MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ksajadi | 2026-03-05 23:03:09+00:00
Around 8 years ago a company called x.ai (yes that was the domain) started to do exactly that. It would create a persona called Amy Ingram (AI in short) that would be your personal assistant. Long story short, it failed miserably as it sent people to the wrong locations on the wrong days. Perhaps it is now the time to finally get it right.
by coldtea | 2026-03-05 23:03:10+00:00
>I agree. If we look to music, how can a musician unhear what they've heard?

Unlike with music, in software traditionally a (human) programmer could be chosen who haven't "heard" (i.e. read the original code). That has traditionally called a "clean room" implementation (not to be confused with the software development process called "clean room").
by woadwarrior01 | 2026-03-05 23:03:15+00:00
It's not particularly about x.com, hundreds of site like x, youtube, facebook, linkedin, tiktok etc surreptitious add tracking parameters to their links. The iOS Messages app even hides these tracking parameters. I don't like being surreptitiously tracked online and judging by the success of my free app, there are millions of people like me.
by tlavoie | 2026-03-05 23:03:19+00:00
I think the issue here is one of informed consent. You might say, "OK, this makes sense" when agreeing to location data for a weather app. In the context of whether it's going to hail soon, location is reasonable. What you only see in those GDPR-type banners is that the data is being re-sold off to 1001 "partners", none of whom are important for my hail-to-head concerns. Never mind all the cases where it's re-sold on to all the governments and personal-level creeps through aggregators.
by benlivengood | 2026-03-05 23:03:27+00:00
Take a look at how Matter handles this; manufacturer certificate to vouch for hardware integrity which gets superceded by the fabric's root CA on commissioning (enrollment in the fabric).

This is basically the best we can hope for until we get nanofabs at home and can build our own secure enclaves in our garages.

Trust decision theory goes like this; it it were possible for the manufacturer to fully control the device then competitors would not use it, so e.g. wide industry adoption of OpenTitan would be evidence of its security in that aspect. Finally, if devices had flaws that allowed them to be directly hacked or their keys stolen then demonstrating it would be straightforward and egg on the face of the manufacturer who baked their certificate on the device.

Final subject; 802.1x and other port-level security is mostly unnecessary if you can use mTLS everywhere which is what ubiquitous hardware roots of trust allows. Clearly it will take a while for the protocol side to catch up; but I hope that eventually we'll be running SPIFFE or something like it at home.
by pinkmuffinere | 2026-03-05 23:03:55+00:00
The comments here seem to have a negative sentiment towards this project, and I want to understand that better.

I would prefer not to carry ID at all times, but it seems to me that this is a fact of modern life -- in the US at least, ID is indeed required for banking, to get a drivers license, to board planes, etc. Our ID system is ridiculous. A weird combination of SSN's, Drivers license, and Passport are forced into this role, even though they weren't designed for that, and don't do a great job. If Ethiopia builds a _good_ system, I feel that is better than whatever _bad_ system would naturally arise without planning. Am I totally off base here? What am I missing?
by amatecha | 2026-03-05 23:04:04+00:00
Yeah I was wondering about that too (the shoulder area for example), conversely maybe striking there is the most likely to cripple the animal, thus making it easier to catch? But I was thinking that as well, "maybe these are the least desirable areas to strike". Either way I was just surprised they really skimmed over the "meaning", when I expected the paper would have delved a bit further into that.
by nh23423fefe | 2026-03-05 23:04:22+00:00
let e^2 = 0.

the dual numbers are D = {x + ye | x,y in R}.

let f(z) be some polynomial.

Then by binomial theorem f(z + e) - f(z) = z^n + n*z^(n-1)*e + O(e^2) - z^n = f'(z)*e.

And so df = df/dz * e
by plorkyeran | 2026-03-05 23:05:33+00:00
Everyone who has put serious effort into analyzing crash reports en mass has made similar discoveries that some portion of their crashes are best explained by faulty hardware. What percent that is mostly comes down to how stable your software is. The more bugs you have, the lower the portion that come from hardware. Firefox being at 10% from bad RAM just means that crashes due to FF bugs are somewhat uncommon but not nonexistent, which lines up with my experience with using FF.
by coryrc | 2026-03-05 23:05:43+00:00
We have 3500 M1 Abrams in storage. We should have gotten every one of them onto Ukrainian soil before the Orcs mined everything.

