MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by wildylion | 2026-03-10 20:51:26+00:00
I'm considering even creating a dial-up (yes, V.34 modem!) line somewhere near to Russia, to offer a side channel with text browsing, news, IRC and email. For when things get really, really bad (they will ...)

Before you ask: yes, dialup works on modern networks if the codec is G.711 (uncompressed). Most public phone network is this way because fax is a thing, but some bulk carriers or some enterprises use compressed codecs.
by joe_mamba | 2026-03-10 20:51:31+00:00
>but people using it are mostly non-technicals

Non-technical people haven't even heard of OpenClaw or Github, let alone know how to use and deploy them. Non-technical people don't even know what OS their Samsung or iPhone is called.

If you can find something on Github and deploy it on your system, you're part of the technical crowd.
by hinkley | 2026-03-10 20:51:36+00:00
There is supposedly a famous video series of Uncle Bob trying and failing to solve sudoku with TDD. He did not read any guides on solving it and tried from first principles instead, and bounced off of it.

It’s clear to me that if you don’t know what you’re building, testing it first has rubber duck value that can easily be overshadowed by Sunk Cost. I always test my pillars - the bits of the problem that are definite and which I will build off of.

Yes, starting with tests without market fit can also be fatal. But calling anything done without tests is just a slower poison. Before you airlift your brain to another unrelated problem you need to codify some of your assumptions. If you’re good at testing you can write them in a manner that makes it easy to delete them when requirements change. But that takes practice a lot of people don’t have because they avoid writing tests or they write the exact same kinds of tests for years at a time without every stretching their skills.

If you’re not writing tests you’re not writing good ones when you do. Testing is part of CI and the whole philosophy of CI is do the painful parts until you either grow callouses or get fed up and file off the scratchy bits. To avoid testing is to forget the face of your father.
by pixl97 | 2026-03-10 20:52:17+00:00
The deeper may just be the uncertain nature of quantum physics. That is any complex system must be built from redundant and repeatable actions, and/or have a self correction mechanism to fix itself if a bit happens to flip out of the universe. This leads to the evolutionary weeding out of indivisible complex systems as the system gains more components its improbable that a load bearing structure in that system will not fail.

Hence every system we get to see in nature is built from smaller components that generate complexity via repetition.

Our computers don't escape from this either. As the components get smaller you end up with your charge probability field outside of your component traces.
by Joel_Mckay | 2026-03-10 20:52:25+00:00
Any new hardware lags in compiler optimizations.

i. llvm presentation can thrash caches if setup wrong (given the plethora of RISC-V fragmented versions, most compilers won't cover every vanity silicon.)

ii. gcc is also "slow" in general, but is predictable/reliable

iii. emulation is always slower than kvm in qemu

It may seem silly, but I'd try a gcc build with -O0 flag, and a toy unit test with -S to see if the ASM is actually foobar. One may have to brute force the optimizer flags to narrow your search. Best regards =3
by gmueckl | 2026-03-10 20:53:15+00:00
In very simple terms, Roblox is an MMO based exclusively around user generated contents (games, items, assets...), including its own virtual currency, microtransactions, marketplaces and convertibility to/from real money. Roblox as a company takes pretty hefty cut from all transactions.

There has been a silent shift in the gaming market over a long time now. Roblox is one aspect of it. Another is the absolutely massive amount of money raked in by some free to play mobile phone titles. For example, Playrix has a revenue comparable to Ubisoft, but their main products are a series of match-3 type games for phones.
by adampunk | 2026-03-10 20:53:48+00:00
The problem I have with this analogy is it cuts the other way. His tempting to look at the dotcom bust and think of pets.com or some other venture where somebody lost their shirt. It gets a little harder when you expand it to companies that today own an enormous slice of the world, because they bet on the Internet. Most people lost in the dotcom boom; Amazon, for instance, didn’t. The whole premise was that if you moved soon enough, you could buy in on the ground floor—-that was emphatically the case if you bought Amazon. Now they own a huge almost inextractable chunk of the Internet. It’s quite hard to do business or pleasure on the Internet without somehow involving Amazon.

