MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Aurornis | 2026-03-03 15:20:03+00:00
The root offense wasn’t that this was published. The root problem is that the author submitted an LLM hallucination as a story. He should have faced consequences even if it had been caught.

> This was an institutional error, not an individual reporter's fault.

The person who caused the problem is at fault. It doesn’t help to do mental gymnastics to try to shift blame to a faceless institution. The author is at fault.

> We should also be asking why he was still contributing when he had a high fever. Why did his editors push him to publish his work?

I think you’re putting too much stock into the excuse. The author got caught doing one of the things you cannot do as a journalist: Publishing fake quotes. He was looking for any way to excuse it and make it not his fault so he could try to keep his job.

He made the choice. The consequences are his to bear. If it had been caught before publishing he still should have faced the consequences.
by asqpl | 2026-03-03 15:20:03+00:00
Engineer here – I run a therapeutic AI system for elderly care in assisted living
facilities. Entire stack runs locally on Mac Minis (no cloud, no GPUs) for privacy
and reliability.

Qwen 3.5's DeltaNet architecture broke our llama.cpp inference (1.5s → 21s).
Migrated to Apple's MLX framework and brought it back to 7s while maintaining
100% clinical pass rates.

Happy to answer questions about MLX vs llama.cpp, DeltaNet optimization, or
running SLMs on Apple Silicon for production healthcare workloads.
by ignoramous | 2026-03-03 15:20:10+00:00
For the universal right to choose whether or not to block ads and trackers,
Mullvad VPN

https://mullvad.net/en/blog/how-were-knocking-down-ads-and-t... / https://archive.vn/TMnG6

https://mullvad.net/en/blog/how-set-ad-blocking-our-app / https://archive.vn/cfyPe
by general_reveal | 2026-03-03 15:20:46+00:00
Might be worth talking about peer respect. Do soldiers respect the West Point grad that hasn’t or doesn’t do soldering? Not really right?

Some won’t ever take that position out of sheer self respect.

Many EMs are not ready to roll their sleeves up and do the full work, they are only ever riled up enough to roll their sleeves up and begin hiring like a maniac or going batshit crazy with micro management. You see, we all saw you too at work. Just know that. This is the LinkedIn comment you won’t see to your stupid fucking work achievement post - fuck you. Morning rant over.

But for my real EMs, much respect :)
by mort96 | 2026-03-03 15:20:56+00:00
This is one thing I don't really blame Apple for, and I think everyone else will follow suit -- and not just because Apple is doing it.

The EU requires that users must be able to buy a device without a charger. It's a huge supply chain challenge to add two variants of every single SKU, one with a charger and one without. So the obvious solution is to sell the charger separately, since you need that regardless, and always sell the device without a charger. You avoid having two variants of everything that way.

Now, you could maybe argue that Apple should default to bundle a charger with your laptop, so that you'd have to uncheck a "bundle charger" checkbox on their website. But do you really care whether your laptop costs $2200 and you can buy a charger for $60 or your laptop costs $2260 and you can save $60 by removing the charger?

You can make an argument that doing it Apple's way hides a price increase. And yeah, that's probably fair. But it's not like Apple is afraid of non-hidden price increases either.
by bitexploder | 2026-03-03 15:21:03+00:00
This is the most fundamental argument that they are not, directly, an intelligence. They are not ever storing new information on a meaningful timescale. However, if you viewed them on some really large macro time scale where now LLMs are injecting information into the universe and the re-ingesting that maybe in some very philosophical way they are a /very/ slow oscillating intelligence right now. And as we narrow that gap (maybe with a totally new non-LLM paradigm) perhaps that is ultimately what gen AI becomes. Or some new insight that lets the models update themselves in some fundamental way without the insanely expensive training costs they have now.
by dathinab | 2026-03-03 15:21:05+00:00
it's about copyrighted content

so yes it applies to fully AI-generated code as much as to "AI art".

like with AI assisted art it doesn't apply to AI assisted coding

and yes if everything is fully AI generate there is no copyright anymore, that is by design!

