MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ytoawwhra92 | 2026-03-13 01:51:29+00:00
There's not going to be a single point at which that happens.

More likely what we will see (if this happens) is AI companies entering close partnerships with other businesses, building up their models ability to do that sort of work, then either acquiring their partner or directly competing with them.

Similar to how Apple monitors developers having success on their platform and then launches a first-party offering.
by wewewedxfgdf | 2026-03-13 01:51:46+00:00
The best interview question to find great developers is this:

"What number am I thinking of?"

Smart developers - really smart developers are always right. Truly great developers have seen this sort of problem before and know how to attack it - they need no fancy questions or "deeper understanding". They simply hit the whiteboard, do the logic and output the answer.

Don't settle for anything except A players.
by motoboi | 2026-03-13 01:52:26+00:00
The whole “chat with an AI” paradigm is the culprit here. Priming people to think they are actually having a conversation with something that has a mind model.

It’s just a text generator that generates plausible text for this role play. But the chat paradigm is pretty useful in helping the human. It’s like chat is a natural I/O interface for us.
by mistivia | 2026-03-13 01:53:11+00:00
> we are performing an rather imprecise and expensive acos() call

No, the acos() call is not expensive at all. There is hardware acceleration.We can calculate acos() with in 12 CPU instructions.

https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/math/i386/acos....
by mlinsey | 2026-03-13 01:53:36+00:00
Having a facial recognition match make you a suspect and cause the police to ask you some questions doesn't seem completely unreasonable to me. Investigations can certainly begin with weak forms of evidence (like an anonymous tip), you just require a higher standard of evidence for a search warrant, surveillance, or an arrest. A facial recognition match shouldn't be probable cause for an arrest warrant, but it still might be a useful starting point for a detective looking for actual evidence.
by mygooch | 2026-03-13 01:53:51+00:00
It's what grads do after school - create an AI startup.

If you went to the right school, you can be a Series A company with nothing more than an OPENAI_API_KEY. Most of the young and inexperienced founders mentally retire at this point and start their family planning.

There were a few cities like "Austin", but now I guess it's just SF and NY again (I'm in SF).

The students get what they paid for.

The school gets their metrics.

The VCs get returns, from the increased revenue their portfolios just paid for by investing in their kid's startup.

And the wheel in the sky keeps on turnin!
by rellfy | 2026-03-13 01:53:57+00:00
This is a great concept. I fully agree with small, focused and composable design. I've been exploring a similar direction at asterai.io but focusing more on the tool layer than agent layer, with portable WASM components you write once in any language and compose together.

I currently use Claude web with an MCP component for my workflows but axe looks like it could be a nicer and quicker way to work with the tools I have.
by komali2 | 2026-03-13 01:54:16+00:00
> The market is pretty efficient - people wouldn’t bid for jobs that are worse than their current situation.

This still seems like an oversimplification. It's easy to label FAANG, "frontier AI companies," whatever else, but the vast majority of jobs and the vast majority of engineers are in a soup that's maybe able to be split between "startup world" and "enterprise world" but beyond that, difficult to say one is "worse" or "better." And I've worked alongside FAANG people in startup world so, either that isn't a "worse" job and therefore your theory doesn't work because that means it's not really possible to accurately evaluate every single company as objectively worse/better, or, your theory doesn't work because people do apply to "worse" jobs.
by Barrin92 | 2026-03-13 01:54:31+00:00
>then you need a bunch of extra parsing and validation code in every recipient object.

that's not a big deal, when we exchange generic information across networks we parse information all the time, in most use cases that's not an expensive operation. The gain is that this results in proper encapsulation, because the flipside of imposing meaning globally is that your entire codebase is one entangled ball, and as you scale a complex system, that tends to cost you more and more.

In the case of the OP where a program "breaks" and has to be recompiled every time some signature propagates through the entire system that is significant cost. Again if you think of a large scale computer network as an analog to a program, what costs more, parsing an input or rebooting and editing the entire system every time we add a field somewhere to a data structure, most consumers of that data don't care about?
by troad | 2026-03-13 01:54:53+00:00
The oldest story in tech standards.

