MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by abletonlive | 2026-03-06 00:10:50+00:00
> If they're so popular and so great, why are they struggling to make profit?

Because they are optimizing for growth not for profit

> Why are they struggling to show large returns

Because they are growing their reach

> Why are they all trying to use the strategy of securing corporate welfare to enrich themselves?

"Securing corporate welfare" well this is one of those reject the premise things. They aren't doing that in any capacity that is different than any other company or sector.

> These things are enabling mass surveillance and human misery, maybe instead of constantly chasing the shiny and letting SV dictate the direction of tech in the US we start introducing public alternatives to this mess?

You're welcome to do that any time, you'll just find that your reality breaks when you realize people actually like LLMs and use them a lot. go ahead and do some basic research

> Something tells me that if you gave $100 billion to a consortium of devs across the US they would come up with a better plan to enable technological flourishing rather than mass inequality.

Yawn. You're speaking about the tech bubble but live in a bubble that doesn't match that bubble's reality. Developers love LLMs. Demand is ATH, we have less capacity to deliver LLMs than there is demand.

How do you operate in the regular world when you're so unaligned with reality?

Both apple and google's app store has LLMs as the #1 downloaded app "BuT thEy ArEn't PoPuLar EvErYbody HaTes Them".

Maybe you should unsubscribe to your bubble subreddits or wherever you are getting information to form such a discordant understanding of reality. I don't think it's working for you.
by saghm | 2026-03-06 00:11:15+00:00
> Most AI integration is like this.

>> This is such a stale take. In the past 3 years I’ve worked on multiple products with AI at their core, not as some add-on. Just because the corpo-land dullards[0] can’t execute on anything more complex than shoehorning a chatbot into their offerings doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people and companies doing far more interesting things.

I feel like this is just a disagreement of what "AI integration" means. You seem to agree that the trend they're describing exists, but it sounds like you're creating new products, not "integrating" it into existing ones.
by NekkoDroid | 2026-03-06 00:11:21+00:00
Generally you'll have your drive only unlock against certain PCRs and their values. It depends on which PCRs you select and then how exactly they are measured.

E.g. systemd measures basically everything that is part of the boot process (kernel, kernel cli, initrd, ...[1]) into different PCRs, so if any of those are different they result in differen PCR values and won't unlock the boot device (depending on which PCRs you decided to encrypt against). I forgot what excatly it measures, but I remember that some PCRs also get measured during the switch_root operation from initrd -> rootfs which can be used to make something only unlock in the initrd.

[1]: https://systemd.io/TPM2_PCR_MEASUREMENTS/
by starkparker | 2026-03-06 00:11:33+00:00
> It's not an adversarial relationship. Your job is to pressure-test the arguments and the language, not to ask every time if maybe the person submitting the article didn't really write it, or didn't really interview the person they're claiming to have interviewed

It doesn't have to be adversarial. The things you're describing as part of the job are the things I did to prove that the reporter was doing their job. So was building a relationship with reporters that shared the load of documenting what's verified and how it's verified, so we could both trust that we were each doing our jobs correctly.

> > A lapse in that non-hypothetically left me responsible, and legally liable, in situations like this.

> It didn't.

Aside from the bald-faced arrogance of telling me what did or didn't happen to me, my lawyer, their lawyer, and my publisher's lawyer all sure didn't agree with you. Fortunately for me, you weren't involved in it.
by streetfighter64 | 2026-03-06 00:11:36+00:00
Have you never seen a native app's auto-update get hijacked by malware? It happened (yet again) last month [0]

Tons of native apps also have plugins or addons, which (surprise surprise) is just code downloaded from some central repo, and run with way less sandboxing than JS.

[0] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/notepad-plus-...
by 201984 | 2026-03-06 00:12:46+00:00
>C++ has its own atomics, threads etc.

It does indeed, but they are not compatible and at least the C atomics cannot be used from C++.

>C++ also has it's own designated initializer like syntax.

