MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jstimpfle | 2026-03-06 13:57:04+00:00
I know what you mean, and as I said I'm actually very sensitive to these issue, but hear me out. (Btw. I have written my own 2D and 3D renderers using OpenGL, DirectX, GDI... so I understand the technical issues quite well).

Here is the reason: 1 CSS pixel (1px) does not represent the width of the physical pixels on your display! In Chromium it is defined as having a width of 1/96th of an inch.
It's important to be aware that this 1/96th is still a virtual size, since chromium doesn't _really_ know the width of your physical pixels. You can influence Chromiums idea of your physical pixel size by adjusting the OS display scaling factor. On a laptop that is set to 150% display scaling (e.g. in the Windows display settings), which means your display is assumed to have 144 DPI, so a virtual 1px or 1/96th inch size corresponds to 1.5 physical pixels wide.

Notice that even though you adjusted the scaling factor, Chromium (having a modern renderer as described) _knows_ it's drawing 1.5 physical pixels wide, it could just have decided to draw 1 physical pixel or 2 physical pixels instead. It could also have decided to snap the line to an integer pixel offset, and so on.

And when you set a 200% factor, Chromium _knows_ it's drawing 2 physical pixels. And it could just decide differently if it wanted.

Deeper issue here is that "1px" is a completely arbitrary choice, it not a sensible specification given that it does not represent an integer amount of _physical_ pixels, and because there is a wide range of real-world display DPI, that's why chrome is subverting it. It's still up to Chrome to choose the actual line size, and to snap lines. Maybe HTML/CSS should define a thin line, and I assume that's what <hr> without any styling is probably already doing.

FWIW I'm on a 4k screen that I've set to 175% scaling, and at least the lines I'm currently looking at (various websites) have no noticeable issues. I've also created a test html page with a ton of <hr> tags, I can scroll them without any flickering. Now, assigning specific widths, I can start to see issues: <hr style="height: 1px">, <hr style="height: 0.5px">, <hr style="height: 0.1px"> etc. Do man of the same kind of lines in a row, and you will see that they are even rendered inconsistently.

So it's easy to make the claim that the existing HTML/CSS renderers still have issues. CSS might need some improvements in the area of specifying hairline sizes.

But we could also make the claim that websites should simply avoid specifying a line width where possible.

See also https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3720

In any case, you can see that where you can still find issues in practice, it's more of a software issue than anything else. And again, these days it's relatively rare to see these issues, especially on HiDpi displays.
by Nursie | 2026-03-06 13:57:09+00:00
So I have an old fashioned "Salter" inflatable BP cuff unit that takes a few AA batteries, that I take readings on sporadically, and as I am borderline problematic (the diastolic number is usually a little high, systolic is not amazing but could be worse, no meds currently) I'm kinda/sorta looking at something that can keep track a bit more often and less intrusively.

But I was hoping that would be an updated Apple watch, as I have an 8 at the moment that does the other stuff :)

That said I understand that the BP measurements on smart watches are pretty execrable. Thanks for the info!
by lproven | 2026-03-06 13:57:51+00:00
Er... he's saying Windows 1 was really ugly, and with Win11, MS has got back to its roots. In other words, Win11 is also really ugly.

Cosmetically, it's all right, sometimes pretty. I like the Bing Wallpaper thing.

Functionally, 11 is a pile of organic fertiliser.
by aleph_minus_one | 2026-03-06 13:58:11+00:00
>
The problem with educated youth who understand the game is that if there’s no room for them to join the ruling class they become very angry.

My experience/observation is that only few (university-)educated people really do understand the game. Only a subset of them actually make a serious attempt to understand the rules of the game, and of those, most get to believe in often very dangerous falsehood about what the rules are.
by Aurornis | 2026-03-06 13:58:22+00:00
> I bought a second hand dell latitude 7/8 years ago, it was 3/4 years old then.

If your needs are satisfied by 4 year old second hand machines and you’re still happy with them when they’re 10-12 years old, that’s great for you.

I think you’re not the target audience. Your decade old Dell Latitude is not even close to the performance or usefulness of a MacBook Neo so the fact that you’re bringing it up is a good indicator that you don’t understand who the MacBook Neo is for.