What I am saying and what I think a lot of folks who are trying to get this point across are saying is that this will be critical infrastructure sooner than 20 years. The right frame of mind is to look at this like we look at the Internet circa of the 1980s or the 1970s. This is big messy and experimental right now. We are in the middle of rebuilding computing with foundation models. That is happening at an enormous subsidy for the time being.
by Levitating | 2026-03-10 20:54:01+00:00
This is why felix has been building the risc-v archlinux repositories[1] using the Milk-V Pioneer.

I think the ban of SOPHGO is part to blame for the slow development.[2] They had the most performant and interesting SOCs. I had a bunch of pre-orders for the Milk-V Oasis before it was cancelled. It was supposed to come out a while ago, using the SG2380, supposedly much more performant than the Milk-V Titan mentioned in the article (which still isn't out).

It was also SOPHGO's SOCs that powered the crazy cheap/performant/versatile Milk-V DUO boards. They have the ability to switch ARM/RISC-V architecture.

[1]: https://archriscv.felixc.at/

[2]: https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...
by heavyset_go | 2026-03-10 20:55:07+00:00
Yes[1]. Copyright applies to human creations, not machine generated output.

It's possible to use AI output in human created content, and it can be copyrightable, and substantiative, transformative human-creative alteration of AI output is also copyrightable.

100% machine generated code is not copyrightable.

[1] https://newsroom.loc.gov/news/copyright-office-releases-part...
by bigyabai | 2026-03-10 20:55:07+00:00
> (if and only if your use-case is covered software wise.)

Judging by Nvidia's current valuation, that's a parenthetical worth ~4 trillion dollars. Apple isn't muscling AMD or Nvidia out of the datacenter anytime soon, and they're basically feeding Intel Foundry customers by dominating TSMC fab capacity. Apple's contribution to the chip shortage is so bad that even they have considered using Intel Foundry Services: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/11/28/intel-rumored-to-supply...

It's been 7 years of Apple Silicon and the macOS market share really hasn't shifted much. The Year Of Apple Silicon For People Whose Use-Case Is Covered Software Wise was 2019; the majority of remaining customers aren't showing any interest.
by pear01 | 2026-03-10 20:55:58+00:00
Simply incorrect. Get a map of modern Europe and Rome at that time. Then plot not only the Roman territory, but also population and flows of commerce. Compare.

It does not map to modern Europe. It encircles the Mediterranean with much of Europe either not included or on the periphery. Most of Europe was to the Romans barbarian hinterland 2000 years ago. Even at its greatest extent you will see Rome was always centered on the Mediterranean. The "West" would have been entirely alienated from said culture had the flame not been kept alive by the East when the West fell.
by steelbrain | 2026-03-10 20:56:08+00:00
Thank you for your comment!

The usecase for something like this is when you control both sides, server & client. There is some basic HMAC auth built into each request.

> I would recommend to sandbox if at all possible.

Since the server is a standard binary that doesn't need any special permissions, you could create the most locked down user in your server that only has access to a limit set of files and the GPUs and it'll work just fine. This is encouraged.
by wildylion | 2026-03-10 20:56:12+00:00
Fuck you. I have many people here (many of them queer) who had to leave everything and become forced emigres or asylum seekers.

Have a bit of compassion, would ya?

My childhood crush is in Ukraine, my dear friend had to leave everything and seek refuge in NL. My friends are under a constant threat of getting imprisoned for 10+ years because they still help support queer and trans people in Russia.

Compared to them I feel very privileged, because I was able to GTFO on my own. But if you think that all Russian citizens must be deported, you're either a troll or a madman. Besides, this is exactly what, for example, Stalin did to Chechens, or think about what the USA did to the Japanese.

Did it help someone? No. Did it ruin millions of lives? You fucking guess.
by SequoiaHope | 2026-03-10 20:56:32+00:00
I’m telling it to use red/green tdd [1] and it will write test that don’t fail and then says “ah the issue is already fixed” and then move on. You really have to watch it very closely. I’m having a huge problem with bad tests in my system despite a “governance model” that I always refer it to which requires red/green tdd.