One that is far more limited. This is valid C, but not C++.

struct bar {
int a;
int b;
};

struct bar tmp = {
.b = 0,
.a = 0,
};
by mlsu | 2026-03-06 00:12:46+00:00
Really?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Watches/comments/187srga/what_watch...

Clunky AF. The guy wearing this watch edited the OP's article, amongst other things. To any reasonable person the vast majority of these watches look like absolute dogshit. You know what looks good? The watches that these brands make for women!

PG described exactly the intention that goes into the design of these watches, in this very article. It's not what you say it is!
by freedomben | 2026-03-06 00:12:53+00:00
> When toggled on, /fast mode in Codex delivers up to 1.5x faster token velocity with GPT‑5.4. It’s the same model and the same intelligence, just faster.

I hate these blog posts sometimes. Surely there's got to be some tradeoff. Or have we finally arrived at the world's first "free lunch"? Otherwise why not make /fast always active with no mention and no way to turn it off?
by nomel | 2026-03-06 00:13:03+00:00
I think the most reasonable take would be to just tell the users hardware is borked, they're going to have a bad outside the game too, and point them to one of the many guides around this topic.

I don't think engineering effort should ever be put into handling literal bad hardware. But, the user would probably love you for letting them know how to fix all the crashing they have while they use their broken computer!

To counter that, we're LONG overdue for ECC in all consumer systems.
by Frank_WolfPeake | 2026-03-06 00:14:50+00:00
One thing I have noticed is that people rarely break from one massive fear, and more often it is the accumulation of too many unresolved things sitting in the background at once.

At some point the mind stops treating them as separate and just experiences all of it as pressure. Stepping away helps, but so does reducing how many of those things you let live in your head at the same time.
by handedness | 2026-03-06 00:14:51+00:00
There's a lot of hand-wringing in this thread about Motorola's location, and a lot of support from a few for a modem made by a company headquartered in....Shanghai. If consistency here is what we claim to be pursuing, then let's actually pursue it.

The opacity of the firmware situation isn't great on either, but one contains numerous excellent mitigations and is very proactively maintained, and the other is something that relies heavily on reverse engineering and community projects to even use.

And it has a physical switch and has some physical distance between it and the CPU, both of which given the previous limitations are mostly theater, in practice. "My modem is so vulnerable it needs to be turned off during extra-important times, but I don't mind leaving it on during times that are merely important." As if a compromised OS can't just wait to exfil data. If your goal is to make it to Checkpoint Charlie and don't want the hassle of having to buy a new phone after you reach freedom, fine, but I haven't seen many well-articulated needs that would be satisfied by a hardware switch when everything behind that switch is filled with vulnerabilities.

For my threat model, using the modern modem with a bounds sanitizer, an integer overflow sanitizer, stack canaries, control flow integrity, automatic initialization of stack variables, very active updates and a large commercial user base and a large market cap in part depending on it, makes a lot more sense.

Google's highly lucrative ad tech business is what makes everyone nervous about anything Google, rightly so, but their share price would plummet if they were caught using Pixel hardware in nefarious ways, or did an unreasonably insufficient job in securing it. I'm not saying it's not possible that the modem is compromised, but for my threat model I have to put a lot into the possibility of an undetected backdoor inside a modem which is by all indications constructed very well, to make using a weird old modem known to be massively lacking in dozens of ways, running an OS with all kinds of issues, make more sense.

And I say that as someone who tried the PinePhone at one point. Fun idea, but no commercial or state organization with an elevated risk profile would trust their data to a PinePhone as it stands. It's fun for hobbyists, but it doesn't belong in the conversation with iPhones and Pixels from a security standpoint. It won't be making it onto the DoDIN APL any time soon.
by bandrami | 2026-03-06 00:15:20+00:00
I don't write code for a living but I administer and maintain it.

Every time I say this people get really angry, but: so far AI has had almost no impact on my job. Neither my dev team nor my vendors are getting me software faster than they were two years ago. Docker had a bigger impact on the pipeline to me than AI has.

