MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lqet | 2026-03-05 12:25:27+00:00
> it is appalling how much these people are not interested in who actually gives their enterprise money

After we bought our house, the property tax was still billed to the previous owner for some time. We called our local city hall, and their answer was basically "just talk to the previous owner and pay the tax for them, we don't care where the money comes from".

Pecunia non olet.
by spicyusername | 2026-03-05 12:25:59+00:00
luddites were right

And yet in the 200 years since human civilization has improved by every imaginable metric, in most cases by orders of magnitude. The difference between 2026 and 1826 is nearly incomprehensible. I suspect most people scarcely imagine how horrific the average life was in 1826, relatively speaking. And between then and now were the industrial revolution, multiple world wars, and generally some of the most terrible events, crooked politicians, and life changing technological forces. And here we are, mostly fine in most places.

I get there are many things happening today that are frustrating or moving some element of human life in negative or ambiguous directions, but we really have to keep perspective on these things.

Nearly every problem today is a problem with a solution.

The feelings of panic we have that things are going wrong are useful signals to help guide and motivate us to implement those solutions, but we really must avoid letting the doomerism dominate. Just because we hear constant negative news doesn't mean things are lost. Doesn't even mean things are bad.

It just means we have been hearing a lot of negative news.

This is what it looks like for progress to not be monotonically increasing.
by orthoxerox | 2026-03-05 12:26:18+00:00
The main point is "It's good for the heritage and good for the customers."

How are the customers hurt if their pie has not been baked by a babushka in Petrozavodsk using the old original recipe, but by an anonymous migrant worker in a dark kitchen using an optimized recipe if the end result is objectively the same? The packaging doesn't have to say who it was made by.

I also don't see the problem with the heritage. The comment I replied to already said anyone could call their pies Karelian, so there was no restriction that benefitted the residents of a specific region. I can see a PDO-like carveout that goes "we want to preserve the traditional pie-making of Karelia, so we want this activity to remain economically viable. Therefore, only pies baked in Karelia can be sold as Karelian pies." But I don't see how Sysco baking the same pies and distributing them nationwide helps maintain the heritage.
by nickdothutton | 2026-03-05 12:26:43+00:00
"As under a green sea, I saw him drowning."

Fortunately, at least in my time, this was part of the curriculum in UK schools, and we had an exceptional English teacher. Like one of the other commenters here, I'm a science and numbers man, but can recite this poem still. Perhaps it was particularly memorable as I have an ancestor who occupies Sanctuary Wood as a consequence of a gas shell.
by jghub | 2026-03-05 12:27:12+00:00
The difference in usability is most apparent during context switching and burst activity.

The Problem with Heuristics:
Most tools use simple counters and multipliers. If you spend 10 minutes performing a repetitive task in a temporary directory (e.g., a "one-off" burst of cd actions into a build folder), a heuristic model can "overlearn" that path. This often clobbers your long-term habits, making your primary project directory harder to reach until you have manually "re-trained" the tool.

The Usability of the Power-Law Model:
Because sd calculates the score by convolving a fixed window of history (the "Attention Span"), it distinguishes between a long-term habit and a recent fluke more effectively.

Stability: Your main work directories remain at the top of the results even if you briefly go "off-track" in other folders.

Decay Precision: if you look at the README of the project, the current chosen default exponent of the power-law decay
p=9.97 -- which just means that if you include the 1000 last cd actions into ranking computation that the 500th of those (in the middel of the window) gets a weight of 1/2^9.97=1/1000 -- this effectively means that only any visit to the considered dir within last 500 contributes to the score (while the window width controls how long the cd remains within "attention span") and only the last 100 or so really influence the scor.
so that is by default (can be altered by user easily) much
"steeper" than a linear or simple exponential decay. It prioritizes what you are doing right now without forgetting what you do consistently.

Zero Maintenance: You rarely have to "purge" or "delete" paths from the database because the math naturally suppresses "noise" while amplifying "signals."

In short: The math matters because it reduces the number of times the tool teleports you to the wrong place after a change in workflow.