> "We've developed Foo 2.0. It does not have feature parity with Foo 1.0, but it's more architecturally elegant in ways that are meaningless to the public. It took ten thousand man hours and was done instead of much needed upgrades to Foo 1.0."

* one year later *

> "Why is no one adopting Foo 2.0? Yes, it doesn't have feature parity with Foo 1.0, but it's frankly irresponsible of the public not to understand that 2.0 is a higher number than 1.0."

* ten years later *

> "Remember Foo? What a mess. Thank god Bar came along."

* eleven years later *

> "Announcing Bar 2.0... "
by Sanchous | 2026-03-13 01:54:57+00:00
Location: Bayonne, NJ, USA (NYC metro)

Remote: Open to remote, hybrid, or onsite

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: JavaScript, TypeScript, Node.js, Express, React, PostgreSQL, REST APIs, Prisma, Jest, Supertest, Git

Résumé/CV: https://github.com/OchirovAleks/OchirovAleks/blob/main/Aleks...

Email: aochirov.tech@gmail.com
by samrus | 2026-03-13 01:55:04+00:00
Theres alot of talk about how the cops just misused the tool and its their fault not the AIs

Thats missing the point here. The point is that these tools provide crazy leverage, and thay can be good or bad. If used carefully it can definitely catch criminals faster, but when misused (or abused) they can let the authorities unjustly ruin lives faster

The question isnt whether AI is perfect or not. Its whether you trust the authorities with it. To use and abuse as they can. Think about the average cop. Think about the way Trump treats people. Think about the way israel keeps an ongoing genocide going. Think about the cases of police brutality that happen in the US, the cases of racial profiling. Think about ICE and their behavior, going around kidnapping and killing people. Do you want these people to have more leverage?
by x86_forever | 2026-03-13 01:55:06+00:00
The x86 CPUID page on sandpile.org got refreshed. A true labor of love. A never ending firehose of bits. Plus countless details covering virtually every x86 processor shipped since the early nineties. Including all kinds of codenames, nicely sorted. Finally Intel, AMD, Centaur, etc. history makes a bit more sense. Now can we please deprecate this monstrosity of "probably the worst x86 instruction ever"?
by pron | 2026-03-13 01:55:35+00:00
First, it's not a question of decidability but of tractability. Verifying programs in a language that has nothing but boolean variables, no subroutines, and loops at depth of at most 2 - far, far, from Turing-completeness - is already intractable (reduction from TQBF).

Second, it's very easy to have some specs decided tractably, at least in many practical instances, but they are far too weak to specify most correctness properties programs need. You mentioned the Rust type system, and it cannot specify properties with nested interleaved quantifiers, which most interesting properties require.

And as for HoTT - or any of the many equivalent rich formalisms - checking their proofs is tractable, but not finding them. The intractability of verification of even very limited languages (again TQBF) holds regardless of how the verification is done.
by DoctorOetker | 2026-03-13 01:56:56+00:00
Both Israel's as well as Iran's and for that matter all nuclear ambitions of any nation should be reigned in, as humanity was doing for a while after the first cold war, with the progressive reduction treaties etc. From the perspective of the USA, a medium-future nuclear attack by Israel was much less likely than a medium-future nuclear attack by Iran.

Closing the Strait of Hormuz is quite easy, scorched-earth-tactics (well scorched-sea-tactics) like sea-mines are a lot easier than conquering territory.

Just look Bosnia&Herzegovina and the huge minefields that were deposited there.

This doesn't show Iran's resilience, and sea mines can be cleared.

There's a long list of cards the USA holds and somewhere down that line there are options like announcing total destruction of neighborhoods of Teheran, and advising the inhabitants to leave, starting with the richest (and thus regime aligned) neighborhoods. Just gradually announce the carpet bombing neighborhoods and provide ample time for evacuation. Watch your demands being met one by one: defuse your sea mines, if one more goes off thats another richest neighborhood gone, give up your for-energy-generation-over-enriched uranium (there is no discussion of its existence as Iran was pleading an insignificant dilution of part of this stockpile) or that another richest-neighborhood-thats-left gone.