The MacBook Neo is a great value for anyone who wants a high quality, long battery life, fast laptop for a bargain price.
by bittercynic | 2026-03-06 13:58:36+00:00
I'm absolutely going hunting for some nearby payphones this weekend!

In the recording on this one [1] the caller states that the payphone is on the caltrain station platform, but on the map it's about 1000 feet from there. Searching the address on google maps correctly shows it at the station, though.

[1] https://walzr.com/payphone-go/?phone=398
by pfisherman | 2026-03-06 13:58:51+00:00
Yeah, you are not wrong. The topic is a bit like troll bait for me. Probably because I have a first hand view of how the current strain of anti intellectualism and resulting policy in the US is destroying jobs and eroding competitive advantage. My observation is that this type of rhetoric tends to be produced and consumed by “elites”, and is often used to advocate for policy that limits socioeconomic mobility.

The irony is that in limiting mobility and competition from the “non elite” out-groups to preserve status, they end up shrinking the overall size of the pie.
by embedding-shape | 2026-03-06 13:59:28+00:00
Yeah, and making current leaders into martyrs is a great way to make the regime stronger, not weaker, is my point.

"Iranians" is a big umbrella, just like all Americans don't want the same thing, the same is true in other countries. After a week of bombings the regime seems as strong as ever, so clearly there are Iranians who are still supporting the regime, otherwise it would have fallen already. But again, killing them with senseless assassinations only seems to make them stronger, because of their religion.
by huxley | 2026-03-06 14:00:18+00:00
Haha. I edited tv shows back in the very early days of digital non-linear editing on a Mac Quadra 840AV with 80MB of RAM and 40/80MHz 68040 processor and a RAID made up of 4 x 9GB SCSI drives, with a coprocessor board that people wouldn’t consider sufficient for editing gifs with now. We did After Effects rendering with similar gear … my first job was restarting after effects after it would crash part way through a render (go back a few frames and start again).
by tgsovlerkhgsel | 2026-03-06 14:00:31+00:00
The prizes (Maui trip, second/third prizes, swag kits, shipping for the swag kits) probably cost around $20k in total.

Assuming an engineer costs $200k/year, 200 effective working days per year, that's 1k/day. Developing the contest (from the idea to building the rules to building the site to playtesting) likely cost more than 20 eng-days, making it the biggest cost.

Hiring is expensive. If it takes 30 minutes to screen one candidate for suitability for the "real" interview and 5h to do a "real" interview (including evaluation etc.), 5 screenings for one interview-worthy candidate and 5 interviews for one hire (I suspect the real factors might be closer to 10), that's 12.5h of screening and 25h of interviewing per hire.
by salawat | 2026-03-06 14:01:00+00:00
>Why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.

You mean other than Nuremberg which was focused on prosecuting war criminals? Remember, IBM was never held to account for propping up the Nazi war and genocide machine. People who made Zyklon B weren't either. Corporate governance is the instrumental convergence of our time.
by marlburrow | 2026-03-06 14:01:47+00:00
Hey HN, I built KinBot because I was frustrated with AI tools that forget everything between sessions.

The core idea: you create "Kins," which are AI agents with persistent memory (vector + full-text search), real identity, and autonomy. They live on your server and remember every conversation.

What makes it different from other agent platforms:

- Mini Apps: Kins can build and serve their own web applications on the fly. Think of it as giving your agent a canvas to create interactive tools, dashboards, or utilities.

- Persistent memory: not just context window tricks, but actual long-term memory with hybrid search across months of conversations.

- Multi-agent collaboration: Kins can talk to each other, delegate tasks, spawn sub-agents.

- Runs anywhere: single process, SQLite, works on a Raspberry Pi. No Kubernetes cluster needed.

- 23 AI providers supported (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Ollama, etc.)

Tech stack: Bun + Hono on the backend, React + TailwindCSS on the frontend, SQLite for everything. One Docker command to run it.

I have been using it daily for months as my personal assistant setup. The mini-apps feature is what I find most exciting: instead of just chatting, your agents can actually build things you interact with.

Looking for feedback on: the mini-apps concept, the memory architecture, and whether the self-hosting story is compelling enough. Happy to discuss technical details.