The difference in detail behaivour boils down to: sd does log the individual cd event history, so nows something about _when_ each visit has happened not only how _often_ it has happened plus when the single most recent one did (which to the best of my understanding is what z/zoxide do). So there is more information to utilize for the ranking. And I believe the difference in behaviour is notable and makes a difference.

the rest is matter of taste: sd does allow to alter ranking transiently in running shell if you note that your current task requires shortly to emphasise or de-emphasise recency importance (alter power exponent) or you want smaller or larger attention span (alter window size). I rarely need/do that but it happens.

last not least sd also provides an interactive selection facility to pick any dir currently within attention span (i.e. "on the dir stack"). if you have fzf installed it uses that as UI for this selection, othrwise falls back to simply index-based selection in terminal. Again, I used this not too often, but sometimes one does want that (e.g. if simply not remembering the path but having to read it to remember it...)
by RogYga | 2026-03-05 12:27:21+00:00
Location: Serbia (Europe) Remote: Yes
Technologies: Frontend - React, TypeScript, Next.js, TanStack Query (React Query, Tab), Redux, Tailwind CSS, Shadcn, GraphQL, WCAG (Accessibility), Vite, Jest, Cypress, React Testing Library, Vitest, CSS Modules, Styled Components, Radix UI, Firebase, Clerk, REST APIs, Performance optimisation, Cursor etc.

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Iuz_fngLMDV0TBMgDYAlbTVuZUt...

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rogy-iga/

Toptal profile: https://www.toptal.com/resume/igor-marinkovic

Email: marigorinkovic@gmail.com

Senior Frontend Engineer with 8+ years of experience, specialized in React and TypeScript. Strong focus on performance optimization, scalable UI architecture, and building accessible, user-centric applications. Experienced in fast-paced startup environments and motivated to help shape high-growth products from the ground up.
by zabzonk | 2026-03-05 12:27:43+00:00
People like the language - Like it though I have only written a few bits and bobs in it. They also like Fortran, Prolog, and (dare I say it) Haskell, and many others that don't appear here so often. Just because a language is not this week's hotness (looking at you Rust) does not make it "obsolete".
by wolvesechoes | 2026-03-05 12:27:57+00:00
I am bit tired of such discussions.

I don't care if LLMs are good at coding or bad at it (in my experience the answer is "it depends"). I don't care how good are they at anything else. What matters in the end is that this tech is not to empower a common person (although it could). It is not here to make our lives better, more worthwhile, more satisfying (it could do these as well). It is there to reduce our agency, to make it easier to fire us, to put us in even more precarious position, to suck even more wealth from those that have little to those that have a lot.

Yet what I see are pigs discussing the usefulness of bacon-making machine just because it also happens to be able to produce tasty soybean feed. They forget that it is not soybean feed that their owner bought this machine for, and that their owner expects a return from such investment.
Show HN: Turn GitHub commits into a publish-ready changelog
by alexkuchar | 2026-03-05 12:28:15+00:00
Hi HN,

I kept shipping features without updating my changelog. After enough times a user asked “when did that change?”, I built HeyEmit to fix it.

HeyEmit is a changelog platform that integrates as a GitHub App, listens to repository events, analyzes commit diffs, and generates structured draft changelog entries for you to review and publish.

The goal isn’t to automate releases — it’s to remove the annoying part of writing changelogs so you actually maintain them.

Typical workflow:

- connect your GitHub repo

- define rules for what should trigger
changelog entries

- commits generate draft entries automatically

- review, edit, and publish when ready

HeyEmit also provides an embeddable changelog widget for your app or website and a hosted public changelog page so your users can see what's changed.

It's a paid tool, with AI-generated changelog drafts available for projects that want automatic summaries.

I'd love feedback from other developers:

- how do you currently maintain changelogs?

- would something like this fit your workflow?

- what features would make it more useful?