Maybe this will change, but until it does I'm mostly watching bemusedly.
by CamouflagedKiwi | 2026-03-06 00:15:35+00:00
This is a pretty big claim which seems to imply this is much more common than expected, but there's no real information here and the numbers don't even stack up:

> That's one crash every twenty potentially caused by bad/flaky memory, it's huge! And because it's a conservative heuristic we're underestimating the real number, it's probably going to be at least twice as much.

So the data actually only supports 5% being caused by bitflips, then there's a magic multiple of 2? Come on. Let alone this conservative heuristic that is never explained - what is it doing that makes him so certain that it can never be wrong, and yet also detects these at this rate?
by a_t48 | 2026-03-06 00:16:24+00:00
The other issue is that it's not like they can go back and run this deduplication after the fact. Image layers are stored as a single gzipped tar of the contents on the layer. You can't just pull a single file out of that. If you go and reorganize as multiple gzip streams, you'll change the digest of the layer. A new registry could do that reorganization on import (and return the digest), or provide tooling to build the layers in the right format to begin with.
by vor_ | 2026-03-06 00:16:28+00:00
> If you actually read the words used in Steam AI survey you'll know Steam has completely caved in for AI-gen code as well.

And if you actually read the article, you'd see it addressed that.

> Yeah, exactly. And LLM help developers save time from writing the same thing that has be done by other developers for a thousand times.

Like a library?
by sdf2df | 2026-03-06 00:17:41+00:00
I don't really get this TBH.

Shipping speed never/is was the issue. Most companies are terrible at figuring out what exactly they should be allocating resources behind.

Speeding up does not solve the problem that most humans who are at the top of the hierarchy are poor thinkers. In fact it compounds it. More noise, nice.
by thefirstname | 2026-03-06 00:18:11+00:00
Tea Checker is a powerful real-time search tool designed to give users direct access to the live Tea app database. Built on the official Tea app API, it enables anyone to instantly check whether their name, phone number, or someone else’s appears on the Tea platform—an app known for anonymous reviews, gossip, and dating insights. Traditionally, accessing this information required navigating closed or exclusive mobile spaces, but Tea Checker changes that by offering a transparent, web-based interface. Users can enter a name or phone number, refine by location or age range, and receive immediate results including profiles, comments, and photos. The platform emphasizes privacy and security, ensuring that all searches remain anonymous and protected. With features like live feed search, detailed profile access, and secure Stripe payments, Tea Checker provides a comprehensive, accurate, and private way to stay informed about what’s being said on Tea. Whether you’re checking your own reputation or researching others, Tea Checker delivers instant clarity and peace of mind.
by aforwardslash | 2026-03-06 00:18:54+00:00
ECC are traditionally slower, quite more complex, and they dont completely eliminate the problem (most memories correct 1 bit per word and detect 2 bits per word). They make sense when environmental factors such as flaky power, temperature or RF interference can be easily discarded - such as a server room. But yeah, I agree with you, as ECC solves like 99% of the cases.
by wolvoleo | 2026-03-06 00:19:03+00:00
Yes it does have access to your data, at least any email coming from or going to another mail provider. Because those are not end to end encrypted. Only encrypted in transit (and even that is optional). So they need to handle the plaintext at the point of transmission.

I really don't like this about proton, they're always going on about their encryption but most emails they've seen in plain text on their SMTP servers. Because that's just how SMTP works. And so has the provider of the other party.

Once they've put them in your mailbox they can't decrypt them again but I always consider a single exposure a loss of confidentiality. The only emails this doesn't apply to are those from people using PGP (yeah all three of them) and those on proton themselves.

In my view this Achilles heel makes most of their protections irrelevant. But they still market it as if it's the email equivalent of signal, which actually can't see what you say at any point of transit. And non technical people have no idea about the difference.

