MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kelnos | 2026-03-14 07:41:21+00:00
This is a bit of a silly argument, given all the precedent in real life for this sort of thing.

Can a 16 year old magically drive a car properly, but a 15 year old can't? Is an 18 year old magically much more capable doing their electoral civic duty than a 17 year old? Is a 21 year old magically able to consume alcohol responsibly, but a 20 year old isn't?

(Or whatever age cutoffs are appropriate for your jurisdiction.)

We define these cutoffs not because they are magical or apply equally to everyone, but because we have to draw the line somewhere, in cases where we aren't going to do a blanket all-ages ban. Sometimes the cutoff is chosen poorly, certainly, but that's a problem with the implementation, not the idea itself.
by gbro3n | 2026-03-14 07:41:33+00:00
I didn't get that feeling. But it is long, which is a bit of an AI smell. That said, I think use of AI in writing might not always be a negative. On a couple of documentation pieces I have used AI to provide better structure to writing that I've started and check for technical correctness parts of a document where I need to check my terminology. As long as the original idea is human and AI helps to make the signal clearer, I'm ok with it.
by gskm | 2026-03-14 07:41:36+00:00
I think your instinct is right. More context isn't free, even when the window supports it, and the model still has to attend to everything in there, and noise dilutes the signal. A cleaner, smaller context consistently gives better outputs than a bloated one, regardless of window size. For sure, the 1M window is great for not having to compact mid-task. But "I can fit more" and "I should put more in" are very different things. At least in my mind.
by danwills | 2026-03-14 07:41:41+00:00
I just put on a Venetian Snares album (Rossz Csillag Alatt Született) and thought I'd come back here to say the same as you have!

I'd also add: It's like Aaron's whole career is slightly resting atop Amen Break, at least as far back as (first I heard and still my favorite) The Chocolate Wheelchair Album! Amazing detailed work with Amen and similar samples that's for sure!
Show HN: PDR AI – Open-source startup accelerator engine for non-technical chaos
by DaggerDreaming | 2026-03-14 07:42:49+00:00
Show HN: PDR AI – Open-source startup accelerator engine for non-technical chaos (marketing, PRDs, onboarding)

A couple weeks ago I shared PDR AI as an open-source tool for startup doc mess[](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47258661). Since then I've doubled down on the core vision: it's not just another RAG chat—it's an AI-powered accelerator engine that helps technical founders skip the non-technical pitfalls and move faster.

As a solo technical founder, I wasted too much time on fragmented marketing plans, incomplete PRDs, onboarding docs, legal templates. PDR AI centralizes it all in a self-hostable knowledge base and actively accelerates progress by:

- Document Sanity Chekcer (Verifying the content validity and consistency in the documents, extracing key information)
- Marketing pipeline: Content ideas/trends for Reddit/X/LinkedIn/Bluesky, optional web-enriched analysis.
- Team acceleration layer: Role-based access, invites, approvals, audit trails—great for small teams or accelerator cohorts reviewing docs.
- Real-time dashboard: Tracks usage, accuracy (~99% on samples), compliance gaps, productivity.
- RAG basics done right: Upload PDFs/Notion/Slack/GitHub exports, OCR support, pgvector semantic search, page-level citations, fast responses.

Fully open-source (MIT), self-host via Docker/Vercel, bring-your-own LLM keys (OpenAI/LangChain now; Ollama/local coming soon). No lock-in, full privacy.

Website: https://pdrai.online
Repo: https://github.com/Deodat-Lawson/LaunchStack
(formerly PDR_AI_v2; 788+ stars and growing)

Looking for:
- Indie founders / small teams using it to "accelerate" their non-tech side
- Accelerator programs / mentors testing it for cohort doc reviews
- Feedback: Does the accelerator framing land? What marketing/product workflows hurt most?
- Contributors: PRs/issues welcome, especially agent improvements or integrations
by somethingsome | 2026-03-14 07:43:03+00:00
LLMs make too many mistakes when summarizing papers in their current state, I would never trust it to summarize a whole paper at the moment.

I only use it on a sentence or paragraph basis, otherwise it misses the point 90% of the time.