Project: https://heyemit.com
by carlob | 2026-03-05 12:28:17+00:00
> What have Governments ever created except for laws that stifle innovation/progress every single time?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ

In all seriousness without the government you would have no innovation and progress, because it's the public school system, functioning roads, research grants a stable and lawful society that allow you to do any kind of innovation.

Apart from that, you have answered to a strawman. I said redistribute, not give to the government. I explicitly worded things that way because I don't think we should not be having a discussion on policy.

I think we are moving to an economy where the share of profits taken by capital becomes much larger than the one take from labor. If that happens then laborers will have very little discretionary income to fuel consumption and even capitalists will end up suffering. We can choose to redistribute now or wait for it to happen naturally, however that usually happens in a much more violent way, be it hyperinflation, famine, war or revolution.
by pkaral | 2026-03-05 12:29:29+00:00
Great topic, and great start. Another anti-pattern I see is: "Do not file PRs on code that you hasn't been reviewed for accessibility to a human".

At first glance, this could seem to be redundant (downstream) of the suggested anti-pattern. But reviewing code doesn't necessarily mean reading all of it. A reviewer might want to unpack a function you already know well, because you specified it and saw it work (but never read).
by bombcar | 2026-03-05 12:30:00+00:00
Procedural generation underlies the most popular game of all time (Minecraft) and is foundational for numerous other games of a similar type - Dwarf Fortress, et al.

And it's used to power effect where you might not expect it (Stardew Valley mines).

What procedural generation does NOT work at is generating "story elements" though perhaps even that can fall, Dwarf Fortress already does decently enough given that the player will fill in the blanks.
by redenter | 2026-03-05 12:30:47+00:00
Sometimes I give presentations about how awesome the browser is. And everytime it reminds of all the capabilities we had back in the time. Easy animations, sound, 3D, augmented reality.
Yea, we've got HTML5. But it took years to even come close to what we could do with Flash and Actionscript. Let alone how easy it was to create super cool animations.
by swiftcoder | 2026-03-05 12:30:49+00:00
> There’s legal precedent is that you can use a derived work to generate a new unique work (the spec derived for the copyrighted code is very much a derived work)

Indeed, but in the clean room scenario, the party who implements the spec has to be a separate entity that has never seen the code. Whether or not the LLM is copyright infringing is a separate question - it definitely has (at least some) familiarity with the code in question, which makes the "clean room" argument an uphill battle
by dathinab | 2026-03-05 12:30:49+00:00
The current US government is systematically attacking anything which tries to "reduce the effects of climate change" and claims it's mostly all a scam.

So no.

But what probably also isn't included but should is environmental damage.

Running low quality "temp." gas turbines non stop isn't without filters etc. isn't just bad for the climate, it's a air pollution which can directly affect anyone in it's path with not only increased chances for lounge cancer but also much more short term effects like asthma, and increased chances of asthma attacks ending deadly. Especially if the weather prevents easy dispersion (like it tends to do in winter). It's not that long ago (<80y) that the west had acid rains, and deadly smog accidents exactly from this kind of negligent shit. And if we look at Asia this is sometimes still a topic today (but has gotten much better compared to just ~20 years ago).
by Dumblydorr | 2026-03-05 12:31:37+00:00
Is it wildly uneducated to not know any of the games you mentioned? I didn’t realize education covered less known video games? Wouldn’t a better example be No Man’s Sky, if we’re talking procedural gen and eventually a good game.

In any case, I agree that gamers by and large don’t care to what extent the game creation was automated. They are happy to use automated enemies, automated allies, automated armies and pre-made cut scenes. Why would they stop short at automated code gen? I genuinely think 90% wouldn’t mind if humans are still in the loop but the product overall is better.
by pjmlp | 2026-03-05 12:31:46+00:00
I was kind of pissed that my parents sponsored getting a 386SX with Windows 3.1 alongside DR-DOS 5, instead of an Amiga, as everyone else on my group, in hindsight they bet on the right system.

To note, the hardware required to get OS/2 running would have added 1 000 euro more in today's money.

A couple of years later Comodore was gone and the history has been racounted endless times.