[1] https://simonwillison.net/guides/agentic-engineering-pattern...
by mr-wendel | 2026-03-10 20:56:50+00:00
The fact that you are engaging in this thread shows me you have considered my opinions, even if you reject them. I think thats great, even in the face of being told I advocate for the collapse of civilization and that I want others to shut up and not be heard.

It is a bit insulting, but I get that these issues are important and people feel like the stakes are sky-high: job loss, misallocation of resources, enshitification, increased social stratification, abrogation of personal responsibility, runaway corporate irresponsibility, amplification of bad actors, and just maybe that `p(doom)` is way higher than AI-optimists are willing to consider. Especially as AI makes advances into warfare, justice, and surveillance.

Even if you think AI is great, it's easy to acknowledge that all it may take is zealotry and the rot within politics to turn it into a disaster. You're absolutely right to identify that there are some eerie similarities to the "gun's don't kill people, people kill people" line of thinking.

There IS a lot to grapple with. However, I disagree with these conclusions (so far) and especially that AI is a unique danger to humanity. I also disagree that AI in any form is our salvation and going to elevate humanity to unfathomable heights (or anything close to that).

But, to bring it back to this specific topic, I think OSS projects stand to benefit (increasingly so as improvements continue) from AI and should avoid taking hardline stances against it.
by NuclearPM | 2026-03-10 20:57:22+00:00
Deciding on the syntax and semantics myself and using AI to help implement my toy language has been very rewarding.

Mine is an Io and Rebol inspired language that uses SQlite and Luajit as a runtime.

1.to 10 .map[n | n * n].each[n | n.say!]
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-03-10 20:58:05+00:00
Dang, Although I really appreciate the work you put in. I am not quite sure if the criticism of said company because of genuine reasons and suspicions about it in launch HN of said company is offtopic. As John said, I agree with him on the aspect that the definition of offtopic might vary for us then it seems.

But if I may ask, doesn't the policy of moderate less not more your (3) point opposite to what you said about offtopic from how I perceive it?

> Sure, we marked the offtopic comments offtopic, which lowers them on the page. This is standard HN moderation. If we didn't do this, then nearly every thread would be choked with something offtopic at the top.

>Oh, and (3) - when YC or a YC-funded startup is part of a story, then we moderate less than we otherwise would [2]. We do still moderate, though—we just do it less.

I would suggest that the minor disagreements that we have is because these two points seem contradictory to me from how I perceive it. I would suggest (if possible) to moderate less as you mention not more and let the order of ranking be natural which in this case might be that john's comments can come at the first place for example. Because you are moderating it by putting it into downweighting it and that's one of the concerns that we sort of have.

Thoughts?
by tasuki | 2026-03-10 20:58:06+00:00
Ok, fair.

But you see: not one comment here is neutral. It would be silly to expect a comment to be neutral, such a comment wouldn't be written in the first place. I think the original comment expressed the point while staying as neutral as possible.

> So you think the commenter was neutral?

Yes, it stated some facts.

> No judgment?

Yes, it contained no explicit value judgement. Any value judgement we bring into it is our own.

> Again, what was the purpose of the comment then?

How would I know the purpose of someone else's comments? I don't even really know what my purpose is debating here with you. I certainly don't see myself persuading you of anything :)
by takklz | 2026-03-10 20:58:10+00:00
APPLYING

What's up friends! I am a Senior Salesforce Developer and Architect that has worked in high tech software companies for the last 10 years. I recently tried my hand at entrepreneurship that unfortunately did not workout, so I am back on the job hunt! I am really open to anything. I have worked with internal RevOps teams with Sales, Finance, Customer Support, and much more. I have spent time in consulting as well, and have no problem working directly with clients as a Customer Success Manger or Sales Engineer etc. If anyone has anything interesting feel free to ping me for sure! I also have a lot of other software engineering skills (Ruby on Rails, VueJS, Nuxt, TailwindCSS).

