MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by socalgal2 | 2026-03-06 02:25:24+00:00
I actually dislike most "branding", by which I mean, I dislike when the name/logo of the brand is on the product itself. I get that puts me in the minority.

For me, partly because I don't want to be seen as showing off and partly because I feel like if you want me to advertise your brand then you should be paying me, not the me paying you.

And, once noticed, it's on so many products I wish it wasn't. The sink in my bathroom says "Sterling" as does my toilet. The saddles (seats) on my two bicycles have their name on them. So do the front forks on one. One that's most silly to me, the tires have huge branding but the actual useful info, what pressure they need, is nearly impossible to read without perfect lighting and then me taking a photo and zooming in.

My phone holder, basket holder, rear racks, and pannier are all branded. My toaster oven, rice cooker, electric kettle, stove, refrigerator, even the garbage disposal has it's name stamped into the top visible part. All my casual shoes have a visible exposed tag at a minimum. Fortunately dress shoes don't but I rarely have a chance to wear those.

My computer case, my monitor, my hub, my KVM, my laptop holder, my headphones, my mouse, they're all advertising their brand at me.

I'd be fine if it's in some hidden area (inside the fridge, under the rice cooker, under the laptop holder, etc...) but ultimately I'd prefer no branding. But, there just aren't any choices. Most people either want to show off the brand they bought or they don't care. Few are like me that would prefer no visible branding. And so you can't get unbranded things (or I can't)
by hammock | 2026-03-06 02:25:53+00:00
> Considering how much more safety and driver assist features are in these cars compared to the same models from even only 10 years ago, the price being nearly the same in constant dollars is actually great remarkable.

There is more technology in modern cars, but the cost of tech always trends down in constant dollars. (See cost per megabyte/megahertz/whatever for example)

And while there is more size in modern cars, the build quality is worse.

So those are two downward forces combining on car prices.
by leptons | 2026-03-06 02:26:05+00:00
The mental gymnastics you're doing is impressive!

>"Apple’s iPhone marketshare in the US is 60% vs Samsung’s at 22%"

Which iPhone, which Samsung?

And you're cherry-picking the US market only.

Worldwide, Apple's market share sucks. Oh, but I guess the rest of the world doesn't matter to you as long as the numbers make sense in your own head that Apple is somehow "winning".

Apple has never had and never will have the market share that others have - Windows and Android eclipse Apple's 15%-30%. Those are the numbers you're so desperate to avoid acknowledging.

It's a pretty pathetic display of fanboyism, and it's rather boring - this "conversation" is over.
by majormajor | 2026-03-06 02:26:51+00:00
I don't think either of these points change the fact that if you bought a Rolex (or IWC or whatever) that someone slipped you out the side door of the factory, identical in every way except missing the logos, for a substantial discount, it would not be nearly as valuable or prestigious in your collection as a genuine one that other collectors would want. How much would a serious collector splash out on an unofficial - and very unspecial - version of a 100k watch?

I'd do that in a heartbeat for a MacBook, though. Same as with any other consumer good.

Apple is competing in the "premium fit and finish" product space, not the "luxury good" space, so the brand is significantly less of a factor of the value for their devices than it is for Rolex, IWC, etc.

And despite the essay linked here—which seems like a lot of words spilled on a fairly mundane history lesson—I don't think "luxury goods are driven by name value" is anything new. Goes back to the wealthy being patrons of the arts for hundreds, thousands of years... They wanted their name associated with those works, and they wanted those works to be famous. Status all the way down. "When telling the time became ubiquitous, the luxury goods part of the watch market became an increasingly large part of it" is uninteresting.
Show HN: Almost Entirely Vibe Coded 3D C++ OpenGL Engine
by Umomgg | 2026-03-06 02:27:05+00:00
Im a graduate student doing research in the Artifical Intelligence domain at the moment. With this project, wanted to see how far I could push agentic coding assistants and I know 3d rendering is one of the hardest systemic tasks to get right.

The result is a sort of first person demo I have that supports save/load "scenes", normal mapping, mesh and texture caching, render-device abstractions and more.

I’m releasing this under the MIT License. Given the current Supreme Court discussions around AI and copyright, I believe that if the authorship of agent-assisted code is legally "thin," the only logical move is to make the architecture a public resource.
by danans | 2026-03-06 02:27:18+00:00
> In a bear market in a bloated company, maybe

Then any company that was staffed at levels needed prior to the arrival of current-level LLM coding assistants is bloated.

If the company was person-hour starved before, a significant amount of that demand is being satisfied by LLMs now.

