MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by estearum | 2026-03-05 14:55:43+00:00
Okay, I'll entertain it. How would you distinguish between the brilliant move of using illegal tariffs to disclose limited power and appetite for tariffs, versus someone displaying a 3rd grader level of economic understanding and saying "well of course we should charge people to sell stuff in 'my store' and I am now the manager of 'the store', so I get to set the rate"?

What specific pieces of evidence do you believe makes the former more likely than the latter?

+1 on nukes, though MAD has worked for decades so far. I agree people think this risk is far more remote than it actually is. Especially the risk of a catastrophic accident as nukes proliferate and forces get put on higher readiness.
by gruez | 2026-03-05 14:55:43+00:00
>It's not smart, it's extortion by someone connected to the state and self dealing.

Where's the extortion? The "it's a nice shop you got there..." racket only works if you can strongly influence whether the damages occur (ie. you tell your goons to attack the shop, or not). So far as I can tell however, that's not the case, because Trump wanted the tariffs to stay, and was sad that they got revoked. Going back to the mob analogy, it would be like if the mob boss asked for protection money, the goons didn't damage the shop, the mob boss was sad that the shop didn't get damaged, and then went to to find some other way to damage the shop (ie. section 122 tariffs).
by quickthrowman | 2026-03-05 14:56:15+00:00
> Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer

As someone who prices and sells labor and material for a living, nobody ate increased tariffs. They were passed along to the ultimate consumer of the tariffed product. Everyone was facing the same tariffs so they’re all incentivized to pass the cost along, line iteming the tariffs on the invoice would make it abundantly clear.
by Jooror | 2026-03-05 14:56:28+00:00
I wonder if my intuition here is correct; I would posit that “PL implementation” is a far more popular and well-explored field than it seems. How many toy/small/labor-of-love langs make it to Show HN? How many more simply don’t?

I’ve never personally caught the language implementation bug. I appreciate your perspective here.
by rincebrain | 2026-03-05 14:56:33+00:00
The simplest way to do this, what I believe memtest86 and friends do, is to write a fixed pattern over a region of memory and then read it back later and see if it changed; then you write patterns that require flipping the bits that you wrote before, and so on.

Things like [1] will also tell you that something corrupted your memory, and if you see a nontrivial (e.g. lots of bits high and low) magic number that has only a single bit wrong, it's probably not a random overwrite - see the examples in [2].

There's also a fun prior example of experiments in this at [3], when someone camped on single-bit differences of a bunch of popular domains and examined how often people hit them.

[1] - https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/917c4a6bfa...

[2] - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1762568

[3] - https://media.defcon.org/DEF%20CON%2019/DEF%20CON%2019%20pre...
by MongooseStudios | 2026-03-05 14:56:45+00:00
Location: Austin, Texas
Remote: Preferred
Willing to relocate: Maybe
Technologies: Go(Golang), Python, Jenkins, Kubernetes, Docker, Dart/Flutter, I've also done work with AWS, Azure, and GCP.
Résumé/CV: https://mongoosestudios.github.io
Email: Located on the about page (not the landing page) of the link above.

Mostly a back end dev, but I'm happy to learn new things to work on a new codebase/product. No crypto companies. Vibe Coding shops, and those who have internal mandates to use AI, need not apply.
by projektfu | 2026-03-05 14:56:54+00:00
A lot of systems are obsolete, in the sense that you cannot find work in them. Nonetheless, people use them to prototype ideas that will eventually find their way into industry. Is Haskell obsolete? Not exactly, but it's hard to find real-world projects that use it. Concepts developed in Haskell get imported into other systems.

Systems are only truly obsolete when there is no real reason to use them. PL/1 is obsolete. It's hard to find even legacy code using it, and nobody would use it for experimentation.
by calny | 2026-03-05 14:57:04+00:00
The maintainer's response: https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327#issuecomment-4...

