MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by SigmundA | 2026-03-05 19:27:33+00:00
>So, Mr Big Boy, now we can get to what a prepared statement in Postgres is.

Yeah not a gotcha at all mr teacher. I think you should stop posting low effort responses and examine your own opportunities for education that may have been missed here.

Lets get this straight prepared statements should not be conflated with caching, yet the only way to cache a plan and avoid a full parse is to use a prepared statement and it is by far the biggest reason to use it and why many poolers and libraries try to prepare statements.

Do you realize how ridiculous this is, here is PG's own docs on the purpose of preparing:

"Prepared statements potentially have the largest performance advantage when a single session is being used to execute a large number of similar statements. The performance difference will be particularly significant if the statements are complex to plan or rewrite"

"Although the main point of a prepared statement is to avoid repeated parse analysis and planning of the statement, PostgreSQL will force re-analysis and re-planning of the statement before using it whenever database objects used in the statement have undergone definitional (DDL) changes or their planner statistics have been updated since the previous use of the prepared statement."

The MAIN POINT of preparing is what I am conflating with it, yes...

If PG cached plans automatically and globally then settings like constraint_exclusion and enable_partition_pruning would not need to exist or at least be on by default because the added overhead of the optimizations during planning would be meaningless.

Seriously this whole thread is Brandolini's law in action you obviously can't articulate how PG is better because it does not have a global plan cache and act like I don't know how PG works? Get real buddy.

Are you going to post another couple sentences with no content or are you done here?
by latexr | 2026-03-05 19:27:37+00:00
> I think notepad.exe is the strongest example of this right now.

It’s a strong bad example, i.e. an example of software with doesn’t know when to stop.

https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2026/01/21/notepad...

https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-20...
by ericmcer | 2026-03-05 19:27:45+00:00
Stardew Valley is a great example of this, and that more is not always better.

Specifically he rolled out a "cave" system with procedural dungeon generation where players could mine through walls and other advanced systems, then undid all of it and ended with ~30 static layouts and very simplistic interactions. The entire game feels like a demonstration that simple, predictable and repeatable interactions with software have more longevity than cutting edge dynamic systems.
by hnfong | 2026-03-05 19:27:47+00:00
The irony of your WoW example is that "retail" WoW basically evolved by Blizzard adding features in response to player feedback where each step when viewed individually seemed reasonable.

And eventually the situation got so "bad" that players realized they actually didn't want any of this (a lot of people have lengthy commentaries on how more in-game friction somehow makes the game better), and then the demand for Classic actually became overwhelming. And even so, I'm not sure Classic consistently has more players than Retail. Probably just two different player bases.
by idopmstuff | 2026-03-05 19:27:58+00:00
I'll grant that it does extend beyond SWEs, but whether AI atrophies skills is entirely up to the user.

I used to use a bookkeeper, but I got Claude a QuickBooks API key and have had it doing my books since then. I give it the same inputs and it generates all the various journal entries, etc. that I need. The difference between using it and my bookkeeper is I can ask it all kinds of questions about why it's doing things and how bookkeeping conventions work. It's much better at explaining than my bookkeeper and also doesn't charge me by the hour to answer. I've learned more about bookkeeping in the past month than in my entire life prior - very much the opposite of skill atrophy.

Claude does a bunch of low-skill tasks in my business, like copying numbers from reports into different systems into a centralized Google Sheet. My muscle memory at running reports and pulling out the info I want has certainly atrophied, but who cares? It was a skill I used because I needed the outcome, not because the skill was useful.

You say that using AI reduces all these skills as though that's an unavoidable outcome over which people have no control, but it's not. You can mindlessly hand tasks off to AI, or you can engage with it as an expert and learn something. In many cases the former is fine. Before AI ever existed, you saw the same thing as people progressed in their careers. The investment banking analyst gets promoted a few times and suddenly her skill at making slide decks has atrophied, because she's delegating that to analysts. That's a desirable outcome, not a tragedy.