It all depends on where the company is in the arc of its technology and business development, and where it was when powerful coding agents became viable.
by wolvoleo | 2026-03-06 02:27:26+00:00
Yes I've seen many news items about laws being introduced that were pretty invasive.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/06/24/germanys-new-surveillanc...

https://www.heise.de/news/Ausweispruefung-bei-Prepaid-SIMs-N...

https://netzpolitik.org/2016/projekt-aniski-wie-der-bnd-mit-...
by hedora | 2026-03-06 02:27:27+00:00
The one where he accuses Trump of retaliating against Anthropic after failing to solicit a bribe?

That should be the headline here. We know Trump personally made $4B last year, and we know he's been using the full power of the US gov't to retaliate against people that don't "support" him.

Come 2029, when there's an opportunity for the corruption trials to start, this sort of behavior needs to be front of the public mind, both at the top, and throughout his network of appointees.
by mikeyouse | 2026-03-06 02:27:35+00:00
I just realized what this feels like.

When I was living in SF, we had lived in the same apartment for 5 years and then our landlord sold the building. The new owner was doing a condo-conversion and so we got 'evicted' (in reality he paid us a small sum of money to move out since evictions are complex there).

My partner and I were both employed, we were going to be fine (although paying much higher rent) but there was this visceral, "The place that we thought was home is being taken and there's nothing we can do about it" unease in the pit of my stomach that stuck with me for months and months.

This really feels the same as that really unpleasant time.
by WatchDog | 2026-03-06 02:27:37+00:00
After hearing Palmer Luckey's argument for the name change[0], I tend to think it's good change.

Some of his arguments:

It used to be called the department of war, and it had a better track record with regard to foreign conflict, under that name then it did under the DoD name.

Department of war is a more honest name, department of defense is a somewhat newspeak term, although "Department of Peace" would be worse.

It's harder to seek funding for "war", then it is to seek funding for "defense".
If you ask someone, "Do you want to spend money on education or war?", you will get a different answer asking, "Do you want to spend money on education or defense?".

[0] Palmer Luckey talking to Mike Rowe about the name change: https://youtu.be/dejWbn_-gUQ?t=1007
by Aurornis | 2026-03-06 02:27:40+00:00
The net error rate is lower with the internal ECC.

DDR4 is not fully reliable memory either.

This is common for many high speed electrical engineering challenges: Running a slightly higher error rate option with ECC on top can have an overall lower error rate at higher throughput than the alternative of running it slow enough to push the error rate down below some threshold.

It makes some people nervous because they don’t like the idea of errors being corrected, but the system designers are looking at overall error rates. The ECC is included in the system’s operation so it isn’t something that is worthwhile to separate out.
by moron4hire | 2026-03-06 02:27:56+00:00
What? I'm not questioning whether the weapons research actually happened. I'm questioning the sincerity of people claiming they didn't know what they were doing. I've seen plenty of weapons programs. They aren't a secret to the people working on them. My point is, the government doesn't need to lie to researchers or even pay them very well to get them to develop weapons because there are plenty of intelligent-enough people willing to do it almost for free.
by thedougd | 2026-03-06 02:28:25+00:00
Sure. It’s just rarely what lay people associate with “sensitive”. Most customers are worried about small electronics with switching mode power supplies that wouldn’t have a problem with just about any power source.

I wouldn’t run some AC motors, old AC clock, ham radio, or many other things on some generators.

The line is open to interoperation and never defined by the manufacturer. It’s blanket liability avoidance that confuses customers.
by danparsonson | 2026-03-06 02:29:02+00:00
> ...the challenge with writing tests well...

Sure, you can test more or less anything given sufficient time and force, but a massive fragile harness wrapped around the system under test is not what I mean by 'testing well'.

Also there are other things in software besides web; unit testing code that is entangled with desktop UI can be difficult or impossible without changing the original code. Try testing a WPF app that talks directly to the Dispatcher when there is no UI thread, for example.
by majormajor | 2026-03-06 02:29:14+00:00
Is there data to prove or disprove this?

I haven't given a shit about Apple marketing since I was a teenager, and I have bought many Apple products since then. If they could turn their marketing spend into a discount on the price instead I'd happily pay less. (Of course, this would reduce their sales, so it wouldn't work that way, but I'm not in it for the videos I've never watched.)

Obviously I'm aware they still have their fanatics, but how much of their sales is that really?
by cjonas | 2026-03-06 02:30:56+00:00
There an interesting series on the modernization of diablo[0] that dives deep into the game mechanics that makes d1 and d2 "better" games than d3 and d4. Basically it all comes down to creating tension, power variable spikes, and meaningful itemization.

https://youtu.be/bcdHPZzyCxQ?si=a8_mDLFTcMrKFV_s
by raven12345 | 2026-03-06 02:30:57+00:00
As someone active in both English and Chinese media, I always feel like who relying on only one is brainwashing, just like Wumao. There's no difference here; it's always about the government control，destroying US company... In reality, free services have always been a competitive strategy for businesses in China, from ride-hailing to bike-sharing, all about grabbing market share and competing for potential users. Daily active users are what Chinese companies care about most.
by drnick1 | 2026-03-06 02:31:08+00:00
I wouldn't call that meaningless privacy theater. For one, you can buy a SIM anonymously, and make the cell location data essentially useless. Second, protection at the DNS level prevents other types of data exfiltration (such as cross-site tracking by the Meta Pixel). By not using social media and communicating over secure apps like Signal, you can indeed achieve a high degree of resistance against tracking and profiling.