We eliminated all Iranian air defense in a couple days. Russia still has air defense after 4 years later.

What little we do is pathetic for the clearest battle of good vs evil since the third reich.
by arjunchint | 2026-03-05 23:05:49+00:00
Oh whoa, we are working in parallel on a similar angle!

We just launched Rover (https://rover.rtrvr.ai/) as the first Embeddable Web Agent.

Similar principles, just embed a script tag and you get an agent that can type/click/select to onboard/demo/checkout users.

I tried on your website and it was reeaaaally slow. Quick question:

- you are injecting numbering on to the UI. Are you taking screenshots? But I don't see any screenshots in the request being sent, what is the point of the numbering?

I don't think building on browser-use is the way to go, it was the worst performing harness of all we tested [https://www.rtrvr.ai/blog/web-bench-results]. We built out our own logic to build custom Action Trees that don't require any ARIA or accessibility setup from websites.

Would love to meet and trade notes, if possible (rtrvr.ai/request-demo)!
by JALTU | 2026-03-05 23:05:49+00:00
There is undoubtedly value in both the self-help advice and the self-reflection and self-assessment involved in deciding if the advice is for you.

That value likely will decrease with age and experience, but is still nice to consciously acknowledge and even reflect on, again after the lessons have been absorbed in whatever ways they have been absorbed, adjusted, or rejected.

Wherever you go, there you are. :)
by newtwilly | 2026-03-05 23:06:41+00:00
For directed coding (implementing an already specified plan) or asking questions about a codebase I use 5.3 codex with medium reasoning effort. It is relatively quick feeling.

I like Sonnet 4.6 a lot too at medium reasoning effort, but at least in Cursor it is sometimes quite slow because it will start "thinking" for a long time.
by alephnerd | 2026-03-05 23:07:20+00:00
MOSIP is Indian [0][1][2]. India is exporting multiple different stacks for Digital Public Infrastructure.

This project in Ethiopia is itself being pushed by the Indian government [3][4] and is part of India's larger "Global South" strategy [5].

I guess the question you should be asking is why the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has becoming intertwined with Indian geopolitical power projection.

[0] - https://www.mosip.io/mosip_project

[1] - https://www.mosip.io/governance

[2] - https://www.iiitb.ac.in/projects/mosip-2

[3] - https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/india-elevates-ties-...

[4] - https://pulseofafrica.info/innovation/119

[5] - https://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/Publication/DPI_Handb...
by mckirk | 2026-03-05 23:07:36+00:00
I think what that research found is that _auto-generated_ agent instructions made results slightly worse, but human-written ones made them slightly better, presumably because anything the model could auto-generate, it could also find out in-context.

But especially for conventions that would be difficult to pick up on in-context, these instruction files absolutely make sense. (Though it might be worth it to split them into multiple sub-files the model only reads when it needs that specific workflow.)
by fragmede | 2026-03-05 23:07:38+00:00
You're confusing the price of something with how much it costs to make it. Prices are just a made up number. Hopefully, the amount someone will pay you for the watch you made is more than it costs you to make it, and you have a sustainable business, but the funny thing about capitalism is that is not at all guaranteed. If the company wants to juice sales, they'll have a limited time discount. Or how about when the company is bankrupt and out of business? Then theres a fire sale and the price of something is pennies on the dollar. So they could sell the watches for $200, or they could give them away for free, or they can charge $100k, or they could barter for them. It's all a matter of business.
Show HN: AI Resume Chatbot – recruiters can chat with your resume
by hanishabsigh | 2026-03-05 23:08:04+00:00
I built airesume.chat — it turns your resume into a chatbot recruiters can interact with.

You upload a PDF and get a shareable link (airesume.chat/yourname). Recruiters can ask questions about your experience, projects, or skills instead of just scanning a static document.