Less capability doesn't necessarily mean less agency. If you choose to delegate a task you don't want to do so you can focus on other things, then you are becoming less capable at that skill precisely because you are exercising agency.

Now in fairness I get that I am very lucky in that I have full control of when and how I use AI, while others are going to be forced to use it in order to keep up with peers. But that's the way technology has always been - people who decided they didn't want to move from a typewriter to a word processor couldn't keep up and got left behind. The world changes, and we're forced to adapt to it. You can't go back, but within the current technological paradigm there remains plenty of agency to be had.
by verdverm | 2026-03-05 19:28:06+00:00
This is what Ukraine is doing, but it will always be imperfect. Shahed style drones don't fly a straight path. Ukraine has built out an auditory detection network using cheap phones, has mobile response teams for different types of incoming threats, yet it is still not enough.

Given the resources we are using today, while still seeing drones and ballistics get through, does not bode well for a 100% reliable system.
by socalgal2 | 2026-03-05 19:28:14+00:00
> And people liked that model, see the huge backlash when Adobe went subscription for creative suite.

That backlash was short lived. Adobe went from $4.4 billion in revenue in 2021 to $23.7 billion. It used to cost $2500 for the "master collection". Now it's $50 a month.

I was one of those people that disliked switching to subscription. I stayed on CS6 for years. I'm also only a relatively casual user though. I once tried Affinity Photo for some work. Their workflow, for my needs, would have made me take ~6hrs more time than the similar workflow in Photoshop. So I paid the $120 a year for photoshop/lightroom because $120 is way less than 6hrs of my life. If of course that was my specific case. It might not be true for others. The point was though, $120, at least for me, is not that much money relative to what I charge/get-paid. So I gave in.

Further, Photoshop is a good example (to me) of software that can't stop updating. New formats come out HEIC for example. New cameras with new raw formats come out. New tech comes out. HDR displays are ubiquitous at this point (all apple products, some large percent of Android, PC, and TVs) (which BTW, Photoshop does not yet truly support so expect an upgrade).
by nerali | 2026-03-05 19:28:17+00:00
I like it! It’s aesthetically pleasing and has a nice concept.

There’s still quite a lot that could be refined in terms of UX, visual details, and even the AI-generated texts, as others in the comments have pointed out, but it works well as an MVP. With some polishing over time, it could become a really great app. Great work.
by jimmaswell | 2026-03-05 19:28:37+00:00
This entirely misses the point. Re-implementing code based on API surface and compatibility is established fair use if done properly (Compaq v. IBM, Google v. Oracle). There's nothing wrong with doing that if you don't like a license. What's in question is doing this with AI that may or may not have been trained on the source. In the instance in the article where the result is very different, it's probably in the clear regardless. I'm sympathetic to the author as I generally don't like GPL either outside specific cases where it works well like the Linux kernel.
by krisoft | 2026-03-05 19:28:50+00:00
They asked the authors for fiction “at times”. Meaning that some are fiction, and some very well might not be. The best they can do is try to contact the authors and see if the case report they wrote is fictional or not. The second best is to admit that they made a mess and say “the case reports might or might not be fictional, we have no way of knowing”.
by retired | 2026-03-05 19:29:09+00:00
> people just didn’t use Linux because it required you to know how things worked under the hood.

This is how Windows feels to me now. The very first interaction with Windows when I buy a new computer is to do Shift+F10 and type away some magical terminal commands to get it working.

That I have to use the terminal to get Windows operational after unboxing my new device is insanity.

From my notes:

> net.exe user 'username' 'password' /add

> net.exe localgroup Administrators 'username' /add

> cd oobe

> msoobe.exe && shutdown.exe -r
by dpedu | 2026-03-05 19:29:17+00:00
Yep, came here to look. Says "Hello Select your address" in the header instead of my delivery address, and when I click it to set my address, the modal says "Sorry, content is not available."

Also seeing stock / availability display on product pages acting weird - things unavailable that certainly actually are, like dishwasher detergent.