Copyright is there to protect human creativity/time investment. If there is no creativity/time investment, then there is no reason for copyright to exist either. Having still copyright there would mean moving it from a law to protect creative work to a law to protect the privileged few which can afford to just mass generate "everything" with AI. That isn't just very undesirable, it's kinda plain evil, as it would mean screwing over the majority of humanity.

Naturally as mentioned that only applies to full AI products, not to AI assisted products in which case the "human contribution" and thinks resulting from it still have copyright.
by smallerize | 2026-03-03 15:21:25+00:00
Ars isn't winging it here, they are following Conde Nast HR processes. https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/editor%E2%80%99s-note-... "I can confirm that the HR processes are intricate and complicated. I can confirm that we have union writers. I can confirm these things take time." -Aurich
by ilamont | 2026-03-03 15:21:29+00:00
developers from the West see no problem with clearly stating their opposition to a topic and listing the reasons why they oppose it—in many ways, this is seen as good, clear communication. This style can sometimes be jarring to Japanese speakers, who generally prefer to avoid anything that could be taken as blunt or confrontational.

This was buried at the end of the essay, but is one of the most important points.

I worked (not as a developer) in a company that was acquired by a Japanese company. Meetings were structured, and debate was kept to a minimum. If there was disagreement (typically framed as a difference of opinion or conflicting goals) there would be an effort to achieve some sort of balance or harmony. If the boundary was not hard, it was possible to push back. Politely.

Also, if Japanese colleagues expressed frustration, or were confrontational, that was a red flag that some hard boundary had been crossed. This was extremely rare, and replies had to be made in a very careful, respectful way.
by michaelt | 2026-03-03 15:21:39+00:00
> I was pondering last night for which services I, personally, would actually be willing to verify my age or identity.

> And… the answer is “none”.

> At least, none that I can think of at the moment.

Think back to the recent pandemic.

Work? Online. School? Online. Recreational activities? Online. Talking to loved ones you don’t live with? Online. Birthday party? Online. Nonfood shopping? Online. Banking? Paying taxes and bills? Online. Job interview? Doctors appointment? Online. Dating? You guessed it, online.

The internet’s a big thing these days.
by elil17 | 2026-03-03 15:21:48+00:00
I don't think this is the correct interpretation. I think they mean that if you make something without AI and then modify that with AI, that's covered. Likewise, if you start from an AI output and modify it, that's covered.

But the pure output of a generative model cannot be copyrighted, regardless of how complex the prompt is (note that the prompt itself could be copyrighted).
by Springtime | 2026-03-03 15:22:07+00:00
Related: this[1] current article/thread about privacy-preserving age verification.

The author here seems to be commenting specifically on the type of anonymity-breaking age assurance widely being utilized along with the vaguely justified social media bans. Given the right technology to prove an age threshold but while preserving anonymity I'd be curious how their thoughts would change.

For example, we've never seen people critiquing the naive kind of 'Are you over 18?' prompts seen on ye olde Reddit or adult sites, precisely because those weren't breaking anonymity or leaking any trackable identifiers.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47229953
by theorchid | 2026-03-03 15:22:12+00:00
> checking competitors, reading AI news, monitoring my Stripe dashboard, looking at Google Trends for content ideas

This problem can be solved not only by automating the process. For example, one solution is to simply stop doing all of this. You don't need to analyze your competitors every morning; it's enough to do it once a month or even once a quarter. Reading news about AI is one way to procrastinate.

Your precious morning time should be spent on truly important tasks.
by bloak | 2026-03-03 15:22:54+00:00
You mean switch to UTC+1 all year while doing +1 on the timetables of all schools and anything else that might directly or indirectly depend on them: childcare for younger children, working hours of teachers and parents, sports activities, public transport, ...? Compared to switching to UTC+0 all year and leaving the timetables as they are, the disadvantages would seem to greatly outweigh the advantages.