The second part here is problematic, but fascinating: "I then started in an empty repository with no access to the old source tree, and explicitly instructed Claude not to base anything on LGPL/GPL-licensed code." Problem - Claude almost certainly was trained on the LGPL/GPL original code. It knows that is how to solve the problem. It's dubious whether Claude can ignore whatever imprints that original code made on its weights. If it COULD do that, that would be a pretty cool innovation in explainable AI. But AFAIK LLMs can't even reliably trace what data influenced the output for a query, see https://iftenney.github.io/projects/tda/, or even fully unlearn a piece of training data.

Is anyone working on this? I'd be very interested to discuss.

Some background - I'm a developer & IP lawyer - my undergrad thesis was "Copyright in the Digital Age" and discussed copyleft & FOSS. Been litigating in federal court since 2010 and training AI models since 2019, and am working on an AI for litigation platform. These are evolving issues in US courts.

BTW if you're on enterprise or a paid API plan, Anthropic indemnifies you if its outputs violate copyright. But if you're on free/pro/max, the terms state that YOU agree to indemnify THEM for copyright violation claims.[0]

[0] https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms - see para. 11 ("YOU AGREE TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE ANTHROPIC PARTIES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, CLAIMS, DAMAGES, EXPENSES (INCLUDING REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS), AND OTHER LOSSES ARISING OUT OF … YOUR ACCESS TO, USE OF, OR ALLEGED USE OF THE SERVICES ….")
by bryant | 2026-03-05 14:57:24+00:00
Much more interesting would be if the tariffs were refunded equally to each person nationwide (interesting in that it very clearly then becomes an income redistribution scheme, even if on a limited basis).

Possibly a refund of about $500 per social security number. Doesn't even have to be in cash, could just directly go towards the social security fund if legislated that way.

Tons of ways to fix this quagmire in a way that's beneficial to people. But it won't happen.
by pixl97 | 2026-03-05 14:57:26+00:00
>all the inertia and inefficiencies of the organization

Honestly you can probably use this as a means to measure the amount of regulation, graft, and corruption in an economy.

In a wild west free for all code velocity would likely be very fast with software popping up, changing rapidly, and some quickly disappearing.

But in an economy that doesn't care what you make, then who you pay or what laws you buy is far more important.
by hamdingers | 2026-03-05 14:57:34+00:00
Origionally:

> That simply is a transfer switch that is built in.

Then in this comment:

> but both a transfer switch and a disconnect are the same thing

These statements are false, and the fact that the second one was written even after being corrected once makes me think they still do not understand.

This user appears to blast paragraphs upon paragraphs of irrelevant noise at anyone who responds to them so that either the comment has internal conflicts (as you noticed) or any criticism seems nitpicky.
by ralferoo | 2026-03-05 14:58:10+00:00
I have an old Lack (20 years) and while I've never used it as a rack, it'd just been retired from under the TV as I got a new one with a wider base. I notice that even though it's never been moved much, it doesn't feel very stable any more and I wouldn't trust it with a rack of heavy equipment, especially with HDDs that could suffer catastrophic failure if they fell. That said, attaching brackets would sure up the legs a bit. Ideally you'd want to attack brackets at the back as well I guess.

I also had a Billy sat next to it, and did similar to this (but again not racked), but had all of my AV gear inside. The door was great, it'd make any status lights diffuse and so they wouldn't interrupt watching a film in the dark (and my old Sky box used to have annoying blue LEDs with an animation when playing back a recorded show), but at the same time remote controls still worked through the glass. Literally best of both worlds. I cut a big hole in the back for cables, which also served well for airflow. I considered adding a fan, but never needed it. I suspect there would be issues with negative pressure doing that though.
by wutwutwat | 2026-03-05 14:58:49+00:00
That would be insane. That would mean people in the government talk to each other and also that they have conversations or make deals behind closed doors or that one or god forbid all of them are corrupt, which is utter nonsense!

Probably just a good guess. At least it wasn't based on intimate knowledge of things based on being in a position extremely close to everyone involved in all of it. Sheesh.
by AnimalMuppet | 2026-03-05 14:58:52+00:00
Self-dealing by someone connected to the state, yes. Extortion, no.