Of course, you can do more, such as running only trusted software (i.e., free software) on your devices, not using Internet-of-Shit devices anywhere in your home, and making sure your car is not snooping on you through it's own cellular modem.
by godrae369 | 2026-03-06 02:31:43+00:00
Hey! Saw your post about GPTBot eating up your Cloudflare Workers quota.
The brutal truth is that relying on robots.txt in 2026 is like putting a 'please do not enter' sticky note on a bank vault. AI scrapers are notoriously ignoring them or rotating IPs. You are literally paying Cloudflare so OpenAI can train their models.
I build custom infrastructure defenses for SaaS founders. Instead of hoping they respect your robots.txt, I can set up specific Cloudflare WAF (Web Application Firewall) rules and Edge Workers that fingerprint AI scrapers (even when they spoof user-agents) and drop the connection at the edge before it hits your billing quota.
If you want to permanently lock them out and protect your server bill, let's chat. I can share the JSON ruleset for your Cloudflare dashboard.
by godelski | 2026-03-06 02:33:21+00:00
While I don't use disposable emails I've been converting all my accounts to unique emails with either Firefox Relay[0] or using my personal website[1]. Bitwarden has made this easy as they let you import your Relay's API key and so every new site gets unique usernames and passwords[2]. It certainly is making it easier to block spam, and you get to know who is leaking your emails[3], and I've burned emails because of it. Frankly at this point the biggest problem is having a 20 year old gmail account. But the plus side of this type of system is that you can move your endpoint, so where Relay/CF directs the emails too, making you less reliant on your email provider[4].

There's pros and cons. On the plus side, unique identities for every site and by getting a catchall domain you can even generate valid addresses via pen and paper. Probably the biggest benefit is just searching emails. On the cons, document sharing can be a bigger pain than it already is (how is this still a pain all these years later?). Also, people get very confused when you tell them your email address is TheirCompanyName@godelski.mozmail.com (I don't actually have that domain, don't send emails there).

It's helpful but I think represents a fundamental flaw in our ecosystem.

> And we're still stuck bashing PGP

I can't believe we haven't normalized this in the nerdy spaces, at least not to the degree of things like Signal. It is a thing that can be entirely automated and both Thunderbird and NeoMutt are able to handle this for you and make it effectively seamless. The average person does want this stuff, but they don't want to think about it. The problem is that they think their stuff is already private, or they say it can be spied on but that they're not worth spying on so they think it is effectively the same thing.

[0] https://relay.firefox.com/

[1] Cloudflare will do email forwarding for you as will plenty of others: https://www.cloudflare.com/developer-platform/products/email...

[2] What doesn't help is how prolific OAUTH is becoming.

[3] Sorry, adding +something on your gmail won't work these days.

[4] I'm actually looking. People say TutaMail but sorry, I need something I can use with either Thunderbird or NeoMutt... This is non-negotiable. Everyone has multiple email addresses these days and I'm not checking 30 different sites. The problem is already one of poor organization.
by idle_zealot | 2026-03-06 02:34:26+00:00
These rules exist ostensibly for security, right? I wonder what the right model is here for interactive end-user operating systems. Just trust apps to behave and give them access to your devices? That's more-or-less what udev hacks end up amounting to in my experience... Maybe the API applications see should just ask the OS for a device that matches some description, and then the OS pops open a picker for the user, kinda like a file dialog? Selection of a device to pass to an application counts as granting permission to use it.
by zmgsabst | 2026-03-06 02:34:42+00:00
It was already going downhill a decade ago, eg, using bad think on video games.

But my personal experience is something snapped in a lot of people during COVID when people asked reasonable questions like — “is an experimental gene therapy really QALY positive in populations not at risk, such as healthy children?”

According to government actuarial tables, the answer was no: the UK government concluded that there was no point at which for those under 40 the immunizations prevented more serious outcomes than they caused. But people were (and often still are) absolutely rabid if you point out we (in administering a QALY negative treatment to a vulnerable population) decided to poison children and young adults en masse. I’ve had people look up my mother on Facebook for calmly citing UK government actuarial reports, which did the calculation on COVID vs vaccine harms.

That’s setting aside that on HN you’d get shadowbanned for even posting the clip of BLM leaders describing themselves as “trained Marxists” and BLM itself as Marxist in ideology. Apparently, no matter how politely you state facts, if HN froths irrationally in response it is an “inherent flamewar”.