Error 500 when I change my selected address in the checkout flow too.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-05 19:29:20+00:00
> ego, of course

This is so silly. Do you really not have any hobbies where you spend inordinate time or money on things you could objectively accomplish quicker and cheaper, but having less fun, in other ways? Like, I ski. It’s a silly way to get up and down a hill in the 21st century.

I’m not a watch guy. But mechanical watches are beautiful. There are idiots who buy them. But that doesn’t mean everyone who does is an idiot.
by dgxyz | 2026-03-05 19:29:28+00:00
I think it will change.

The entire web is built on geopolitical stability and cooperation. That is no longer certain. We already have supply chains failing (RAM/storage) meaning that we will be hardware constrained for the foreseeable future. That puts the onus on efficiency and web apps are NOT efficient however we deliver them.

People are also now very concerned about data sovereignty whereas they previously were not. If it's not in your hands or on your computer than it is at risk.

The VC / SaaS / cloud industry is about to get hit very very hard via this and regulation. At that point, it's back to native as delivery is not about being tied to a network control point.

I've been around long enough to see the centralisation and decentralisation cycles. We're heading the other way now
by fryd_w | 2026-03-05 19:29:31+00:00
Co-founder here. Want to add some context on a decision the article doesn't cover: why Slack.

We tested two surfaces early on - a standalone web app and Slack. The web app: clean UI, full control over the experience. But a lot of friction - why open a browser if you can speak to Viktor in the way you speak to your team? Also, in the webapps, users are used to immediate answers. And Viktor needs time to think/work - like your coworker. In slack we're used to longer wait times. In the end - we speak to humans.

Slack won because it's where work already happens. The agent reads the same channels your team does (crucial for the magical moments!), responds in threads, reacts to messages. There's no context switch. When someone asks the agent to "check what John said about the Q3 budget," it can actually go look - because it's already in the channel where John said it.

The tradeoff is real though. You inherit every Slack UX limitation. You can't build custom UI components. Your entire interaction model is text, threads, buttons, and emoji. We've had to get creative - approval workflows through button clicks, rich output through uploaded files, progress updates through emoji reactions. It's constraining, but the constraint forces simplicity that users actually prefer.

The other thing I'd highlight: the skill system is a compounding moat we didn't fully appreciate at first. Every time any user on a team corrects the agent or teaches it something, that knowledge persists for everyone. Six months in, a team's Viktor knows their project IDs, their naming conventions, which endpoints are broken, who prefers what format. A new hire gets the benefit of all that accumulated context on day one. That's not something you get from a chatbot with a system prompt.
by ceejayoz | 2026-03-05 19:29:53+00:00
> Trump, who said he would nominate in her place Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin, made the announcement on social media on Thursday, two days after Noem faced a grilling on Capitol Hill from GOP members as well as Democrats.

One idiot replaced by another. Whee.

> Trump says he’ll make Noem a “Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas,” a new security initiative that he said would focus on the Western Hemisphere.

At least he's learned to keep them in-administration so they don't immediately go write a tell-all book.
by kridsdale1 | 2026-03-05 19:30:50+00:00
Watches were understated in the 70s and turned more to gold in the 80s and a super proliferation of diversity in the 90s. 90s also had machismo Schwarzenegger sized cases for steroid men.

2000s brought Hiphop bling culture to them which embraced maximalism with size further increasing and 85 diamonds and rubies being something worthy of showing.

2010s austerity led to a retreat all the way to 1940s style trench and dress watches, cases back to 38mm.

Post Covid, boldness is having a comeback. See the newest Planet Ocean. We are seeing bling and ostentatious gold again on celebrities this year.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-05 19:31:08+00:00
> movement isn't part of the brand. It's not part of the signal. The case/dial/sometimes band are the brand

The movement was the expensive part. Audemars, Vacheron and Patek only made movements. The retailer would then put it in a case. That’s the entire point of PG’s essay.

> if you couldn't tell them apart, they wouldn't be any good at signaling, the entire point of wearing them

Which might lead you to revise your hypothesis around why these watches were bought and made in the “golden age of watches.” Then as now there is such a thing as quiet luxury.
by benrutter | 2026-03-05 19:31:19+00:00
I think the tricky bit is less proving you bought something, and more proving that the thing you bought cost more than it otherwise would.