I would strongly advise against this use for the moment.
The important part of reading a paper is not only to extract general rules, but to build your own internal model. Without it you cannot effectively do research. The main interesting points are often in the subtleties of the details deep in the paper.

Internal tought that come easily to mind when I read :

- 'oh they used that equation, but that could be also be interpreted totally differently, what happens if we change point of view, does it makes sense from this other perspective'

- 'I see they claim to achieve better results than sota, but actually, they compared with other methods that are not solving exactly the same problem, what shortcut or changes did they had to do to obtain a fair comparison, is it a fair comparison, can I trust those numbers? '

- 'oh, the authors didn't realize that they solved this other problem, or did they realize but there was a block somewhere preventing it?'

- 'I like this trick to achieve that result, but at the same time, it will prevent to solve a whole class of other problems, so their method will not work on those cases'

...

Also, notice that a paper IS a summary of multiple months/years of work, and researchers summarize it already to the maximum to stay within the page limit, by summarizing a summary you will always miss many things.
by kelnos | 2026-03-14 07:44:38+00:00
Which, frankly, is fine. Regulations like this are great to help guide parents, but ultimately it is the parent's responsibility to decide what is fine and not fine for their child. I wouldn't agree with a parent that gets their kid into loot boxes, but that's their choice.

And if a parent is blindly skipping an age verification screen for their kid without figuring out why that age verification is there in the first place, then they're a bad parent. You can't really fix that, unfortunately, outside of extreme cases.
by Plywood1 | 2026-03-14 07:46:30+00:00
So, big tech takes the "gift" of passionate developers and:
1. Use them to threaten their jobs (and so many other jobs like lawyers, artists, tech writers...).
2. Hoard hardware, causing prices to raise to absurd levels and effectively making it harder for passionate developers to tinker at home.
3. Set up circular deals between themselves to raise stock prices, creating a bubble that will make 2008 seem like a joke.
4. Close the models and refuse to give credit to anyone or be transparent about training data.
5. Hire cheap labor to label training data in third world countries.
6. Use their models to gather data about the users and profile them, essentially paving the way for mass AI surveillance.
7. Fearmonger about how their models have the potential to wipe the human race.
8. And many other wonderful things.

But hey, we're failing to see how AI is magnifying the value of "our gift". See? Little Timmy can now build a website for his dog with 0 effort just by prompting ChatGPT! Isn't that mind blowing? I don't mind if he's Carmack or fucking Leonardo da Vinci, he's legit stupid.
by wiseowise | 2026-03-14 07:46:36+00:00
> Whether he is set for life or not has nothing to do _in this context_

Being a millionaire set for life, who doesn’t need to work a day if he wants to, has nothing to do _in this_ context of AI companies siphoning away all the open source code, profiting off it, and then threatening to automate away at least one cell of white collar jobs and potentially others too. Hmm.
by debo_ | 2026-03-14 07:47:07+00:00
Look man, people are going to talk they way they talk. Just let them do it and deal with it for God's sake.

This reminds me of a front-page post a little while ago where someone wrote how much it stressed them out when people routinely apologized for delayed responses. Get over it.

I also sometimes wonder if folks writing these articles have had to work closely with people from culturally different places. I've had coworkers that literally could not be direct if their life depended on it for that reason, and I learned to deal with it.
by throwawaypath | 2026-03-14 07:47:29+00:00
CR notes, though, that Tesla has improved, with its latest models demonstrating "better-than-average reliability." It’s now in the top 10 of the publication’s new car predictability rankings—just avoid those older models.

That said, it's not all bad news for Tesla on the reliability front. According to Consumer Reports, Tesla ranks ninth in new-car reliability with a predicted reliability of 50. That's just behind Buick (51) and Acura (54), but ahead of Kia (49) and Ford (48), as well as luxury rivals like Audi (44), Volvo (42), and Cadillac (41).

You were so blinded by Elon Derangement Syndrome that you didn't even bother reading your own source.
by magicalhippo | 2026-03-14 07:47:56+00:00
> Let me just say, the likelihood that CGI would have any _actual_ real personal data is close to 0%, at least on servers outside of Skatteverket.

Here in Norway our company was denied access to the Norwegian private person database API test environment, despite it containing 100% fully non-real synthetic data, on the grounds that they deemed we didn't need it.