It takes a fair amount of money to take a court case to the Supreme Court. You can pay it all (and still maybe lose), or you can let the law firm have part of what you win. This happens all the time in the US legal system. It's not extortion; it's essentially venture funding by the law firm. (Yes, I'm aware of the pattern in the previous sentence, but I'm in fact a human, and not even LLM-assisted.) If the company doesn't want to play that way, they don't have to. They can pay the full cost of the lawsuit themselves.
by philomath_mn | 2026-03-05 14:58:56+00:00
Reminds me of this quote from Tonya Riley's _The Staff Engineer's Path_:

> In The Art of Travel (Vintage), Alain de Botton talks about the frustration of learning new information that doesn’t connect to anything you already know—like the sorts of facts you might pick up while visiting a historic building in a foreign land. He writes about visiting Madrid’s Iglesia de San Francisco el Grande and learning that “the sixteenth-century stalls in the sacristy and chapter house come from the Cartuja de El Paular, the Carthusian monastery near Segovia.” Without a connection back to something he was already familiar with, the description couldn’t spark his excitement or curiosity. The new facts, he wrote, were “as useless and fugitive as necklace beads without a connecting chain.”
Show HN: I built a Bitcoin-only portfolio and analytics app
by mrdevilseyee | 2026-03-05 14:59:02+00:00
I wanted to share a project I've been working on. Like many of you, I was frustrated with existing portfolio apps. They prioritize multi-asset ticker lists, bombard you with altcoin clutter, and often harvest your portfolio data.

I couldn't find a clean, dedicated app that just focused on Bitcoin, so I decided to build my own.

My core architectural principle from day one was your data is yours:

100% Local Storage: Your portfolio balances, addresses, and transaction history are stored entirely on your device. Zero user data is sent to external servers.
No Custody, No Execution: It's strictly an analytics and tracking tool. You remain in full control.
Open Data Sourcing: It only uses open APIs for price and network state. Where historical data is missing from third-party APIs, the app locally caches and accumulates data to generate your metrics.
Because the app doesn't have to worry about 10,000 different tokens, it focuses entirely on the tools and intelligence long-term Bitcoin holders actually care about:

Flexible Portfolio Tracking: You can add transactions manually, upload a CSV, or import directly from public wallet addresses (with the ability to select specific transactions).
Accurate P&L: Edit metadata like cost basis, fees, and notes to get an exact picture of your portfolio performance and drawdowns.
Native Network Stats: Track block height, mempool pressure, transaction fees, circulating supply, and halving countdowns directly in the app.
Accumulation Goals: Set your stack targets and visually track your progress.
The Essentials: Clean interactive charts, customizable price alerts with full trigger history, and home-screen widgets for quick updates.
The core tracking is completely free. There is an optional PRO tier that unlocks things like advanced technical analysis, S&P 500/Gold correlation tracking, and corporate treasury monitoring (which helps support the development), but the main goal is providing a solid, noise-free foundation.

I’d love for the community here to tear it apart, test it out, and tell me what you think. What other strictly Bitcoin-native features do you feel are missing from the current ecosystem?
by isotropical | 2026-03-05 14:59:14+00:00
Alonso might be the unluckiest driver in modern F1. Just when he thought, he would get to drive a Newey car, he deal with this. And it does not help that his team mate is Lance Stroll. Lance hasn't turned up to F1 official media and is not seen around in the team's own media. I am astonished as to how Aston Martin is surviving as a team. Last year they struggled to get points at around the mid. And now I don't think they can even race the car because of the 107% qualifying rule.
by jacquesm | 2026-03-05 14:59:20+00:00
There is a very interesting tech using superconducting loops to store power. I think that that will be the 'battery of the future' but it is going to take a while before that sort of thing is safe enough (and cheap enough) for things like vehicles. But for stationary short term 'ride through' situations it has already been deployed, and also for stabilization of the grid in the presence of fast fluctuating loads or generators.
by gruez | 2026-03-05 14:59:35+00:00
>Wasn't the whole point of selling your right to refunds that the initial tariff was so onerous to businesses that they needed a cash injection to stay afloat.