The other confusing thing about this discussion is that when you include timetable changes there are quite a lot of options and it's not always obvious which alternative people are comparing an option against. To be honest, the current system with clock changes isn't the worst possible option. Perhaps it's the second best.
by mlp-yc | 2026-03-03 15:23:12+00:00
Location: Nashville TN (US Citizen, AU citizen)

Remote: yes, preferred

Willing to relocate: yes, anywhere on the planet

Technologies: C, Perl, Unix, Linux, electronic circuit design, PCB layout, PKI

Résumé/CV: https://mlp.sarce.net/resume.pdf

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/markpappin/

Email: mlp-yc@sarce.net
by homeschoolfit | 2026-03-03 15:23:43+00:00
Homeschool families juggle many apps. Facebook groups for community, Band or Slack for chat, spreadsheets for curriculum, signup genius, sites for co-op scheduling and dues, homeschool-life for public listings. Homeschool.fit replaces all of them. One platform for curriculum planning, real-time group chat, co-op scheduling with sign-ups, events, polls, dues collection, work sample portfolios for charter reporting, a living books library, and community discovery. Built by a homeschool family.
by tshaddox | 2026-03-03 15:24:04+00:00
Yeah, I'm surprised this request still comes up a lot in techie circles. 15 years ago it made sense. When I packed up and moved to San Francisco with nothing but an AirBnB for a few days, I didn't even have a smartphone, so I bought an iPad with cell data to be able to look for apartments. But these days, it's gotta be a pretty rare scenario to not have a smartphone with a data plan and at least a way to upgrade to enable tethering.
by newswasboring | 2026-03-03 15:24:19+00:00
I fell for this yesterday, but for zeroclaw not nanoclaw. I found this website[1] through brave search I think. I was not paying too much attention as I was under the influence, it points to the wrong repo[2] and instructions install from that. I didn't like zeroclaw anyways so I tried to uninstall it and only then realized i'm on a forked repo.

[1] https://zeroclaw.net/
[2] https://github.com/openagen/zeroclaw
by superfluous_g | 2026-03-03 15:24:22+00:00
95% of AI pilots fail to demonstrate ROI. 90% of CEOs see no productivity gains. 80% of employees report anxiety despite 88% adoption rates.

The data is screaming that AI adoption is failing and the barrier is psychological.

Meanwhile, I built a psychology-first AI enablement strategy from scratch at a FTSE 250 company. 286% ROI. The equivalent of 72 extra FTEs from 500 users. Execs telling me I changed their life.

I've since applied for over a hundred roles. Zero callbacks.

The market is hiring CIOs and ML engineers to solve what is fundamentally a human problem. And the stats show it: just 5% of firms get tangible gains, 23% sustained adoption, zero evidence that time savings translate to productivity gains.

This is what I'm building to fix it.
by spwa4 | 2026-03-03 15:25:51+00:00
What about the argument that Congress has always gone along with this in the past?

I mean it isn't quite that stark, but the last president that actually asked congress for and got a declaration of war was Roosevelt. The last president that asked for and got permission for the use of military force was George Bush (junior) after 9/11 (obv. he meant against the Taliban).

Which means all US conflicts are "based on" George Bush's approval for use of military force, about 1 per presidential term: military intervention in Lybia, the campaign against ISIS, campaign against Syria and Iraq militias/continuation against ISIS, and now Iran. Iran is a different scale I guess, but ...
by raesene9 | 2026-03-03 15:25:53+00:00
Whilst I have no special knowledge, my expectation is it'll do both. If you reduce the barriers to coding you'll get more code, both at the hobbyist/one-person level and also at the large corp level.

Whether that translates into more value for those larger corps is the trillion dollar question :) Writing code is a small part of the process of finding and shipping features that customers want, so it remains to be seen how much LLM tools translate it.

I think it's fairly widely accepted that from a financial standpoint we're in an AI/LLM bubble. There has been more investment than we're likely to see financial benefits, but it's impossible to predict to what degree (if you can predict that and the timing you can make a lot of money!!)
by whizzter | 2026-03-03 15:25:54+00:00
I think that might be partly because on regular PC's you can just go and buy an NVidia card insteaf of fuzzing around with software issues, and for those on laptops they probably hope that something like Zluda will solve it via software shims or MS backed ML api's.