While job searching I kept noticing recruiters only spend a few seconds looking at a resume. If they miss something relevant, there’s no way for them to ask questions or dig deeper. This tries to make the resume more interactive.

How it works:
- Upload your resume (PDF)
- The system extracts experience and skills
- You get a shareable link (or connect your own domain)
- Recruiters can ask questions in a chat interface
- You can see what questions people ask and jump into the chat live if you want

There’s a demo on the landing page where you can chat with my resume.

Curious what people think — especially from people who review a lot of resumes. What would make something like this actually useful?
by dkatsura | 2026-03-05 23:08:15+00:00
Maker here. Quick challenge for the skeptics:

Assume the capsule file leaks (someone forwards/copies it). In your view, does embedding the access policy (time/geo/password/visual key) into the same artifact as the ciphertext add any value, or is it pure security theater?

If you think it’s theater, what’s the smallest, most realistic bypass you’d try first — and what constraint would you add to make this primitive actually useful?
by Bewelge | 2026-03-05 23:08:32+00:00
> That’s exactly my point. If a problem exists or a solution to a problem is possible about which no party is willing to talk about, it will not show it. The choice of topics is based on party opinions, not on voter surveys. This is called bias.

It's not a bias. I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of the word. We vote for parties and the wahl-o-mat compares the opinion of these parties. It would be biased if it would give an unfair advantage or disadvantage to one or some parties. The parties' opinions not being a good representation of the important challenges we face is not a bias of the wahl-o-mat. You can question its usefulness but calling it biased is calling it dishonest.

And honestly? That sucks. You can question its usefulness but please don't call an initiative that aims to give the populace a better political overview biased for no reason. You're not helping shape political discourse for the better here. I just checked: There weren't any no google results for "wahl-o-mat bias" yet. Now there are.
by belorn | 2026-03-05 23:09:03+00:00
(I am the other Mandos developer)

I think FOSDEM had a talk a few years ago about that solution and their tang server. It is very similar in concept. They use McCallum-Relyea exchange, and we use PGP encryption, but the basics are the same in that you need information stored at the server and information stored in the unencrypted initramfs in order to be combined and turned into the encryption key. If my understanding of the McCallum-Relyea exchange is correct, they also combine the key creation and perfect forward security of the transaction into a single protocol, while we use TLS and client keys for the perfect forward security aspect and PGP for data at rest.

With tang you need to verify the hash of the tang server in order to prevent a MITM threat from extracting the server side part during the key creation process, while with Mandos you configure it manually with configuration files.

Tang uses REST and JSON. Mandos sends a single protocol number and then sends the data. Both operate primarily through local LAN, through Mandos client also support as an option to use global reachable ip addresses.

Outside of those design differences, there are some packaging aspects. Tang was designed for Redhat/Dracut, while Mandos was designed for Debian and initramfs-tools (Today Mandos also support Dracut, but it is not packaged for Redhat). Redhat packaging has been requested multiple times for Mandos, but neither of us two developer are Redhat users.

To add some historical context, I recall a Debconf BoF by the developers of initramfs-tools about if they were going to continue developing initramfs-tools or giving up and port everything to Dracut, and the silence was fairly deafening. People did not want to give up on initramfs-tools, but everyone recognized the massive duplication that those two project are. Similarly, the reason why Redhat had chosen initially to develop Dracut rather than just port initramfs-tools is also fairly big mystery, and is generally considered a Not Invented Here syndrome. Today there are however some distinct difference in design between the two systems.
by nl | 2026-03-05 23:10:02+00:00
> So, these speculators are like "oh no, more GPUs requires more RAM!", and then just start speculating on all RAM.

Are you claiming that these speculators are buying DDR5 RAM and warehousing it somewhere? Or what exactly is the mechanism you are proposing here?

To me it seems much simpler - AI companies want HBM, but HBM and DDR5 share the same wafer production process and facilities, but the HBM process is much more fragile and takes three times the wafer production.