No? You also do it for certainly. "One bird in hand beats two in the bush" and all that. You see this occurring outside of tariff refunds, with businesses selling debts to debt collectors for pennies on the dollar, or bond holders selling high risk bonds (eg. Argentina) for steep discounts.
by ImPostingOnHN | 2026-03-05 15:00:09+00:00
> And why would they have an objection to that? They sold a product to a customer. They should have no business in how that customer uses their software.

They sold a service to a customer, contractually subject to terms they both agreed upon. How do people keep missing this? The government changed their mind after agreeing to the restrictions and tried to alter the deal with Anthropic ex-post-facto.
Show HN: Rivora, Reliability for Autonomous Infrastructure
by sgr0691 | 2026-03-05 15:00:10+00:00
Hi HN!

I’ve built this product called Rivora.

The idea came from frustrations I kept running into running modern infra. Reliability is still mostly reactive. Something breaks, alerts fire, and someone ends up jumping between dashboards trying to piece together what actually changed hopefully not at 3am.

But infrastructure itself is becoming more autonomous, constant deploys, lots of services, and increasingly AI devtools.

Rivora is my attempt to build a reliability layer for autonomous infrastructure that actually understands what’s happening in the system and surfaces risk before things break.

It connects to your cloud environment, CI/CD, and observability stack to watch how the system evolves and explain why reliability risk is increasing instead of just sending endless alerts.

Still early and definitely rough around the edges.

Curious to hear feedback from anyone running production infrastructure.
by general_reveal | 2026-03-05 15:00:40+00:00
Why would China immediately retaliate with a Rare Earth threat to tariffs? Why would we threaten Greenland, another rare earth hotbed? We , the general public , similar to the Cuban Missile crisis, are not being told shit.

There is a global cold/hot war where real pieces have moved. NATO is basically at war and we can’t know.
Show HN: echo.html, between Feather Wiki and Roam with commands like Emacs
by m15o | 2026-03-05 15:01:22+00:00
Here's echo.html, a project I've been working on for almost a year! It's a tool to take notes, connect them, and save/share them as a single file. Imagine a mix between Feather Wiki and Roam but with commands like on emacs. Hope you like it!
by teleforce | 2026-03-05 15:01:38+00:00
Whether we like it or not, the only constant in life is change.

>What's the Excel of JSON

Ever heard of CUE that's compatible with JSON and YAML introduced by ex-Googlers? It seamlessly support both types and values, whereas Excel supports ephemeral values [1].

Both CUE and original Excel are non-Turing complete so they don't have the notorious and tricky halting problem.

Someone need to seamlessly integrate LLM with CUE, its NLP deterministic distant cousin based on lattice-valued logic [2],[3].

Truth be told LLM are like the automated loom machine during 19th CE Britain that kick started the industrial revolution. Heck the Toyota conglomerate was once the pioneer of the modern automated loom manufacturer, and looks where they are now after embracing change and pivoted to vehicle manufacturing.

The automated loom machine commoditize the manual looming industry (not unlike modern software engineering) to its oblivion in India, that turned the rich Moghul India with the highest GDP in the whole wide world into the lowest GDP for India during colonial time (include Indian sub-continent namely Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh here if you want apple to apple comparison) [4].

Ignore LLM at your peril in the name of so-called moral authenticity/forgery/lie/etc, and you can go the way of 20th CE India and its sub-continent, settling only at a fraction of its Moghul empire in term of GDP at its very peak.

> Is there a standard CRDT-like protocol for syncing editable graphs yet?

It's for other HN comments but spoiler alert it's called D4M by the nice folks from MIT [5]. We probably don't need full CRDT, local-first capability with eventual consistency will be more than suffice for most things that are of importance.

[1] CUE lang:

https://cuelang.org/

[2] The Logic of CUE:

https://cuelang.org/docs/concept/the-logic-of-cue/

[3] Guardrailing Intuition: Towards Reliable AI:

https://cue.dev/blog/guardrailing-intuition-towards-reliable...

