
by observationist | 2026-03-06 22:46:44+00:00
Not what I'm saying - if you meet the technical, intentional definition of a process, substantiated by precedent, then the law should support any variation of the process which has those same technical features meeting the definition.

Using AI as a tool to produce output, no matter how complex the underlying tool, should result in the authorship of the output being assigned to the user of the tool.

If autocorrect in Word doesn't nullify copyright, neither should the use of LLMs; manifesting an idea into code and text and images using prompts might have little human input, but the input is still there. And if it's a serious project, into which many hours of revision, back and forth, testing, changing, etc, there should be absolutely no bar to copyright.

I can entertain a dismissal based on specific low effort uses of a tool - something like "generate a 13 chapter novel 240 pages long" and seeing what you get, then attempting to publish the book. But almost anything that involves any additional effort, even specifying the type of novel, or doing multiple drafts, or generating one chapter at a time, would be sufficient human involvement to justify copyright, in my eyes.

There's no good reason to gatekeep copyright like that. It doesn't benefit society, or individuals, it can only benefit those with vast IP hoards and giant corporations, and it's probably fair to say we've all had about enough of that.