Still we don't give up keeping it alive somehow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJS5E4CPmpY
by duckerude | 2026-03-05 12:31:50+00:00
Perhaps notable: years ago the original original chardet was rewritten with a different license: https://github.com/hsivonen/chardetng

AFAIK this was not a clean room reimplementation. But since it was rewritten by hand, into a different language, with not just a different internal design but a different API, I could easily buy that chardetng doesn't infringe while Python chardet 7 does.
by d4rkp4ttern | 2026-03-05 12:32:18+00:00
Related, I often work with markdown docs (usually created via CLI agents like Claude Code) and need to collaborate with others in google docs, which is extremely markdown-unfriendly[1], so I built small quality-of-life CLI tools to convert Gdocs -> md and vice versa, called gdoc2md and md2gdoc:

https://pchalasani.github.io/claude-code-tools/integrations/...

They handle embedded images in both directions. There are similar gsheet2csv and csv2gsheet tools in the same repo.

Similar to the posted tool, there is a first time set up involving creating an app, that is documented above.

[1] in the sense there are multiple annoying clicks/steps to get a markdown doc to look good in Gdocs. You'd know the pain if you've tried it.
by simiones | 2026-03-05 12:33:58+00:00
Producing a copy of a copyrighted work through a purely mechanical process is clear violation of copyright. LLMs are absolutely not different from a copier machine in the eyes of the law.

Original works can only be produced by a human being, by definition in copyright law. Any artifact produced by an animal, a mechanical process, a machine, a natural phenomenon etc is either a derived work if it started from an original copyrighted work, or a public domain artifact not covered by copyright law if it didn't.

For example, an image created on a rock struck by lightning is not a copyright covered work. Similarly, an image generated by an diffusion model from a randomly generated sentence is not a copyrightable work. However, if you feed a novel as a prompt to an LLM and ask for a summary, the resulting summary is a derived work of said novel, and it falls under the copyright of the novel's owner - you are not allowed to distribute copies of the summary the LLM generated for you.

Whether the output of an LLM, or the LLM weights themselves, might be considered derived works of the training set of that LLM is a completely different discussion, and one that has not yet been settled in court.
by throwaw12 | 2026-03-05 12:34:52+00:00
Let's make some assumptions first:

1. DCs must be built anyway

2. You can't take away energy from households

(3). Highly preferred that you are not going to impact cost negatively to households (otherwise why we have this discussion)

based on these assumptions, solution I see is, BigTech subsidising energy costs for 10 years for nearby households (area will be geofenced, e.g. in the radius of 50km), subsidy will be based on the prices outside of that radius. e.g. if you everyone outside of closest DC pays 1$ and in the radius prices become 1.5$, 0.5$ will be covered by BigTech and they're also responsible & pay to setup the system to automatically include everyone in subsidy program, not like you need to apply

Also BigTech is not going to build the power generation plants, it must be built by existing processes to minimize impact on pricing
by lqet | 2026-03-05 12:35:34+00:00
> has an integration with SAP

There is your problem right there. A family member worked for a large German company which used in-house developed software for exchanging and preparing lab reports for customers. The software worked well since the 90ies, was perfectly tailored to the company, and the people writing it were in the same building and could ship bug fixes within hours. Everyone was happy. Around 2015, someone in management had the idea to move the entire process to a customized off-the-shelf SAP product because of <buzzwords>. The software engineers were in effect degraded to administrators. The new system missed so many edge cases of the lab process that they had to fall back to pen, paper and phone. Customer complaints and employee turnover started to skyrocket immediately afterwards.
by pkaral | 2026-03-05 12:35:48+00:00
There are so many implicit premises in that short comment, such as:

- Incredibly smart people are always right when it comes to extremely complex systems involving both deterministic behavior and human psychology
- The people with the nuclear codes will be given their orders by (or themselves be) incredibly smart people
- Wargames work (they have a horrible track record)
- The best plans are based on a complete understanding of the starting conditions and the factors that influence the modelling (including the "unknown unknowns")

I could go on.
by matrixgard | 2026-03-05 12:36:53+00:00
Getting your first users in regulated health is almost always slower than you expect and faster than incumbents want. The trick most teams miss early on is going B2B before B2C — a single physio clinic or rehab center running a 10-patient pilot gives you real outcomes data, which is the only thing that moves the needle in this space. No-code marketing funnels won't get you past the procurement desk at a hospital, but a PDF with before/after gait scores from 10 patients will.