But I’m not sure I qualify for what you’re asking, as I generally post under my true identity, not anonymously.
by datsci_est_2015 | 2026-03-06 02:35:16+00:00
> Hypothetically if we had a choice between sending in humans to war or sending in fully autonomous drones that make decisions on par with humans, the moral choice might well be the drones - because it doesn't put our service members.

I guess let the record state that I am deeply morally opposed to automated killing of any kind.

I am sick to my stomach when I really try to put myself in the shoes of the indigenous peoples of Africa who were the first victims of highly automatic weapons, “machine guns” or “Gatling guns”. The asymmetry was barbaric. I do hope that there is a hell, simply that those who made the decision to execute en masse those peoples have a place to rot in internal hellfire.

To even think of modernizing that scene of inhumane depravity with AI is despicable. No, I am deeply opposed to automated killing of any kind.
by wingrammer | 2026-03-06 02:35:20+00:00
That’s an interesting way to frame it.

What we kept running into is that even when the agent output itself is correct and admissible, distributed systems behavior can still produce duplicate mutations once execution starts — retries, worker restarts, async scheduling, etc.

So the layer we focus on is the execution boundary itself: once a tool call or API mutation is approved, ensuring that action commits exactly once.

Pre-execution validation definitely helps reduce bad decisions upstream. Our assumption is that even with good validation, the execution layer still needs deterministic guarantees because infrastructure failures are unavoidable.
by widowlark | 2026-03-06 02:35:25+00:00
Casio is the best watch brand in the world. This is measurable - most features, battery life, versatility, utility, and durability for the lowest possible price. It's an objective truth. Given this, other watch brands have had to differentiate, and since they cannot compete on pure functionality alone, they offer luxury or, as pg points out, brand identity as a differentiatior.
by skybrian | 2026-03-06 02:35:41+00:00
At a technical level, I don't believe they're specifically working on targeting anyone. They're providing a general-purpose API that Palantir is presumably using to build the target-finding software.

I imagine that's why the implementation got so far along before this blew up. Someone at Anthropic talked with someone at Palantir and they had a "you did what? Did you read the contract terms" moment, and that was after it went into production.
by zof3 | 2026-03-06 02:36:46+00:00
After spending a couple hours working with it, it feels like a significant jump from 5.3 codex – and I know they said it wasn't theoretically the biggest jump, but this feels like the improvement of Opus 4.5 over again – that minor improvement that hits a tipping point. It just gets stuff right, first try. Its edits are better, more refined, less spaghetti-like.

If you last used 5.2, try 5.4 on High.
by hedora | 2026-03-06 02:37:11+00:00
ECC is standard at this point (current RAM flips so many bits it's basically mandatory). Also, most CPUs have "machine checks" that are supposed to detect incorrect computations + alert the OS.

However, there are still gaps. For one thing, the OS has to be configured to listen for + act on machine check exceptions.

On the hardware level, there's an optional spec to checksum the link between the CPU and the memory. Since it's optional, many consumer machines do not implement it, so then they flip bits not in RAM, but on the lines between the RAM and the CPU.

It's frustrating that they didn't mandate error detection / correction there, but I guess the industry runs on price discrimination, so most people can't have nice things.
by dmitrygr | 2026-03-06 02:37:33+00:00
I like this, but a bigger problem exists that needs to be solved. I suggest: any business that accepts money for services MUST have a way to reach a human & any email from them that is not purely informational may not be sent from a no-reply address. I am so tired of “$thing is wrong with your account. Please do not reply. Email is unmonitored. Don’t calls us — we dont have a phone number. Live chat is “ai only” and can do nothing to help you. In conclusion, fuck you. However, $thing is still wrong and if you don’t fix it somehow, $consequences will happen. GL&HF”

Nothing wrong with automated processes, I get that customer support costs money, but final appeals MUST exist and MUST go to a real human who has real ability to overrule the machines and speaks English.
by ubutler | 2026-03-06 02:37:58+00:00
FWIW we're planning on releasing a self-hostable version on AWS Marketplace quite soon followed by one on the Azure Marketplace. In both cases, deployments live entirely in your tenancy, are fully air-gapped (ie, they can't access the internet), and your usage is unmetered.

We do already have a government-facing client using one of our self-hosted deployments given the privacy and security concerns the legal industry tends to have (rightfully in our view) around AI.
by oefrha | 2026-03-06 02:38:10+00:00
Surprised huh v2 isn't included in this and there's no mention of it in the release announcement at all. Quite a few of my apps mix bubbletea/bubbles and huh in different parts of the app, and while they're typically separate and technically could coexist no problem, it would feel a bit weird. Plus huh is advertised as "can be integrated into a Bubble Tea application"; I'm not using it personally but it's surely used by some users. Anyone from charmbracelet here could comment on the situation?