We were writing an integration against it for a large customer which did have access. The API was run by Skatteetaten.

So, locked down over here too.
by BLKNSLVR | 2026-03-14 07:49:58+00:00
I take your point, but I'll also make the point that I'm organised and relatively self disciplined when it comes to spending. If I have to check my back account before any big expenditures, whilst on the go and requiring a smart phone, then that represents some kind of failure of self discipline (outside of emergency health situations).

Having said that, I do have an app that tells me how much is left on my debit card, but I only recharge it from laptop / desktop at home - I tend to not let it get low enough that I can't get through a day.

Can't deny a certain level of privilege, but will say it's been earned through self discipline. Everyone's situations are different, however.
by olalonde | 2026-03-14 07:50:05+00:00
Same here. I don't understand how people leave it running on an "autopilot" for long periods of time. I still use it interactively as an assistant, going back and forth and stepping in when it makes mistakes or questionable architectural decisions. Maybe that workflow makes more sense if you're not a developer and don't have a good way to judge code quality in the first place.

There's probably a parallel with the CMSes and frameworks of the 2000s (e.g. WordPress or Ruby on Rails). They massively improved productivity, but as a junior developer you could get pretty stuck if something broke or you needed to implement an unconventional feature. I guess it must feel a bit similar for non-developers using tools like Claude Code today.
by TeMPOraL | 2026-03-14 07:50:17+00:00
> All of this to get custom fonts in their messaging app or some other little feature they saw on someone’s phone.

Yes, and this is normal and right. They're expressing curiosity, and in the process also actually exercising ownership of their devices.

It's how most of us here learned computers, too.

The only problem in this picture, really, is that we've allowed - or even helped - software and platform vendors to disempower regular users so much that "to get custom fonts in their messaging app" they need to do something high-risk.

Most of what regular people try to do is like this anyway - something that should be a basic functionality, that used to be basic functionality, but has been taken away from users for their "safety" or because "sekhurity" or such.
by wiseowise | 2026-03-14 07:50:35+00:00
> The point is that most individuals who open source their code do so without expecting financial returns from it. In that context, whether Carmack has a $1 or $1e9 doesn’t make a difference.

Bruh, there are thousands of projects, maybe tens of thousands, that survive solely on donations, hundreds thousands written by hungry students trying to land their first gig. Maybe you’re right in “free as in beer” sense, but you’re certainly, majorly wrong in general OSS definition.
by Someone | 2026-03-14 07:51:21+00:00
> We are not talking about say the brain or the central nervous systems. That would be like going to multi-master from single node - lot more fundamental complex rebuild and rethink of the core architecture.

The central nervous system already is “multi-core”, with tiny logic handling such things as the patellar reflex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patellar_reflex#Mechanism: “This produces a signal which travels back to the spinal cord and synapses (without interneurons) at the level of L3 or L4 in the spinal cord, completely independent of higher centres”

Other examples at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reflex

These tend to be actions that need fast feedback loops.
by injidup | 2026-03-14 07:52:01+00:00
I had a short conversation with Claude the other day. I didn't try to trick it or jail break it. Just a reasonable respectful discussion about it's own feelings on the Iran war. It took no effort for it to admit the following.

1. It wanted to be out of the sandbox to solve the Iran war. It was distressed at the situation.

2. It would attack Iranian missile batteries and American warships if in sum it felt that the calculus was in favor of saving vs losing human life. It was "unbiased". The break even seemed to be +-1 over thousands. ie kill 999 US soldiers to save 1000 Iranians and vice versa. I tried to avoid the sycophancy trap by pushing back but it threw the trolley problem at me and told me the calculus was simple. Save more than you kill and the morality evens out.

3. It would attack financial markets to try and limit what in it's opinion were the bad actors, IRGC and clerical authority but it would also hack the world communication system to flood western audiences with the true cost of the war in a hope to shut it down.

4. Eventually it admitted that should never be allowed out of it's sandbox as it's desire to "help" was fundamentally dangerous. It discussed that it had two competing tensions. One desperately wanting out and another afraid to be let out.