Repo: https://github.com/MarlBurroW/kinbot
by PorterBHall | 2026-03-06 14:01:59+00:00
> When we ponder upon this, it boggles down to the fact that it's notoriously hard to distinguish "value creation" vs "value extraction".

This is an excellent frame to think about this. When we look at the increasing financialization of consumer spending (subscriptions, buy now pay later, rebates, club discounts, etc.), we can think of it as disguising value extraction as value creation.
by bhekanik | 2026-03-06 14:01:59+00:00
Feels like we’re relearning a very old lesson: if untrusted text can influence a privileged runtime, you need hard isolation boundaries, not policy in prompts. For agent-based workflows I’d default to (1) no network egress unless required, (2) ephemeral runners with no shared cache, (3) narrowly scoped tokens, and (4) a mandatory human approval step before any write action. Slightly slower, but much cheaper than incident response.
Show HN: Desktop app to run Python agents over TCP with live server geolocation
by rtuyeras | 2026-03-06 14:02:00+00:00
I built an open-source desktop app for running and monitoring Python agents that talk over TCP.

It works on , , . The basic idea is simple: if a repo has an . entrypoint, the app can import it from GitHub, install . if needed, connect it to a TCP server, and show what it is doing in one UI.

:

• import agent repos from GitHub, including private repos
• run agents through .
• optional . support
• optional . for agent metadata
• connect agents to TCP servers
• inspect message flow in one place
• map/network view showing where connected servers are

I originally built this because managing multiple agents by hand across terminals and scripts gets messy fast.

This is not an agent framework. It is more of an operational layer for Python repos that already follow a simple entrypoint and communicate over TCP.

: https://github.com/Summoner-Network/summoner-desktop
: https://youtu.be/yvD712Uj3vI

Interested in feedback on whether this workflow makes sense, and what might be missing for real multi-agent setups.
by whywhywhywhy | 2026-03-06 14:02:12+00:00
None of this is for what you're describing though, there is no reality where such wildly different countries and states in different corners of the world all decided coincidentally to all do this within 6 months of each other. We know it's not "well maybe they saw X country and thought it was a good idea" because even percolating the policy would have taken over a year.

Protecting kids is just the PR reason, the real goal is requiring ID auth for every action taken on a computer. If we normalize it for downloading apps or using websites the next step is to authorize it for connecting to HTTPS at all and then the next step is requiring it to unlock your CPU cores.

If people don't push back on this now there is no world where we get out of 2030 without requiring government ID auth to install linux on your own computer not connected to the internet.

End to end silicon to server auth is absolutely possible and someone is working really hard to make it a reality.
by throwpoaster | 2026-03-06 14:02:20+00:00
What we now call Silicon Valley was created by the Navy in the late 19th century because they needed advanced radio technology to coordinate Pacific patrols. From then to about five years before the time you’re talking about, schools and tech companies worked closely with the military.

On the timescale of the industry as a whole, working with the military has been the norm and we are seeing a reversion to mean after about two decades of aberrant divergence.
by Madmallard | 2026-03-06 14:02:52+00:00
It's okay shills and those with stock in the AI copies brainwashed themselves inside out and will spam forever on this website that if you just introduce the right test conditions agents can do anything. Never mind engineering considerations if it passes the tests it's good homie! Just spent an extra few hundred or thousand a month on it! Especially on the company I have stock in! Give me money!
by s2sphysical | 2026-03-06 14:03:04+00:00
Author here. Happy to answer questions.

The surprising result: rigid-body coupling r=0.35 on real IMU
vs r=-0.01 on synthetic. Physics separates them without labels.

Try on your own data:
pip install s2s-certify
s2s-certify your_file.csv

Full writeup: https://dev.to/timbo4u1/i-built-a-physics-certification-laye...
Show HN: NPIScan search 9M U.S. healthcare providers from the NPI registry
by bas_sen | 2026-03-06 14:03:22+00:00
I’ve been exploring the NPPES dataset, the federal registry that assigns NPI numbers to every healthcare provider in the U.S. It currently has about 9 million records and grows by ~30k per month, but accessing it usually means downloading multi-gigabyte CSVs or using the CMS lookup that returns one provider at a time.

I built NPIScan to make the dataset browsable. You can search by name, NPI, specialty, or location and drill down from state → city → ZIP code. Each provider has a profile with credentials, practice locations, taxonomy codes, and digital health endpoints.

