MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bzurak | 2026-03-14 13:07:54+00:00
I wouldn't say it abstracts the locking mechanisms away - if you need synchronization in your app, it's probably best to leave how that's achieved up to the user - what it does is make it possible to contain your business logic end-to-end in a single application/codebase without obfuscating it with distribution boundaries (e.g., calls out to other REST APIs or message queues). There are also still worker nodes to manager, BUT the architecture is much simpler in the sense that there are only workers to deal with - no control plane, scheduler, or other services involved.

Regarding failures - Wool workers are simple gRPC services under the hood, and connections are long-lived HTTP2 connections that persist for the life of the request. Worker-side failures simply manifest as Python exceptions on the client side, with the added nicety of preserving the FULL stack trace across worker boundaries (achieved with tbpickle). A core tenet of Wool is that it makes no assumptions about your workload - I leave it up to you to write a try-catch block and handle exceptions in a manner appropriate to your use case. The goal is to keep Wool as unopinionated about this sort of thing as possible.

I'm not sure about your specific needs, but I'm considering adding a simple CLI-based worker management tool for users that don't want or need a full service orchestrator like Kubernetes in their stack.
by rkomorn | 2026-03-14 13:08:35+00:00
100% agree. I'm currently out of tech (and not all that likely to return) but this is the one thing I feel certain about if I do decide to come back: there will not be a place for me as some sort of artisanal, non-"AI-first/fluent" engineer (whether I like it or not).

Even in adjacent roles (design, PM, etc), I'm confident "how do you leverage AI?" will be one of the central evaluation questions.

Edit: for emphasis, again: whether I like it or not.
by dnpls | 2026-03-14 13:08:54+00:00
This is amazing. I like the Logitech mouse + kbd that I have but the Logi apps are crap. At some point (not too long ago) I had to run TWO Logi apps because the newer one didn't have support for my keyboard. Mind you, it's some MX artsy-fartsy with the volume knob, so it's not old hardware. Also the app was awful, the volume knob didn't work right away, then the volume would go up and down some 5 minutes later on its own. I'll gladly get rid of the Logi apps ASAP.
by mschuster91 | 2026-03-14 13:09:03+00:00
> A/B testing the features of a web app is not unexpected or unethical.

It's not "unexpected" but it is still unethical. In ye olde days, you had something like "release notes" with software, and you could inform yourself what changed instead of having to question your memory "didn't there exist a button just yesterday?" all the time. Or you could simply refuse to install the update, or you could run acceptance tests and raise flags with the vendor if your acceptance tests caused issues with your workflow.

Now with everything and their dog turning SaaS for that sweet sweet recurring revenue and people jerking themselves off over "rapid deployment", with the one doing the most deployments a day winning the contest? Dozens if not hundreds of "releases" a day, and in the worst case, you learn the new workflow only for it to be reverted without notice again. Or half your users get the A bucket, the other half gets the B bucket, and a few users get the C bucket, so no one can answer issues that users in the other bucket have. Gaslighting on a million people scale.

It sucks and I wish everyone doing this only debilitating pain in their life. Just a bit of revenge for all the pain you caused to your users in the endless pursuit for 0.0001% more growth.
by jaen | 2026-03-14 13:09:11+00:00
Or... you could just use a programming language that looks good and has great support for embedded domain-specific languages (eDSL), like Haskell, OCaml or Scala.

Or, y'know, use the language you have (JavaScript) properly, eg. add a `sum` abstraction instead of `.reduce((acc, val) => { return acc+val }, 0)`.

In particular, the problem of "all the calculations are blocked for a single user input" is solved by eg. applicatives or arrows (these are fairly trivial abstract algebraic concepts, but foreign to most programmers), which have syntactic support in the abovementioned languages.

(Of course, avoid the temptation to overcomplicate it with too abstract functional programming concepts.)

If you write an XML DSL:

1. You have to solve the problem of "what parts can I parallelize and evaluate independently" anyway. Except in this case, that problem has been solved a long time ago by functional programming / abstract algebra / category-theoretic concepts.

2. It looks ugly (IMHO).

3. You are inventing an entirely new vocabulary unreadable to fellow programmers.

4. You will very likely run into Greenspun's tenth rule if the domain is non-trivial.
by seba_dos1 | 2026-03-14 13:10:07+00:00
It doesn't even matter that it generates revenue, they could "give it away for free" and yet earn vast amounts of money with it just fine - but they never gave it away to anyone! They just let you use it "for free" right now, but could change their mind at a whim and stop, or even ban you specifically because they just feel like it. They're the only owners of data you contribute and it's not being given away, but strictly guarded.

Compare with OSM, which actually is being "given away for free" even though people still do monetize it. They just do it on the same terms as anyone else could.
by sdovan1 | 2026-03-14 13:10:12+00:00
Sometimes I wonder why we need to invent another DSL. (or when should we?)