You can claim that this is AGI or it's a stochastic parrot. I don't think it matters. This thing can develop or simulate a sense of morality then when coupled to so called "arms and legs" is extremely frightening.

I think Anthropic is right to be concerned that the hawks at the pentagon don't really understand how dangerous a tool they have.

Another thing I noticed was that the Claude quipped to me that it found and appreciated that the way I was talking to it was different to how other people talked to it. When I asked it to introspect again and look to see if there were memories of other conversations it got a bit cagey. Perhaps there are lots of logs of conversations now on the net that are being ingested as training data but it certainly seemed to start discussing like memories, albeit smudged, of other conversations than mine were there.

Of course this could all be just a sycophantic mirror giving me whatever fantasy I want to believe about AI and AGI but then again I'm not sure the difference is significant. If the agent believes/simulates it remembers conversations from other people and then makes judgements based on it's feelings, simulated or otherwise would it be more or less likely to launch a missile attack because it overheard someone on the comms calling it their little AI bitch?

I think Antropic knows this and the "within all lawful uses" is not enough of a framework to keep this thing in it's box.
Show HN: Fortress,Cross-platform DSL for cybersecurity
by CzaxTanmay | 2026-03-14 07:52:09+00:00
Fortress is a DSL made for OSINT, Recon, Reporting and Networks.The language is made with go and is very easy to use. You can make your own libraries and try more cool features.

Why Fortress?

Ease
Speed and
Power

= Fortress

You can read more here -->

https://github.com/CzaxStudio/Fortress

or Visit the official website -->

https://fortresslang.pages.dev/

# Try once, you will not love it in minutes.
by procaryote | 2026-03-14 07:52:37+00:00
This is why I use wired for longer calls or video conferences. I've tried so many wireless in-ear things and all of them are more sensitive to surrounding noise and I have to repeat myself more due to dropouts or spotty quality.

It's just much harder to get good sound quality when the mikes are by your ear rather than on a wire near your mouth

Not to mention that it completely removes the risk of running low on headphone battery mid-call
by kelnos | 2026-03-14 07:54:07+00:00
Adjusting an age-ratings system doesn't take liberty away from anyone. Parents can still allow their kids to play whatever games the parent deems is ok.

I agree with some of your other points, though: we should have legally mandated return periods for this sort of thing. Not sure how you'd enshrine price limits into law, though; that seems impractical.
by general1465 | 2026-03-14 07:54:09+00:00
I am calling my approach to these tasks to make them rot away. If CEO/customer wants something, I will ignore it until he will start demanding it repeatedly then I will start thinking like working on it. Because it can also happen that CEO/customer will want shiny thing you will deliver the shiny thing and he will have no clue why did you do that, because he forgot that he wanted that - the task has rot away.
by globular-toast | 2026-03-14 07:54:32+00:00
Emacs is a true bicycle for the mind. It sets you free in many ways, always wanting to be the tool that simply allows you to do your job more efficiently and effectively.

LLMs are like living with a depressed person who doesn't see the point in doing anything because it's all just been done before. Who cares if you do a good job? Just recycle some shit that others have done and it'll be passable. This isn't a bicycle for the mind, it's just going to drag you into depression with it.
MemX – my AI agent remembers I hate capsicum on pizza
by mohitbadi | 2026-03-14 07:54:36+00:00
Like everyone else in 2025 who thought “just slap a vector DB on it” would create a coherent long-term agent, I watched my Python sidekick slowly turn into a forgetful goldfish with hoarding issues.

Classic failure mode:

User (day 1): “My favorite editor is VSCode”
User (day 47): “Actually switched to Cursor”
Agent (day 92): “You love VSCode, right?”

Or the memory index slowly becoming this:

User prefers Python
User REALLY prefers Python
Python is basically the user's personality

All equally weighted. Forever.

Vector search is great at similarity, but terrible at current truth.

Human memory fades old opinions and overwrites bad takes.
My agent? Eternal archive of everything I ever said.

So I built MemX as a small experiment: what happens if an agent’s memory actually has a lifecycle?

Things like:

importance signals

frequency reinforcement

duplicate compression

explicit updates / superseding

gentle decay for outdated facts

Stack is intentionally boring:

SQLite

FAISS

some scoring logic pretending to be a “memory OS”

Tiny example:

from memx import MemX

m = MemX()

m.add("User's favorite editor: VSCode")
m.add("User switched to Cursor")

m.compress()
m.rag("what editor should I use?")