Unlike the human-shields / hostage-taking tactics of the IRGC / ayatollah, it would target not innocent third parties nor the lives but the possessions of the regime-aligned parts of the population.

All the people you forced to study physics for the megalomaniac dreams of the regime? Allow them to flee the country (and take their inkling nuclear skills with them) and welcome them with a new free life. In the west we don't gas your girlfriends, sisters, nieces over a few hairs sticking out from under their headwear.

People repeat the patterns of their breaktrhoughs / successes.

There were many factions around the time the current regime rose to power.

Which one won? Which one was reluctantly given bargaining power by the free world? The faction that took hostages.

Ever since, whenever the regime felt threatened (internally or externally) they resort to hostage taking and human shields.

No sane person puts a girls school in a semi-used military complex, especially not in that hotbed of the middle east, with Iraq as a neighbour, Israel not much further, and while sponsoring and weaponizing groups like Hamas.
by YZF | 2026-03-13 01:57:00+00:00
In Israel helicopters are routinely taking down these drones. There are many videos of them chasing them down. There was an incident where some houses were hit by that cannon fire as well. They are finding them (presumably with radar).

You're probably more of an expert than me so educate me on how this works. But it is working.

But yes, some drones are also being taken down with air to air missiles.

Those drones are typically shot down over your territory so air superiority and MANPADS are less of an issue.
by ehnto | 2026-03-13 01:57:58+00:00
I think the free market response is that another vet with fair prices will show up, but A) that's a waste of everyones time and very inefficient and B) a real grass roots business takes time and passion, somebody to start it, buy in from the community etc.

That work had already been done. To throw it all away for VC or PE to squeeze the life out of it and by extension the community, that's just sad, and a net negative for society. I don't really care about who to blame, the PE or the business owner who sold, the process is destructive.
by tomhow | 2026-03-13 01:58:37+00:00
As much as we try to reward the first person to submit the story, we also have to give credit to the person who submits the best URL and the best version of the story. It looks like your submission was killed due to being an archive.is link, which is not allowed as a URL for a submission (we need the canonical URL submitted to prevent people from using archive services or shorteners to mask domains that may be malicious).

Sometimes it's just a matter of luck as to who gets the submission right and gets the karma. Sorry it wasn't you this time, but keep submitting good stuff and you'll get your turn.
by spicymaki | 2026-03-13 01:58:41+00:00
How many more articles are we going to see with the headline AI facial recognition leads to innocent person jailed? A grandmother no less.

Some tech company illegally scanned people's photos on social media and now is using them with our complicit legal system to randomly put people behind bars. Now I need to worry that any day now due to a dice roll I will be sent away in a the middle of f'ing nowhere for months or years. Now the government wants to use these same dumb systems to make automated killing machines. FML!

I see a lot of comments trying to attribute blame to the cops, the lawyers, the police chief, the marshals, the tech bros, etc, but it is all of them and all of us that are guilty. We are so complicit in this sick system we live in. We are stuck in a collective action deadlock.

That fear you have in the back of your mind that says next time it might be you is counteracted by the thought "well thank goodness it wasn't me or a loved one," so you don't act. We are all doing this, that is why nothing changes.

The only people able to act these days are the most insane. The narcissistic corrupt power hungry politician, the psychopathic tech bro billionaire, and the jacobins are the only ones with the energy wade through this cesspool and that is why everything is so dystopian.
by nunez | 2026-03-13 01:59:12+00:00
Yes...because banks have made it much more difficult to do online banking through a web browser as a forcing function to route people to their apps.

I actually switched to a credit union last year from Chase partly for this reason. Chase used to have m.chase.com, which was PERFECT for most of the banking I did while being extremely fast, even back in the 2G days. They Web 2.0'ed it in 2017 and deprecated m.chase.com in 2018 or so.