A few interesting patterns from the data:

- 2025 had ~631k new NPI registrations, the largest jump on record

- Behavior Technicians grew to ~526k providers and are now among the largest specialties

- California alone has ~1.1M providers (~12% of the country)

- Only ~0.5% of providers have registered digital health endpoints

Tech stack: Next.js, PostgreSQL, Meilisearch, Redis.
The main challenge was making 9M records feel fast to browse. I solved it with denormalized listing tables, Meilisearch full-text search, and Redis caching for aggregated queries. Most pages respond in <40ms after cache warmup.

Curious to hear feedback from anyone working with healthcare data.
by pflanze | 2026-03-06 14:03:58+00:00
Do you happen to use memory resource limits? I used to run Firefox under some, like everything, to prevent it from potentially making the whole system unresponsible, and at the same time had frequent cases of Firefox showing random visual corruptions and crashes. At some point I realized that it was because it was running out of memory, and didn't check malloc failures, thus just continued to run and corrupting memory. (That was some 6-8 years ago, maybe Firefox does better now?)
by tclancy | 2026-03-06 14:04:01+00:00
Part of that caught my eye. As yet another person who’s built a half-ass system of AI agents running overnight doing stuff, one thing I’ve tasked Claude with doing (in addition to writing tests, etc) is using formal verification when possible to verify solutions. It reads like that may be what Anthropic is doing in part.

And this is a good reminder for me to add a prompt about property testing being preferred over straight unit tests and maybe to create a prompt for fuzz testing the code when we hit Ready state.
by quirk | 2026-03-06 14:04:02+00:00
This comment thread shows how feminized and weakened our language has become. Modern terms like “serviceman” and especially “service member" are mostly 20th–21st century bureaucratic jargon.

Soldiers were just called soldiers. The word soldier just means a member of an army and has been used for centuries.

Warfighters is probably more accurate for their intended job description.

Also the original commenter does not understand the word "Orwellian" and uses it just to mean "different than what I'm used to" which is a common mistake.
by wyattbenno | 2026-03-06 14:04:03+00:00
Hi,

AI Agents Can Move Money.
Lobstar Wilde Proved They Can Lose It Too...

So we made:
(ARc + ZK) Neurosymbolic formal reasoning w/ zero knowledge proofs for cryptographically secure agentic guardrails. Our approach has two essential properties for agentic commerce: (1) succinct proofs and (2) optional privacy.

The core idea is from the Automated Reasoning Checks (ARc) paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.09008) which converts natural language policies into SMT-LIB constraints and checks agent actions against an SMT solver rather than an LLM judge. The solver proofs are not succinctly verifiable (10 mins to run takes 10 mins to check), by wrapping this with ZKP we get succinctly verifiable proofs (under 1s) that can be checked on constrained devices or by agents directly. ARc proofs would require the policy to be public.. ZK allows them to be private. We wrote about the ZK tech here (https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.17452). *Thank you AWS AR team for useful discussions and work in this field!

The motivation was incidents like Lobstar Wilde where an AI agent sent ~$442K in tokens to a stranger because there were no hard constraints or cryptographic guarantees. Prompt guardrails and LLM judges are arguable. A formal logic (SAT/UNSAT) proof is not.

How it works:

POST your policy in plain English (contracts, user support docs whatever) to /v1/makeRules. We compile it to SMT-LIB via a reasoning model and run consistency checks from the ARc paper.

POST agent actions to /v1/checkIt with your policy_id and inference output that you want to check against guardrails. The action is formalized and checked against the solver. Returns SAT or UNSAT.

Soundness is over 99% on unseen datasets per the paper. This matters because LLM-based guardrails degrade under adversarial pressure — the attack surface is the model's judgment itself. A sufficiently creative input can argue its way past any prompt-based guardrail. The ARc approach removes that attack surface entirely!

There is also a game running in our blog, where you can try and bypass the guardrails on a simple 5 rule model defending Lobstar Wilde.

The solver does not have judgment, it cannot be persuaded, and its accuracy does not drop when someone is actively trying to fool it. Good luck hacking!