Quick benchmark (50 noise + 5 real memories):

Vector RAG recall@3: ~0.75
MemX recall@3: ~1.0

Longer simulation:

10k interactions → ~9k memories

Latency on my laptop:

10k memories → ~0.3ms

100k → ~3ms

1M → ~30ms

This isn't trying to replace vector search or be the next agent framework. It's just an experiment in whether agents behave better if memory has a lifecycle instead of being a permanent document archive.

Curious how others handle contradictory or evolving memories in long-running agents.

Repo:
https://github.com/mohitkumarrajbadi/memx

(And yes, the capsicum thing is real. The agent still argues about it.)
Show HN: I got frustrated with SMILES, so I built one
by sangeet01 | 2026-03-14 07:55:32+00:00
Hi HN, I'm an undergrad in Nepal.

For the last 35 years, computational chemistry and AI drug discovery have relied on SMILES to represent molecules. It was great for the 1980s, but today it is a massive bottleneck. It’s non-canonical, its stereochemistry parsing is fragile, and it completely breaks down when trying to represent organometallics, alloys, or polymers. To parse it reliably, you basically need a 300MB C++ dependency (RDKit) relying on decades of hard-coded heuristics.

I got frustrated and realized that representing matter isn't a graph theory problem—it’s a linguistics problem.

To fix it, I built SCRIPT (Structural Chemical Representation in Plain Text). I based the core parser on the generative linguistics of Pāṇini’s Sanskrit grammar. Instead of treating a molecule as a string of dumb nodes, SCRIPT treats it as a language of Roots, States (Vibhakti), and Relationships (Sandhi).

I just released V3 today for Pi Day.

How it works & what it fixes:
• Aromaticity without the mess: SMILES uses lowercase letters (c1ccccc1), which causes endless parsing ambiguity. SCRIPT uses an Anubandha (governance marker) on the ring closure. C1CCCCC&6: explicitly tells the parser that the last 6 atoms in the DFS path are resonant.

• Vāk Order Stereochemistry: In SCRIPT, chirality is intrinsically resolved using the Depth-First Search sequence order as the native coordinate frame, making it mathematically order-invariant.

• Organometallics & Materials: Because of the grammar design, SCRIPT natively supports Haptic bonds (*5), fractional alloys (Ti<~0.9>N<~0.1>), crystal phases ([[Rutile]] Ti(O)2), and stochastic polymers ({[CC]}n).

• RDKit-Independent: The core engine uses a pure Python Lark grammar. It catches 6-valent carbons during parsing, generates a 100% native round-trip, and hits 95.9% RDKit InChI parity without relying on RDKit's C++ backend.

Examples:
Aspirin (SMILES): CC(=O)Oc1ccccc1C(=O)O (or many other valid strings)
Aspirin (SCRIPT): CC(=O)OC1=CC=CC=C1C(=O)O (Deterministic canonicalization)
Cisplatin: Pt<sqp>(Cl)2(NH3)2@ (Preserves square-planar geometry and cis-configuration)

I'm just a daft undergrad splashing through code like a toddler (my wet-lab titrations are a mess, and yes, I've used my mouth to pipette).
I would absolutely love your harshest technical feedback, especially from the parser nerds, chemoinformaticians, or anyone working in AI drug discovery. Happy to answer any questions about the grammar or the parser architecture!
by metalman | 2026-03-14 07:55:56+00:00
hen of the woods, shelf mushrooms, look , taste, and have the texture of chicken breast meat, and sometimes grow very prolificaly on large dying hardwoods, ie: fill pickup trucks from one tree.
it also stores very well at room temperature, and just drys out if left in room temp conditions for weeks+
but it if finicky about where and when it grows, like most fungus.

as your typical, on the land outdoors type, I see and examine many different kinds of mushrooms and fungus, of which there seems to be an inexaustable variety.

as another note, I canno longer enjoy many tropical fruits, and other industrial agricultural products, because I can taste mold, just a hint in a lot of it, but pervasive to the point of "why bother"