[4] Economy of the Mughal Empire:

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

[5] D4M: Dynamic Distributed Dimensional Data Model:

https://d4m.mit.edu/
by myrmidon | 2026-03-05 15:02:11+00:00
I'll turn this around: Do you think it is acceptable for policymakers, lawmakers or people involved in such a process to reap profits more or less directly with (partially non-public) knowledge they've acquired?

Because I think not. And I feel pretty strongly about this. The conflict of interest is so glaringly obvious that it should be completely self-evident why every voter should want to prevent, ban and punish any such action.

I feel that anyone involved in this tariff insurance business should be able to prove without a shadow of doubt that they had no political insider knowledge about the whole thing, and I'm extremely skeptical that this is the case (just from the pople involved alone!).
by coldpie | 2026-03-05 15:02:36+00:00
> The government knows exactly who paid what in duties

No, they have a record of who handed the money over to the government. This does not tell you who paid the duties. There's going to be a whole lot of Trump toadies & business owners in the chain, siphoning cash from refunds before they work their way back to the people who actually paid them. And that's not even getting into the open corruption & fraud that will be happening as part of this as well.
by 1899-12-30 | 2026-03-05 15:02:39+00:00
The key to non-disruptive LLM integration is using it in a purely additive way, supplementing a feature with functionality that couldn't be done before rather than replacing an existing part. Like adding ai generated images to accompany the dwarf fortress artifact descriptions. It could completely togglable and doesn't disrupt any existing mechanics, but would provide value to those that don't mind the slop.
by jmyeet | 2026-03-05 15:02:51+00:00
Cantor Fitzgerald lost most of its staff in the World Trade Center on 9/11. Lutnick sued American Airlines, eventually settling for $135 million [1]. He claimed this would largely go to the family of hte victims.

Turns out most (if not all) of it went to the senior executive team, wtih himself being the primary beneficiary [2].

This is also the same Howard Lutnick who the DoJ accidentally released a photo of with Jeffrey Epstein [3]. People noticed and they removed it. People noticed that too so they restored it.

Just so we're all clear who Howard Lutnick is.

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/busine.ss/judge-approves-ame...

[2]: https://x.com/FinanceLancelot/status/2022877480516813077

[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/27/howard-lutni...
by kowalej | 2026-03-05 15:02:54+00:00
I'm shocked you can't see how this is a potential conflict of interest. You don't need to know the exact outcome of the SC decision to have confidence that things will land in your favor. There are certainly all kinds of high level discussions with legal experts in the White House that could have hinted this outcome as likely. The real question is whether there's any personal involvement still with Cantor or this was something launched without influence. If there was influence though, there will of course be denials and bold-face lying (just like with the Epstein involvement).
by AnimalMuppet | 2026-03-05 15:02:57+00:00
The commerce secretary wasn't the one pushing for them in the first place. The president was.

I mean, look, there's plenty of conflicts of interest, and stuff that sure looks like graft, and claims of people making insane amounts of money off of stuff. But in this case, the commerce secretary's options were 1) do the tariffs or 2) get fired. Minion? Sure. Minion without the self-respect or ethics to quit when they were being told to do unconstitutional stuff? Also sure. Pushing these policies, as though they had agency in the matter? No.
by Kamil_KKA | 2026-03-05 15:02:58+00:00
The biggest change wasn’t the idea, it was what I skipped. I was learning Next.js and didn’t know how to properly do auth, sessions, and accounts, so I left auth out entirely.

The first version of Crush Analyzer had:
- no accounts
- no saved state
- I had to do the backend work manully

Users just pasted real chat conversations and got feedback. I wanted to see if people actually cared before automating anything. Only after repeat usage did I wire it up to APIs.

What I learned:
- low friction beats “proper” architecture early
- people will tolerate rough edges if the value is clear
- doing things manually taught me more than building features

Next project I will do the same - focus 100% on the value bring to the user even if it is not real time and automating later when I seee traction.

Happy to answer questions.