The provider that maintains my bank's online banking platform made it fast and lightweight, much like m.chase.com of yesteryear, while also adding more modern authentication security (2FA vs SMS).
by throw0101c | 2026-03-13 02:00:34+00:00
> Most people using Android will come to your home and ask "do you have WiFi here?"

The Android implementation of IPv6 completely boggles my mind. They have completely refused to implemented DHCPv6 since 2012:

* https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/36949085

But months after client-side DHCP-PD was made an RFC they're implementing that?

* https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/simplifyin...

In what universe does implementing DHCP-PD but not 'regular' DHCPv6 make any kind of sense?
by nbf_1995 | 2026-03-13 02:01:24+00:00
The server is configured as a caching reverse proxy (just nginx with cache.nixos.org as upstream) which I think is similar to squid proxy.

Outside my LAN I do have the ability to tunnel home, but depending on the connection and the updates I just deal with the timeouts, or just wait until I get home.

I think technically you can override substituters using cli options but its not ideal. There are several proposals for configuring timeouts per substituter but none of them are merged yet.
by blharr | 2026-03-13 02:01:38+00:00
It's a completely grotesque point you've got. Tiles are advertised as used for personally tracking your devices. To the average person its the same technology as a Bluetooth earbud. Not a device for tracking at a central whatever 100 companies want that data.

And for 2... thats completely irrelevant. "More or less"? So... a hundred of millions of tiles still out there is "more or less"?
by adriand | 2026-03-13 02:01:48+00:00
I disagree that it’s “just a text generator” but you are so right about how primed people are to think they’re talking to a person. One of my clients has gone all-in on openclaw: my god, the misunderstanding is profound. When I pointed out a particularly serious risk he’d opened up, he said, “it won’t do that, because I programmed it not to”. No, you tried to persuade it not to with a single instruction buried in a swamp of markdown files that the agent is itself changing!
by angry_octet | 2026-03-13 02:01:57+00:00
Harness needs to intercept all too calls and compare with an authorisation list. The problem is that this is using already granted core permissions.

So you have to have a tighter set of default scopes, which means approving a whole batch of tool calls, at the harness layer not as chat. This is obviously more tedious.

The answer might be another tool that analyses the tool calls and presents a diagram of list of what would be fetched, sent, read and written. But it would get very hard to truly observe what happens when you have a bunch of POST calls.

So maybe it needs a kind of incremental approval, almost like a series of mini-PRs for each change.
by doublerabbit | 2026-03-13 02:02:58+00:00
% isIt3
10
0
6
4
8
0
9
5
I found three
----
proc isIt3 {} {
variable 3 [expr {int(rand()*12)}]
switch $3 {
3 { puts "I found three" }
default { puts "$3" ; isIt3 }
} ;# end switch
} ;# end proc

The number you're thinking of is 3. (-:
by DoctorOetker | 2026-03-13 02:03:35+00:00
What makes you think Iran was not a real nuclear threat?

The USA even bungled up an operation (with the goal of gaining better intel and internal domestic spies in Iran) by convincing an Iranian physicist to carry convincing plans to an address in Iran. That physicist got so sh-scared (who wouldn't) that the nuclear bomb designs would be so transparently bugged that he feared for his life. He did the unexpected: he recognized which parts of the designs were obviously manipulated for failure and corrected them before indeed depositing at the address. He feared and figured that other physicists in Iran would quickly spot the same manipulations in the weapon design, and he would effectively be committing suicide by thus proving himself a spy!

What a cuck-op of an operation!
by daft_pink | 2026-03-13 02:04:32+00:00
It kinda reminds me of the first time I visited a maker space years ago. It was full of cutting edge lasers cutters, 3-D printers, oscilloscopes. I’m doing the tour they told us we could make anything. Then the tour ended. I get to meet the real users and they showed me what they made. Most people just made random things like etching Pokémon into their pencil case. I left thinking wow these people could make anything and that’s what they made. All I’m saying is if you give the average person something that Lockheed Martin is using to build the SR 71. The average person would probably just use it to make a toy car and that SR 71 is not going to get built.
by LPisGood | 2026-03-13 02:04:50+00:00
I’m not usually one to complain about AI being used to generate content because I find this and especially interesting topic, but it really took me out of it.