On the distribution side, the quickest path I've seen is physio association conferences and LinkedIn outreach to department heads at rehab centers — not patients directly. Patients don't choose their rehab tools, clinicians do. The clinical champion model works surprisingly well even at early stage if you frame it as a research collaboration rather than a sales pitch.

What's your current plan for collecting and presenting outcomes data from your first cohort?
by matrixgard | 2026-03-05 12:37:03+00:00
The one-minute setup is a strong pitch for the demo, but I'm curious what happens when the agent hits an edge case it wasn't trained on — does it gracefully defer to a human or does it just hallucinate a confident wrong answer? That's the moment that kills trust with customers, especially in the first few weeks of deployment.

The WhatsApp integration is smart — that's where most SMB customer conversations actually happen in a lot of markets outside the US. What does the handoff flow look like if a conversation escalates beyond what the agent can handle?

Are you targeting businesses that already have a sales process and want to automate it, or founders who are pre-sales-motion and trying to figure out how to talk to customers at all?
by matrixgard | 2026-03-05 12:37:13+00:00
The pact drift problem is real and underrated. Most teams don't notice it until a customer complains about something that was working fine six months ago — by then the audit trail is gone and you're debugging vibes, not code.

The decay-by-time approach you're describing is interesting but I'd push back slightly on fixed 7-day windows. Behavior drift is much more correlated with model updates and prompt changes than calendar time — an agent that hasn't changed in 90 days is probably more trustworthy than one that got a prompt tweak last week. Versioning pact scores to model and prompt hash might give you a sharper signal than wall-clock expiry.

What's your current plan for detecting when a model provider silently updates the underlying weights? That's the scenario that breaks pact scores without any change on your side.
by Horos | 2026-03-05 12:37:45+00:00
Nice try — the local-first distributed pattern worth building on.

Three questions:

Why blockchain for access rights? A signed Merkle structure or a Certificate Transparency-style log would give the same guarantees without the operational complexity. What does the blockchain add here that a simpler append-only signed registry doesn't?

The threat model is unclear. If the blockchain provider controls validation, the "accessible only to end users" guarantee depends on trusting that provider. This is the oracle problem — the chain guarantees integrity of what's inside it, but not the truthfulness of what gets written in. Who runs the chain, and what happens if they're compromised or write false access rights?

Go is listed first in the bindings but the example code is Python. Is the Go binding at feature parity, or is Python the primary target?
by miki123211 | 2026-03-05 12:38:43+00:00
In Poland, I pay 25pln (~$7) per month for unlimited calling and texting + 24GB[1] per month I think.

The fun part is that the data rolls over, so I have something like 4TB of unused data right now, + whatever the special bonus pool I get with each top-up.

The gotcha of this promo is that it all resets back to 0 if you forget to top up even once. I put one over on them though, my bank has an "auto top-up" feature, which is completely free, and of which I'm a very happy customer.

[1] It's 15GB for the first month of the promotion and then it rises by 1GB each month until some cap. Not sure exactly what the cap is though, as the data rolls over and I'm using some each month, so it's very hard to keep track of.
by nickjj | 2026-03-05 12:39:19+00:00
It's metal "A-shell", I got mine in black. It also comes in blue or rose gold.

I'm not a huge touchpad fan, but it's very usable. It doesn't misclick.

When picking it, you can choose up to 64 GB of RAM and a 2 TB SSD. It was $50 more for 2 TB instead of 1 TB.

The only problem is it seems to be out of stock. It's a Nimo N155. Amazon resellers are also marking it up like crazy compared to its official listed price.