Basically, too many choices to "focus on" makes non a winner except the incumbent.
by levabalkin | 2026-03-03 15:25:54+00:00
Much of today’s conversation about AI in design revolves around efficiency. AI generates layouts faster, writes copy quicker, prototypes more variations. But the structure of design remains intact: teams, roadmaps, versioning, design systems, debates about ethics and values.
The proposal here is different: Not AI-assisted design. Not AI-augmented workflows. But post-design.
by tsoukase | 2026-03-03 15:25:56+00:00
This feels more like a joke. Off course the step- word was meant to be omitted in order to challenge pervert instincts, so this ban is justified. I can imagine the embarrassment in many UK homes. But, banning a legal relation while allowing rape, animals or extreme age and size differences is odd. I suppose cousin and unkle/aunt relationships will increase. How is it supposed to be enforced? Will there be a word filter?
by battery_staple_ | 2026-03-03 15:26:38+00:00
> tear it apart.

Alright, though I'll be gentle.

> state machines and hardcoded context for over 1,600 specific verticals running 1,284 autonomous workflows—handling everything from healthcare compliance to real estate out-of-the-box.

How do you know? Did you consult a collection of experts in each of 1,600 fields?

> Production-ready for DoD contracts, healthcare (HIPAA), and enterprise compliance.

How much paperwork have you done? The things you say this is ready for have processes in place that things need to go through, in order to be ready for them. Have you gone through those processes?

You make a lot of claims. I have no doubt that you have a github repo with a folder full of a thousand lines of code for each one of them. I'm less confident that those lines of code have ever really run -- like, how did you test the MLS integration? If you haven't sold an actual house via your agentic workflow, then you haven't tested the MLS integration.

My advice to you is to exercise some self-restraint. Narrow your focus to a set of things you're actually willing to execute on -- as in, willing to pay the transaction cost to do a real-world test (and have that test fail as spectacularly as you can imagine!). If you don't have the means / willingness to sell an actual house, then don't try to do an MLS integration. For most of these things, you're going to need to partner with an existing expert in the field. And that's not because building a flow for them is hard, but rather because building a flow for them is _arbitrary_. It doesn't matter what's 'correct'. It matters what they need. Even if you give them something that's fit for purpose, they won't be able to migrate to it unless it does it more or less the way they _currently_ do it.

> I never coded before 6 months ago.

> Started with API keys, ... and I still have to retrieve my own API keys lol.

I remember being this age, though for me it was PHP/MySQL and building a content management system for my dad's website. It's a good place to be. Keep it up.
by observationist | 2026-03-03 15:27:20+00:00
Part of it is civics. You have the right to record in public. Being in a public space means you are consenting to being recorded; it's in public. It's not always moral, classy, correct, or good, but the alternative is the erosion of the principles of free press, freedom of expression, etc.

The form factor of the camera doesn't matter. We do have different constraints, but those are pretty solidly filled out in case law. I don't believe making recording glasses illegal to wear in public would withstand constitutional scrutiny. Mandating a visible notification with a conventional color, signaling things like "on" "passive" and "recording" would be constitutional and wouldn't infringe. That said, surreptitious use would likely be legal, e.g. aftermarket modification to allow recording with no lights; first amendment issues have a high bar and all sorts of secret camera precedents being legal. This is how corrupt politicians and cops and officials get caught, all the time, and it's highly unlikely to be smart glasses that gets the people and courts to flip on 1A.
by ekns | 2026-03-03 15:27:28+00:00
Interesting. I've been just now exploring something related or tangential, but for Finnish governance (why not all countries eventually).