Ps I'm not blaming proton for not having a technical solution for this because interoperability makes it an unsolvable problem. But I do blame them for their marketing around it.
by kmeisthax | 2026-03-06 00:19:04+00:00
> From then on I considered people who think you shouldn’t overlock ECC memory to be a bit confused. It’s the only memory you should be overlocking, because it’s the only memory you can prove you don’t have errors.

This attitude is entirely corporate-serving cope from Intel to serve market segmentation. They wanted to trifurcate the market between consumers, business, and enthusiast segments. Critically, lots of business tasks demand ECC for reliability, and business has huge pockets, so that became a business feature. And while Intel was willing to sell product to overclockers[0], they absolutely needed to keep that feature quarantined from consumer and business product lines lest it destroy all their other segmentation.

I suspect they figured a "pro overclocker" SKU with ECC and unlocked multipliers would be about as marketable as Windows Vista Ultimate, i.e. not at all, so like all good marketing drones they played the "Nobody Wants What We Aren't Selling" card and decided to make people think that ECC and overclocking were diametrically supposed.

[0] In practice, if they didn't, they'd all just flock to AMD.
by gwd | 2026-03-06 00:19:08+00:00
OK, so a while back I set up a workflow to do language tagging. There were 6-8 stages in the pipeline where it would go out to an LLM and come back. Each one has its own prompt that has to be tweaked to get it to give decent results. I was only doing it for a smallish batch (150 short conversations) and only for private use; but I definitely wouldn't switch models without doing another informal round of quality assessment and prompt tweaking. If this were something I was using in production there would be a whole different level of testing and quality required before switching to a different model.
by zahlman | 2026-03-06 00:20:38+00:00
> I could have Claude code shit out a... clone, and have none of the baggage...

Social media is different because of the network effects. Taking hold requires being there to catch refugees when something else collapses, and being sensitive to the fact of that collapse. It seems like quite a bit of luck is often required.

But you could also, you know, actually try to differentiate yourself. Figure out actual things that you'd want those sites to do differently, and have an opinion on which different approach to take.

And I especially wouldn't try with Twitter, because there are already at least two major competitors, and the people who have fled to them, in broad terms, seem to have done so based more on internal social strife than on any technical dissatisfaction. (Despite all the seemingly obvious technical issues to complain about!)
by like_any_other | 2026-03-06 00:21:06+00:00
> censorship implies a right to speech, in this case Google has the right to restrict the speech of it's users

I don't follow. Even if Google does have the legal right [1], that does not make the censorship less problematic, or morally right. And even if it's hard to make a legislative fix ("You want to ban companies from trying to protect their users from phishing?") [2], that doesn't undo the problems of the current state, or mean we should be silent about it.

[1] This is far from certain, as it could be argued to be tortious interference, abuse of market power, defamation if they call something phishing when it's not.. Then there's the question of jurisdiction..

[2] It's a very common debating tactic to assert that a solution is difficult, to avoid admitting a problem exists.
by sparky_z | 2026-03-06 00:21:30+00:00
I remember many years ago (maybe around 2014?) reading about a smallish European country that implemented this sort of thing really well. There was nothing but glowing praise for it at the time. I want to say maybe it was Latvia?

Does anyone remember what I'm talking about? I'm wondering if there been any long-term takeaways for how well it ended up working.
by thewebguyd | 2026-03-06 00:21:51+00:00
Same here, more or less, in the ops world. Yeah, I use AI but I can't honestly say it's massively improved my productivity or drastically changed my job in any way other than the emails I get from the other managers at my work are now clearly written by AI.

I can turn out some scripts a little bit quicker, or find an answer to something a little quicker than googling, but I'm still waiting on others most of the time, the overall company processes haven't improved or gotten more efficient. The same blockers as always still exist.

Like you said, there has been other tech that has changed my job over time more than AI has. The move to the cloud, Docker, Terraform, Ansible, etc. have all had far more of an impact on my job. I see literally zero change in the output of others, both internally and externally.