Location: Pensacola, FL - Fairhope, AL

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Skills/Technologies: (LWC, APEX, Salesforce CPQ, basically everything salesforce has to offer! haha)

Résumé: https://www.linkedin.com/in/taylorkrause/

Email: taylorkrause@gmail.com
by Jtsummers | 2026-03-10 20:58:14+00:00
The manual tests also stop being run, or get reduced to such an extreme that any value from them is going to be low. Testing only happy paths and maybe release specific tests. This is shockingly (to outsiders, not to anyone who's ever been in the industry) common in aerospace and defense systems. There were some aircraft I would not fly on for a few years until I knew our updates had rolled out. Now I'm not connected to that work anymore so I'm back to "ignorance is bliss" mode and try not to think about it.
by vidimitrov | 2026-03-10 20:58:30+00:00
He admits the real hole himself: "this doesn't catch spec misunderstandings. If your spec was wrong to begin with, the checks will pass."

But there's a second problem underneath that one. Acceptance criteria are ephemeral. You write them before prompting, Playwright runs against them, and then where do they go? A Notion doc. A PR comment. Nowhere permanent. Next time an agent touches that feature, it's starting from zero again.

The commit that ships the feature should carry the criteria that verified it. Git already travels with the code. The reasoning behind it should too.
by verall | 2026-03-10 20:58:32+00:00
Tracking solar time would mean it's equivalently light out at 5AM and at 7PM. Nearly noone is awake at 5AM. Nearly everyone is awake at 7PM. You can wave your arms around and say "well then why don't people wake up earlier", but they have jobs and stuff. The "scientific evidence" for standard time is flimsy.
by gbnwl | 2026-03-10 20:58:39+00:00
I'm noticing terms related to DL/RL/NLP are being used more and more informally as AI takes over more of the cultural zeitgeist and people want to use the fancy new terms of the era, even if inaccurately. A friend told me he "trained and fine tuned a custom agent" for his work when what he meant was he modified a claude.md file.
by lovich | 2026-03-10 21:00:06+00:00
I’m actually not familiar enough to know. Can models be refreshed for cheaper? I thought due to the black box nature of them that there would be no difference between updating and generating a whole new model.

Maybe they can get to a “good enough” level where the next model isn’t 10x the price but if the business model requires ever increasing sizes to paper over the r&d costs from the previous set then I don’t understand how they would transition to profitability
by wildylion | 2026-03-10 21:00:18+00:00
This is the literal job of state security. Besides, most of those $#@$###s get in not by pretending they've been persecuted, but simply because they already have deep cover and hold passports of other countries.

And I sincerely hope that you will never have to know what it's like to flee your own country, first hand. Peace.
by foundatron | 2026-03-10 21:00:30+00:00
Feels like a whole bunch of us are converging on very similar patterns right now.

I've been building OctopusGarden (https://github.com/foundatron/octopusgarden), which is basically a dark software factory for autonomous code generation and validation. A lot of the techniques were inspired by StrongDM's production software factory (https://factory.strongdm.ai/). The autoissue.py script (https://github.com/foundatron/octopusgarden/blob/main/script...) does something really close to what others in this thread are describing with information barriers. It's a 6-phase pipeline (plan, review plan, implement, cold code review, fix findings, CI retry) where each phase only gets the context it actually needs. The code review phase sees only the diff. Not the issue, not the plan. Just the diff. That's not a prompt instruction, it's how the pipeline is wired. Complexity ratings from the review drive model selection too, so simple stuff stays on Sonnet and complex tasks get bumped to Opus.

On the test freezing discussion, OctopusGarden takes a different approach. Instead of locking test files, the system treats hand-written scenarios as a holdout set that the generating agent literally never sees. And rather than binary pass/fail (which is totally gameable, the specification gaming point elsewhere in this thread is spot on), an LLM judge scores satisfaction probabilistically, 0-100 per scenario step. The whole thing runs in an iterative loop: generate, build in Docker, execute, score, refine. When scores plateau there's a wonder/reflect recovery mechanism that diagnoses what's stuck and tries to break out of it.

The point about reviewing 20k lines of generated code is real. I don't have a perfect answer either, but the pipeline does diff truncation (caps at 100KB, picks the 10 largest changed files, truncates to 3k lines) and CI failures get up to 4 automated retry attempts that analyze the actual failure logs. At least overnight runs don't just accumulate broken PRs silently.