More relevant to the topic at hand, I feel like I didn’t put that much thought into designing my interview questions, but I’m always astounded when I read these sorts of descriptions of other interview questions. There should perhaps be some formal training or certification or something for asking good engineering interview questions.
by maxbond | 2026-03-13 02:05:20+00:00
My friends and I were talking about the recent supply chain attack which harmlessly installed OpenClaw. We came to the conclusion that this was a warning (from a human) that an agent could easily do the same. Given how soft security is in general, AI "escaping containment" feels inevitable. (The strong form of that hypothesis where it subjugates or eliminates us isn't inevitable, I honestly have no idea, just the weak form where we fail to erect boundaries it cannot bypass. We've basically already failed.)
by neoCrimeLabs | 2026-03-13 02:05:59+00:00
They never stopped supporting it, to my knowledge. I first started using their certs for my IMAP and SMTP servers 10ish years ago, at least.

If you use HTTP-01 challenge method you require an HTTP server on the host.

If you don't want an HTTP server on your imap/smtp server you need to use the DNS-01 challenge method.
by bdangubic | 2026-03-13 02:06:45+00:00
> What makes you think Iran was not a real nuclear threat?

decades and decades and decades of ...

https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2025/6/18/the-history-of-n...

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskMiddleEast/comments/1l9t7yl/neta...
by jongjong | 2026-03-13 02:07:00+00:00
Yes, with current costs, most people literally cannot afford legal representation, especially in the plaintiff side.

For example, I've been cheated out of at least $100k net worth by the founder of a crypto project because he decided to abandon tech which was working and switched to a competitor's platform for no reason. Now I was already worried about repercussions outside of the legal system... This is crypto sector after all... But also, legally, there's no way I can afford to sue a company which controls almost $100 million in liquid assets and probably has got government regulators on their payroll... Even though it is a simple case, it would be difficult to win even if I'm right and the risk of losing is that they could seek reimbursement of lawyers fees which they seek to maximize just to make things difficult for me.
by Terr_ | 2026-03-13 02:08:47+00:00
I fear a future where we are all Archibald Buttle [0], at the whim of implacable systems that will eventually ruin our lives with no explanation or appeal, because nobody really cares about doing the right thing.

I suspect there's some overlap to how prior generations had internalized anxieties about nuclear armageddon.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film)
by pwthornton | 2026-03-13 02:09:27+00:00
Having done some work with these F500 companies, this is part of it. These legacy companies have long seen tech as a cost center, haven't invested in it, and are unable to attract talent. And, for whatever reason, these companies insist on working with large consulting firms, when a dedicated software or tech consulting firm that is smaller would be way better.

Ultimately, why would a large company hire a consultancy company that is bad at tech and has a lot of bad processes to do their tech for them? Because the company itself is even worse and doesn't know what good looks like. If you are hiring McKinsey or Deloitte to do your tech, it's because you are completely lost and don't have the slightest clue how to become unlost. And you have no concept of what good looks like.

If you think the actual tech talent and systems are bad, when you work with these consulting firms, they are going to do the most heavy SAFe process you have ever seen. For me, the worst part is not the tech talent, but rather the most by-the-book, heavy-handed agile process possible. Everything moves way slower because of this "agile" rot, and there is almost no concept of doing proper ideation and prototyping work.

These legacy F500 companies try to do everything cheaply with consultants and offshoring, and yet it always ends up costing way more than it would if they just had proper in-house tech talent.
by pmarreck | 2026-03-13 02:09:27+00:00
This is nonsense. There's plenty of work that goes into it. In fact, if no human work goes into it, then it is unlikely to pass human muster/judgment. It is just a tool for accelerated work, like literally every technological progress before it, but hey, you can go continue banging away at your loom making bespoke textiles, no one's gonna stop you.