Idea: Pull in all related docs and statements from the law and its process. And analyze its mechanisms across all timeframes, and across all capital stocks including social/human/moral etc capital. (finding: no one understands game theory nor causal models apparently)
Show HN: Aside – Local meeting capture with vault-native AI distillation
by jphorism | 2026-03-03 15:27:35+00:00
I built aside this weekend because I was tired of pasting meeting transcripts into Claude Code myself to get notes that actually connected to my Obsidian vault. Every tool I tried either required an account, sent my audio to a server, or produced summaries disconnected from where I actually think.

aside is a ~5MB Rust binary that records meetings and feeds them into an AI-native transcription-to-vault workflow:

1. Record — captures mic + system audio simultaneously (stereo WAV, left=you, right=them) with a timestamped TUI editor for real-time notes
2. Transcribe — local transcription via whisper.cpp, with a 7-stage cleanup pipeline that strips hallucinations, deduplicates backchannels, and merges fragments
3. Align — interleaves your memo lines with the transcript on a shared timeline, so you can see what was said around each thing you noted
4. Distill — a Claude Code skill searches your Obsidian vault for related notes, then writes a structured note back into it with [[wikilinks]] to your existing thinking

The distillation step is the part I'm most interested in feedback on. The entire pipeline is a 240-line markdown file (a Claude Code "skill") that the LLM follows as instructions. It treats your memo lines as attention signals — what you wrote down mid-call gets priority over what you didn't. Lines you edited mid-meeting get weighted even higher. It searches your vault semantically and by structure (tags, people, wikilinks), then weaves connections into the output note.

The output doesn't read like a meeting summary with action items. It reads like what you would have written up yourself if you had the time — highlighting what mattered to you, connected to what you've already been thinking about.

The skill is plain text. You can read it in the repo, fork it, change how it prioritizes topics or formats notes. There's no black box between the transcript and the vault note — just markdown instructions an LLM follows.

This matters because the workflow is vault-native end to end: sessions live inside the vault, distilled notes land where your thinking already lives, and the AI step uses your vault's own language and structure as context. The meeting note isn't a standalone summary — it's a node in your existing knowledge graph.

Technical details: 3.1k lines total. Rust binary handles recording + TUI (cpal for audio, ratatui for the editor, lock-free ring buffers for real-time capture). Python script handles transcription cleanup. Claude Code skill handles distillation. Everything runs locally except the optional LLM call.

Dual audio capture solves hybrid meetings — conference room mic + remote participants on speaker both get transcribed on separate channels.

No accounts, no telemetry, Apache 2.0. Install via `brew install jshph/aside/aside`
by leoedin | 2026-03-03 15:28:10+00:00
The AI-ism that annoys me the most is the unnecessary hubris. Just sampling a small portion of the linked article:

"Here’s the fascinating part:", "And one delightful discovery: "

Personally I find the AI-isms take away from the voice of the author. What does the author find interesting? What was their motivation? It's all lost in a sea of hubris and platitudes.

There's almost certainly a positive side - technical people who aren't so good at communication can now write punchy deep-tech blogs. But what's lost is the unique human voice that is normally in every piece of writing. It's like every blog is rewritten by a committee of copywriters before it's published. Bleurgh.
by q00 | 2026-03-03 15:28:22+00:00
I’ve been building Ouroboros to solve the "infinite token burn" problem in agentic coding. Most failures I've seen come from ambiguous inputs, leading to agents that "look busy" by refactoring the same code over and over without real progress.

To reach true Human Outside The Loop stability, I’m experimenting with two "math gates"

Ambiguity Gate: The Socratic interview phase doesn't end until the calculated ambiguity drops below 0.2

Convergence: Instead of fixed iterations, the loop stops when the system's schema stabilizes across generations

At a recent hackathon in Korea, I used this to let an agent run unsupervised for 7 hours overnight. It generated ~100k lines of code (including 70k lines of tests/mocks) and successfully built a hardware-integrated system while I slept.

The "Deep Interview" pattern from this project was recently merged into the oh-my-claudecode (OMC) v4.6.0 release as an official skill.I'd love to hear your thoughts on how to measure "real" architectural progress in long-running agent loops versus shallow code churn.