Also want to shout out Ouroboros (https://github.com/Q00/ouroboros), which comes at the problem from the opposite direction. Instead of better verification after generation, it uses Socratic questioning to score specification ambiguity before any code gets written. It literally won't let you proceed until ambiguity drops below a threshold. The core idea ("AI can build anything, the hard part is knowing what to build") pairs well with the verification-focused approaches everyone's discussing here. Spec refinement upstream, holdout validation downstream.
by cobolcomesback | 2026-03-10 21:00:35+00:00
The message and meeting being discussed here have nothing to do with AWS or any outages AWS has faced recently. I think you’re missing the point of the article and the discussion.

I don’t blame you, because this is just bad reporting (and potentially intentionally malicious to make you think it’s about AWS). But the meeting and discussion was with the Amazon retail teams, talking about Amazon retail processes, and Amazon retail services. The teams and processes that handle this are entirely separate from any AWS outages you are thinking of.
by hackerInnen | 2026-03-10 21:00:59+00:00
This. While I doubt that there will be a good (whatever that means) desktop risc-v CPU anytime soon, I do think that it will eventually catch up in embedded systems and special applications. Maybe even high core count servers.

It just takes time, people who believe in it and tons of money. Will see where the journey goes, but I am a big risc-v believer
by gruez | 2026-03-10 21:01:01+00:00
>If I could rip K-Pop Demon Hunters with a screen capture app to obtain a file I could share with a friend, I still wouldn't do it.

Well no, because the lack of DRM wouldn't just mean you can manually screen record netflix. It also means you can write an app to screen record netfilx for you, or skip that altogether, similar to something like yt-dlp. After all, if somebody wants to rip youtube (DRM free), they don't screenrecord it, they find some random website/tool off google.
by jongjong | 2026-03-10 21:01:39+00:00
The part about 'genius' being slow and about wrestling with difficult problems resonates.

The idea of 'genius' or in fact 'intelligence' being about speed isn't just a Hollywood thing though; it's also been a Silicon Valley thing as well; it's why most big tech interviews are time-constrained.

Over the years, I've also heard many tech CEOs say stuff alongside "There's only one type of intelligence" or "All intelligent people are intelligent in the same way."

These kinds of statements raised my eyebrows but now with LLMs being able to solve most puzzle problems rapidly but struggling with complex problems it's completely obvious that it's not the case.

What it says is frightening. The CEOs of big companies have been giving positions to people who have the same thinking style as them. Quick puzzle-solving tech tests are literal discrimination against the neurodivergent and also against geniuses. They've been embracing wordcels and rejecting shape rotators.

I think a guy like Tony Hoare would struggle to find a job these days.

You could argue that the issue extends beyond Hollywood and Silicon Valley... The whole education system is centered around puzzle-solving speed. It's hilarious that AI is now solving all these tests within minutes with better scores than humans. Crazy to think that LLMs could graduate from university based on current assessment policies! It's very revealing of what kind of education system we have.
by Terr_ | 2026-03-10 21:03:09+00:00
The difference is that compilers involve rules we can enumerate, adjust, etc.

Consider calculators: Their consistency and adherence to requirements was necessary for adoption. Nobody would be using them if they gave unpredictable wrong answers, or where calculations involving 420 and 69 somehow keep yielding 5318008. (To be read upside-down, of course.)
by logicprog | 2026-03-10 21:03:24+00:00
Since when is maintaining a personal patch set / fork parasitic? And in what way does it harm them, such that they should move to spaces where it doesn't happen, as a result? Also, isn't the entire point of open source precisely to enable people to make and use modifications of code if they want even if they don't want to hand code over? Also, that would be essentially making code closed source — do you think OSS is just going to die completely? Or would people make alternative projects? Additionally, this assumes coders who are fine with AI can't make anything new themselves, when if anything we've seen the opposite (see the phenomenon of reimplementing other projects that's been going around).

Additionally, if they accept AI contributions, I try, when I have the time and energy, make sure my PRs are high quality, and provide them. If they don't, then I'll go off and do my own thing, because that's literally what they asked me to do, and I wasn't going to contribute otherwise. I fail to see how that's rude or parasitic or disrespectful in any way except my assumption that the more featureful and polished forks might eventually win out.