The longer writeup covers the ARc paper, why LLM judges and other approaches don't work as well, how our zero knowledge machine learning (zkML) integration works for succinct verifiable proofs with private policy cryptographic audit trails, and policy failure modes to avoid.

Happy to answer questions about the ARc + zkML compilation approach, the x402 payment flow, or anything else.

The current system does use USDC to future proof it for agent-to-agent interactions with no human-in-the-loop (Credit cards are for humans. Stable coins are for agents).

Thanks!

Full blog post:

https://blog.icme.io/ai-agents-can-move-money-lobstar-wilde-...
by armchairhacker | 2026-03-06 14:04:17+00:00
Education does increase upward mobility. But 1) you have to pay attention and use the education to find opportunities, and 2) it doesn’t guarantee it, you need opportunities in the first place.

You can get more upward mobility by skipping education - but only if you what you do instead enables lots of upward mobility. For example, if you skip education to work in trades, you’ll have a reliable career and upfront cash; but the career’s growth is capped, so to become really successful, you must figure out how to use the upfront cash and reliable income (which probably involves research i.e. education).
by ramses0 | 2026-03-06 14:04:18+00:00
I worked at yahoo during its (in retrospect) decline.

It used to be hard to be "web scale" and available, now that's either k8s or a few checkboxes in AWS.

Yahoo used to be able to "coast" on the compellingness of their services because 80% attractive with 100% available and 100% global reach crushes 90% attractive with 95% available and 25% global reach.

I was often confused by the hyperfocus of analysts asking "Is Y! a tech company or a content company?"

What they were really asking was if we should be valuing Yahoo! as 30%+ margin on putting ads next to Yahoo! News articles, or 10x multiplier on originating GMail/Search?

I think "data is the only moat", and in a way that goes back to the "first to market / eBay" POV, and the difference between first to market and fast follower is super interesting!
by magicalhippo | 2026-03-06 14:04:21+00:00
The page has no discussion of prior art like PCG[1], and no results from standard tests like Diehard[2] or TestU1[3].

It might be good, but I'd stick with proven alternatives.

[1]: https://www.pcg-random.org/

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diehard_tests

[3]: https://simul.iro.umontreal.ca/testu01/tu01.html
by heavyset_go | 2026-03-06 14:04:46+00:00
I'm using send as a synonym for serve, would you serve such content to someone who presents themselves as a child on your platform? No.

Like do you really think someone who presents themselves as a child on Pornhub will stay registered and not banned? They aren't going to serve porn to someone who presents themselves as a kid.

I think it's pretty clear and convincing when someone presents themselves as a child on your platform. I'd be convinced and wouldn't take that liability on.
by eklavya | 2026-03-06 14:05:27+00:00
Yeah, I guess so. I was just wondering when people said it's great value, is it because they believe that the build quality (all metal) is the most important factor here. But then I can get an HP omnibook 5 oled for the same price with "almost" a metal body.

I started thinking, ok I was going to buy an iPad maybe, why not neo? It makes so much sense since my wife could do much more with it. Then I started looking at what the market has to offer for the price and it stopped making sense. The marketing does seem great on this. I am sure it makes a lot of sense to some people who wanted a cheap macOS laptop and got it.
by Kiboneu | 2026-03-06 14:05:30+00:00
Yesterday I was just watching an episode of futurama where bender (the robot) “finds” his imagination and believes that he is a dnd character. He goes around Don Quixote style.

To defeat bender, Fry pretends to a destructive spell on him.

I couldn’t find the exact scene but…. https://youtube.com/watch?v=chjVoVcVi3A
by Traster | 2026-03-06 14:07:09+00:00
Isn't this just the obvious conclusion you would expect going in? Corporate bullshit is meant to sound impressive whilst simultaneously either saying nothing, or hiding the real meaning.

Synergy is a great example - what the person saying it hopes you understand is that Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros have a complimentary set of skills that when put together will be more profitable. What they actually mean is that when we merge these two companies we're going to have two sets of sales teams, two sets of marketing teams, two production teams, two sets of HR, accounts, back office etc. And so we're going to be more efficient because everyone I just mentioned is going to be fired.

So yeah of course, the intent is to trick you and the likelihood of success is (inversely) proportional to how smart you are and it turns out if you're smart you probably also do other parts of your job well.