So either this is a massively overblown bubble, or I'm just missing something.
by chaps | 2026-03-06 00:22:37+00:00
I worked in ad-tech for a year before I left the tech industry as a whole. I've also done a fair bit of investigative journalism.

Let me share a thing:

Factual, a company that specializes in hyperlocal geofencing, uses geofencing much smaller than the self-regulation that their industry allows in their own rules. I learned this after a coworker quit because our company was allowing ad targeting to people using these smaller geofences. The whole company had an all-hands about it where the CEO of the company told everyone that we were not going to stop using Factual nor the smaller-than-allowed geofences because we, ourselves, were not the ones to produce those geofences. We were just a man in the middle helping to build a system to track people at high resolution.

Please try to reconcile with what your industry has and continues to destroy.
by mahirhiro | 2026-03-06 00:22:43+00:00
Firstly I just want to say thank you to all of you who took the time to comment/ download / review the app/ send me feedback. Positive or negative feedback this was pretty cool to receive.

This is the first app I built and it’s cool to see something which I initially built for myself resonates with other folks here!!

A few quick responses:

On the AI copy:
Fair criticism. I did use LLMs to help structure some of the landing page text. Writing marketing copy is honestly not my strongest skill and I spent most of my time building the app itself. That said, the comments here made it clear the tone feels generic, which is the opposite of what the app is trying to do. I’ll probably rewrite a lot of it in a simpler, more direct voice.

On reminder fatigue:
This was one of the main things I worried about when building it. A lot of apps in this space turn into “nagware.” My approach was:
- You only add a small subset of contacts (not your whole address book).
- you adjust the frequency to what feels comfortable and start muting or snoozing people as they either leave your circle in life, or you feel like it’s becoming annoying. Of course I’m open to feedback here!

On privacy:
Everything lives locally on the device. No accounts, no backend. The app literally has no way for me to see your data. For something this personal, that felt like the only acceptable design.

Again I built it mostly because I personally struggle with the “out of sight, out of mind” problem with friends who don’t live nearby anymore. If it ends up useful to others, that’s a bonus, I’ve already gotten 500 downloads in my first day which is so cool because I had a target of 100, now my next target is 1000 (post bug fixes this weekend haha)

Really appreciate the bug reports and feature suggestions in this thread keep’em coming.
by handedness | 2026-03-06 00:23:01+00:00
That's reasonable, and I hope we get there.

Qualcomm is an American company, and it sounds like the GrapheneOS team is working directly with them on developing the spec for this, including hardware MTE support. That's promising and I think could bring improvements over the current situation, if not open source modem firmware, unfortunately. I'm hoping to be surprised, though.
by sdf2df | 2026-03-06 00:23:34+00:00
Youre not missing anything.

Humans are funny. But most cant seem to understand that the tool is a mirage and they are putting false expectations on it. E.g. management of firms cutting back on hiring under the expectation that LLMs will do magic - with many cheering 'this is the worst itll be bro!!".

I just hope more people realise before Anthropic and OAI can IPO. I would wager they are in the process of cleaning up their financials for it.
by halfcat | 2026-03-06 00:23:39+00:00
The idea that people are going to YOLO changes to DNS and Postgres migrations gives me such anxiety, knowing the pain people are in for when they “point Claude at it, one prompt, and done”, then their business is dead in the water for a week or two while every executive is trying to micromanage the recovery.

I love Streamlit and mermaid, but if these are the shining examples this isn’t a good sign. These have hard ceilings and there’s only so much you can work around the model of “rerun the entire Python script every time the page changes”.

As long as humans are involved the UI will matter. Maybe the importance is not on the end-user facing UI, and maybe it’s more on the backend SRE-level observability UI that gives insight into whether the wheels are still on the bus, but it will matter.

Some people are getting the AI to handle that too, and like all demos, that will work until it doesn’t. I’m sure NASA or someone can engineer it well enough to work, but it’s always going to be a tradeoff: how fast you can go depends more on the magnitude of the crash you can survive, than the top speed someone achieves once and lives to tell about it.