There isn't enough DDR5 RAM being produced, so prices go up.
by teddyh | 2026-03-05 23:10:04+00:00
Despite the “tang/clevis” system being too clever by half (and even more complex), it is essentially very similar. Mandos, though, is much simpler; you can actually understand it, since it uses standard components and protocols like DNS-SD¹, OpenPGP and TLS. (Mandos is documented in man pages, in contrast to page you linked, which is both huge, and – for me at least – keeps reloading itself and replacing the entire page with a 500 server error.)

Mandos is also for Debian (and all Debian-based systems), and not Red Hat (although there is nothing preventing a port, since Mandos now also supports initramfs images created by Dracut).

Finally, Mandos was initially created in in 2007, many years before tang/clevis, and literally by a person in a dorm room, not by whatever academics/scientists who seem to have dreamed up the cryptography/protocol tangle that is tang/clevis. Mandos has changed some since then, from initially using broadcast UDP and X.509 certificates, to using DNS-SD and raw public keys², but has otherwise remained very similar to its initial design.

1. <https://www.dns-sd.org/>

2. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7250>
by netcraft | 2026-03-05 23:10:27+00:00
I think its understandable that you took that from the click-bait all over youtube and twitter, but I dont believe the research actually supports that at all, and neither does my experience.

You shouldnt put things in AGENTS.md that it could discover on its own, you shouldnt make it any larger than it has to be, but you should use it to tell it things it couldnt discover on its own, including basically a system prompt of instructions you want it to know about and always follow. You don't really have any other way to do those things besides telling it every time manually.
by VirusNewbie | 2026-03-05 23:10:38+00:00
Yes, it's a lot of fun. I'm working on a core team at Google, and honestly i'd keep doing it even if I had 10M stashed away.

It is also very stressful and frustrating at times.

However, early in my career I had challenging and stressful jobs with shitty managers who always tried to crack the whip, where I made 80k a year.

Now at least my stressful job has me pampered between stresses and mostly my boss telling me I did a good job (with occasional critical feedback on how to improve).

It's not an easy job though. I see a fair amount of coworkers counting their pennies so they can quit. Honestly I think you have to be a little bit crazy and enjoy tangly stressful problems to like this job.

If you don't like messing with tech, digging in, feeling confused and lost for hours and days before an 'aha' moment, then its' going to seem like a slog.
by TacticalCoder | 2026-03-05 23:11:08+00:00
I agree with several things in TFA but you're right that some people just love these because they look beautiful.

TFA says this:

> If mechanical watches had only been accurate to a minute a day they couldn't have made the leap from keeping time to displaying wealth.

I don't think it's necessarily about displaying wealth: we could discuss humans (not just women but also men) wearing some kind of jewelry since thousands of years, including poor people who don't do it to display wealth but just because they enjoy the look of it. There was an article about monkeys enjoying the looks of crystals the other day I think.

One example would be people who don't dress nicely and who drive a cheap car and overal look like they just don't care about what others do think, and yet wear a dive watch. There are countless dive watches, be it a cheap no-name one, a perfect chinese replica of a Rolex Submariner (some replicas have most parts that can be exchanged with real Rolexes, which created the entire "frankenwatch" thing: where some parts are from the true brand and others have been swapped by chinese parts) or a real Rolex Submariner or Sea-Dweller costing $10 K to $20 K (for the base models).

Also in an age of alienating technology, something has to be said about a 100% mechanical device that's not connected to anything and doesn't require a battery to work, however imprecisely: it's not just about the beauty of the object when you look at it. It's also the beauty in having something that's not spying on you.

Just like there are people who, for a variety of reason, only ever take out their old Ferrari for a spin at night (when there's no trafic).

I take it you could very probably say: "Most people own fancy mechanical watches and high-end sport cars to flaunt wealth". But you can't generalize to 100% of watch owners and Ferrari owners.
by WhatsTheBigIdea | 2026-03-05 23:12:35+00:00
Your gut may be leading you astray?

I also find that firefox crashes much more than chrome based browsers, but it is likely that chrome's superior stability is better handing of the other 90% of crashes.