As I understand it (which isn't a lot), if you paid a tariff on an overseas order you're theoretically due it back, although that might require taking the government to court, which is gonna cost more than the settlement for most people.
by kseniamorph | 2026-03-05 19:31:36+00:00
makes sense, but i'd separate two things: models converging in ability vs hitting a fundamental ceiling. what we're probably seeing is the current training recipe plateauing — bigger model, more tokens, same optimizer. that would explain the convergence. but that's not necessarily the architecture being maxed out. would be interesting to see what happens when genuinely new approaches get to frontier scale.
by phil21 | 2026-03-05 19:31:50+00:00
> I did not claim this. I claimed most of the money that will be refunded will go to Trump toadies.

That would require most of the money collected being from trump toadies to begin with. Anyone that regularly imports goods as a matter of business will also be requesting their refunds. Only a tiny fraction sold their rights.

> It does matter if the tax that was gathered was illegal, as it is here. The illegally gathered funds should go back to the entity that paid the tax.

The entity that paid the tax was the one that wrote the check to the federal government. They chose to (or not) pass all or a portion of those costs down to their customer. The customer in the end chose to purchase the goods or not.

If your landlord charges you $100/mo more in rent due to a property tax that was later reassessed due to a mistake, they are under no legal obligation to refund you that money. You chose to rent at the higher price.

Simply put: Your recourse was at the time of transaction. After that it’s no longer your money. Plenty of companies get refunded errant taxes paid years later due to law being misapplied or even found outright illegal. This is no different.

The only marginally interesting legal question here is going to be the companies that separated it out as a line item. I imagine this will be roughly as enforceable as “fuel surcharges” are on airline tickets - where the surcharge has nothing to do with the actual real time cost of Jet fuel. It will likely devolve all the way down to specific clauses in contracts, most of which will not cover this to start with. So it may as well be a “I’m wearing black socks today” tax as a line item would be my guess. Very interested in the first few test cases though!
Show HN: Museum Music
by zora_goron | 2026-03-05 19:32:12+00:00
Museum Music is an app a friend and I built to enhance the museum experience with music. I had the habit of visiting museums with headphones in, but felt there was a disconnect between the works I was viewing and what I was listening to.

Museum Music lets you a picture of the exhibit you are viewing, identifies the period of the piece, and generates a contextually-appropriate Spotify soundtrack to accompany you.

It was originally built around two years ago, and LLM technology has considerably improved since then - so this felt like the perfect opportunity to test out coding agents by refactoring and improving the codebase!

Built using the GPT and Spotify APIs.
by wtallis | 2026-03-05 19:33:04+00:00
That's a ridiculously implausible and sensationalized rumor. At most, Microsoft may make a NPU a requirement for OEMs to use the Windows 12 logo on new PCs. Actually refusing to support the existing install base of recent and hughly-capable desktops is not at all likely. It would be far more drastic than the hardware deprecations brought by Windows 11, which were already quite controversial (and loosely enforced).
by zoklet-enjoyer | 2026-03-05 19:33:04+00:00
How do they determine if the person is a US citizen? I've sometimes wondered if my Google account is caught up in mass surveillance of non-Americans because I created my main email address while living in Australia, though I am a US citizen and only a US citizen. I haven't checked in a while, but I know that even in the US, checking my email on the web it would show that it was connecting to an Australian domain.
by dpatterbee | 2026-03-05 19:33:09+00:00
If only one country has an article about something you'd probably think it's an outlier. If every country has the article then you'd more likely think it's just part of life. I didn't make an assertion, I'm not providing evidence.

I don't even disagree with the post, I just don't like seeing shallow dismissals where someone could've actually put effort in to make a point. So I did the same.
by andreadev | 2026-03-05 19:33:24+00:00
The framing in this thread is full-duplex vs composable pipeline, but I think the real architecture is both running simultaneously — and this library is already halfway there.