If 50% of chrome crashes were due to bit flips, and bit flips effect the two browsers at basically the same rate, that would indicate that chrome experiences 1/5th the total crashes of firefox... even though the bit flip crashes happen at the same rate on both browsers.

It would have been better news for firefox if the number of crashes due to faulty hardware were actually much higher! These numbers indicate the vast majority of firefox crashes are actually from buggy software : (
Show HN: The CTO Game – Scale your infra in real-time, under pressure
by frenchmajesty | 2026-03-05 23:12:55+00:00
I made this game because I didn't like how unrealistic System Design can be in interviews. You're incentivized to make your design as elaborate and fancy as possible so you can show how smart your are and there is a slight negative bias towards "simplest solution that meets the needs"

Therefore, I made this game to help me practice my real intuition for what decisions makes sense given a context.

Hope you all enjoy. Please share feedback so I can improve it I have many ideas but want to test the water first to see how the community feels about it.
by derwiki | 2026-03-05 23:12:55+00:00
100%, this has been my soap box for years.

A very easy, effective, multi-layer setup:

1. Browser adblocker

2. Pi hole running locally

3. Pi hole at your home network router level

And 4, not as easy but effective, a firewall like Little Snitch

Edit: the other good news is your old data loses value quickly, so starting today is still very effective: you haven’t missed the boat yet!
by keyringlight | 2026-03-05 23:12:57+00:00
One of the points Linus Torvalds made a few years back was that enthusiasts/PC gamers should be pissed that consumer product availability/support for ECC is spotty because as mentioned up-thread they're the kind of user that will push their system, and if memory is the cause of instability there will be a smoking gun (and they can then set the speed within its stable capacity). Diagnosing bad RAM is a pain in the rear even if you're actively looking for a cause, never mind trying to get a general user to go further than blaming software or gremlins in the system for weirdness on whatever frequency it's occurring at.
by apsurd | 2026-03-05 23:13:04+00:00
Well framed. I will add though that it's not entirely indicative of how much one thinks is a lot; it can also be, as was explained to me, that for ultra wealthy people, the price, at any magnitude, becomes a rounding error.

half a million for a car sounds absurd to me, but it's 0.5% of $100M. Compare that to $50k car on a ~$200k median net-worth US household.
by BERTmackliin | 2026-03-05 23:13:06+00:00
We built Anchor Engine because LLMs have no persistent memory. Every conversation is a fresh start—yesterday’s discussion, last week’s project notes, even context from another tab—all gone. Context windows help, but they're ephemeral and expensive.

The STAR algorithm (Semantic Traversal And Retrieval) takes a different approach. Instead of embedding everything into vector space and hoping similarity scores work, STAR uses deterministic graph traversal. Nodes are concepts extracted from text; edges encode typed relationships (e.g., is-a, part-of, caused-by, mentioned-with). When an LLM needs context, STAR walks the graph based on explicit structural patterns.

For example, if the model asks about "your project from last month," STAR can traverse `project → timeline → notes → decisions` instead of relying on fuzzy vector similarity.

Why not embeddings?
- Embeddings drift over time and across models
- Similarity scores are opaque and nondeterministic
- They often require GPUs or cloud APIs
- You can't inspect why something was retrieved

STAR gives you deterministic, inspectable results. Same graph, same query, same output—every time.

Key technical details:
- Runs entirely offline in <3GB RAM. No API calls, no GPUs needed. Fits on a Raspberry Pi.
- Compiled to WASM – embed it anywhere, including browsers.
- Recursive architecture – we used Anchor Engine to help write its own code. The dogfooding is real.
- AGPL-3.0 – open source, always.

What it's not: It's not a replacement for LLMs or embeddings. It's a memory layer—a deterministic, inspectable substrate that gives LLMs persistent context without vector databases or cloud dependencies.

The whitepaper goes deep on the graph traversal math and includes benchmarks vs. vector search:https://github.com/RSBalchII/anchor-engine-node/blob/main/do...

We're especially interested in feedback from people who've built RAG systems or experimented with symbolic memory layers. If you've ever wanted to give an LLM long-term memory that fits on a Raspberry Pi, this might be interesting to you.