The fact that qwen3-asr-swift bundles ASR, TTS, and PersonaPlex in one Swift package means you already have all the pieces. PersonaPlex handles the "mouth" — low-latency backchanneling, natural turn-taking, filler responses at RTF 0.87. Meanwhile a separate LLM with tool calling operates as the "brain", and when it returns a result you can fall back to the ASR+LLM+TTS path for the factual answer. taf2's fork (running a parallel LLM to infer when to call tools) already demonstrates this pattern. It's basically how humans work — we say "hmm, let me think about that" while our brain is actually retrieving the answer. We don't go silent for 2 seconds.

The hard unsolved part is the orchestration between the two. When does the brain override the mouth? How do you prevent PersonaPlex from confidently answering something the reasoning model hasn't verified? How do you handle the moment a tool result contradicts what the fast model already started saying?
by 0xffff2 | 2026-03-05 19:33:51+00:00
I can't speak to Germany, but we also have "end of speed limit" signs in California, and here they definitely mean what the other commenters have said, i.e. the basic speed rule applies. Just based on reading these comments, the German rules seem to be the same here, so I would very much suspect that that in your example the speed limit is unambiguously 100km/hr after the "end of limit" sign.
by satvikpendem | 2026-03-05 19:33:54+00:00
It's more hedonic adaptation, people just aren't as impressed by incremental changes anymore over big leaps. It's the same as another thread yesterday where someone said the new MacBook with the latest processor doesn't excite them anymore, and it's because for most people, most models are good enough and now it's all about applications.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47232453#47232735
by almyfha | 2026-03-05 19:34:32+00:00
OP was talking about that they now have and pursue the intention of upgrading the kernel during the lifetime of the device.
Instead of device launching with LTS kernel, which is supported for many years upstream, and always using it, instead LTS kernels are supported for 2 years (or extended like here), and the devices keep moving on to the next lts branch during their lifetime (usually not immediately, but after the regressions fixed for next branch, tested well before that in avf VMS etc)
by kridsdale1 | 2026-03-05 19:34:57+00:00
Anyone with $(80,00-250,000) (which is a lot of you) can buy a Nautilus today[1].

This status-through-martyrdom ritual to get it from retail at MSRP is utterly bizarre.

[1] https://www.chrono24.com/patekphilippe/nautilus--mod106.htm
by b112 | 2026-03-05 19:35:06+00:00
Indeed. And the concept of passing any refund on is just untenable. My example is to highlight how unreasonable such an expectation is.

And while this specific tariff situation is silly, and annoying, it's been going on forever. There were cases of tariffs on lumber from Canada, with presidents of all stripes. Some were fought, won in court, and nary a person questioned "where is the refund for the consumer".
by cyberax | 2026-03-05 19:35:16+00:00
Better how? On what metrics? Pedestrian deaths did not go down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47242382

> Not to mention the article we're discussing (improvements in Helsinki) explicitly attribute the decrease in traffic deaths to the same kind of improvements Seattle/Portland/SF have been making.

Let me repeat another poster here: "Correlation is not causation". Who's to say that Helsinki wouldn't have had zero deaths even without these changes?
by hvb2 | 2026-03-05 19:35:19+00:00
> Rather than claim a straw man, think about what they do and how it interacts with the administration.

Uh, essentially betting against a policy your former head put in place isn't a typical thing?

You would absolutely steer clear of this. There's plenty of other things they could be doing, no?

Just to make the point. This is such a typical thing investment banks do, that (especially) they are the ones doing it and nobody else?
by RS-232 | 2026-03-05 19:36:21+00:00
More desperate virtue signaling and gatekeeping.

“Look at me and the code that took me eons to perfect. It’s handcrafted and genuine.”

Newsflash: nobody cares, especially if it’s expensive, time consuming, or doesn’t work. They also don’t care about “artisanal” PDO cheese with a 30% tariff that still tastes like shit.

“The posers are stealing our thunder. Forgery!! They terk r jerbs!”

Sink or swim. You decide.