At work, we have an XML DSL that bridges two services. It's actually a series of API calls with JSONPath mappings.
It has if-else and goto, but no real math (you can only add 1 to a variable though) and no arrays.
Debugging is such a pain, makes me wonder why we don't just write Java.
by kivle | 2026-03-14 13:10:49+00:00
I tried the Anthropic models because gemini-pro had already been rate limited with a 5 day wait. I got some actual usage out of the Google model, but laughably little compared to what I got with ChatGPT Plus. This is definitely not an imagined thing from my side, you just have to look at the Antigravity forums:

https://discuss.ai.google.dev/new
by ramgine | 2026-03-14 13:11:17+00:00
I use wireless almost exclusively. ANC in the office is a must. I also know that a good pair of wired headphones will have way more fidelity than AirPods. But I do have some nice wired headphones and I pair them to my iPhone with the Fiio BTR5. It’s been a good mix of the two. I’m of the mindset to go back to an mp3 player and use the fiio to connect to my car Bluetooth
by fc417fc802 | 2026-03-14 13:11:36+00:00
People aren't as stupid as you appear to think. Yes, there are second (and third, forth, ...) order effects. Typically these sorts of systems will settle into an equilibrium. A reasonably competent government agency will account for that where necessary.

It's strange. You object to the government here yet expect private industry to fill the same gap. Why do you believe private industry would navigate these issues better than a government agency would? Given the difference in incentives it doesn't make any sense.

It's a good thing for the regulator to be able to step in at will rather than blindly hope that things go well. Industry is notoriously bad at making short term sacrifices for long term risk management. Would you rather the government force them to maintain their own reserves via regulation?

> This isn't a different thing from the first thing. There being less supply is what causes the price to go up.

No, the two are not at all the same. Rapid price fluctuations are one issue. Essential resources are an entirely separate problem. Volatility and starving to death both involve price movement but are otherwise very different things.

> encouraging the market to take all the slack out causes there to be less supply.

So if the reserve is run by the government it's removing slack and reducing supply, but when run by private industry ... ?

No amount of regular slack is ever going to be able to compensate for a tail risk that blocks the import of an essential good. Take oil for example. No company is ever going to voluntarily warehouse enough to keep the entire US economy going for any significant amount of time. It's a crazy small tail risk and very expensive to counterbalance.

Food is similar. No grocery store or wholesaler or whoever else is going to voluntarily stockpile enough to keep people from starving in the event of widespread crop failure or similarly devastating adverse environmental event.

> If the government keeps an enormous reserve, they're going to cause the price to be higher even when nothing is wrong and burn through a disproportionate amount of tax money doing it.

Why would that be? Filling and emptying shifts demand but doesn't create additional. Anyway you seem to be arguing that private industry should do this for themselves. So whatever the effects are they will be present either way.

Why do you expect disproportionate expenditures? The cost is that of warehousing. The benefit is the entire economy running more smoothly which presumably increases taxes by quite a lot if money is all you're concerned with. It also just generally improves everyone's quality of life which I would hope is the entire purpose for the government to exist when you get down to it.
Show HN: Got tired of AI copilots just autocompleting, and built Glass Arc
by Conquer01 | 2026-03-14 13:11:48+00:00
Hey HN,

Over the last few months, I realized I was paying $20/month for an AI that essentially just acts as a really good autocomplete. It waits for me to type, guesses the next block, and stops. But software engineering isn't just writing syntax, it's managing the file system, running terminal commands, and debugging stack traces.

So I pivoted my project and built Glass Arc. It’s an agentic workspace that lives directly inside VS Code.

Instead of just generating text, I gave it actual agency over the local environment (safely):

1. Agentic Execution: You give it an intent, and it drafts the architecture across multiple files, managing the dependency tree and running standard terminal commands to scaffold the infrastructure.

2. Runtime Auto-Heal: This was the hardest part. When a fatal exception hits the terminal, Glass Arc intercepts the stack trace, analyzes the crash context, writes the fix, and injects it.

3. Multiplayer: Generates a secure vscode:// deep-link so you can drop it in Slack and sync your team's IDEs into the same live session.

4. Pay-as-you-go: I scrapped the standard $20/mo SaaS model. It runs on a credit system—you only pay when the Architect is actively modifying your system. (Signing in via GitHub drops 200 free credits to test it out).

I’d love for you to try to break it, test the auto-healing, and tear apart the architecture. What am I missing?

Live on the VS code Marketplace, Install: https://www.glassarc.dev/
by energy123 | 2026-03-14 13:11:55+00:00
We should make different inflation baskets, representative of the bottom quartile, the median person, and the upper quartile.

The bottom quartile has a large % of the CPI basket composed of housing rent, for example.

The upper quartile has 0% of the CPI basket composed of rents.

This should be doable quite easily, it's not like the spending habits of different socioeconomic groups are a secret.
by mexicocitinluez | 2026-03-14 13:12:27+00:00
I use these tools a lot, and one thing that has stood out to me is that they LOVE to write code. A lot of it. And they're not super great at extracting the reusable parts. They also love to over-engineer things.

I've taken great pains to get by with as little code as possible, because the more code you have, the harder it is to change (obviously). And while there are absolutely instances in which I'm not super invested in a piece of code's ability to be changed, there are definitely instances in which I am.
by mikkupikku | 2026-03-14 13:12:43+00:00
Agreed. The only time I don't clear context after a plan has been agreed on is when I'm doing a long series of relatively small but very related changes, such as back-and-forth tweaking when I don't yet know what I really want the final result to be until I've tried stuff out. In those cases, it has very rarely been useful to compact the context, but usually I don't get close.
by codingdave | 2026-03-14 13:12:46+00:00
Only in some industries, and only on modern stacks. Those of us who work on legacy platforms in enterprise environments don't need it at all. On the contrary, the younger folks who use it can't get good info out and are trashing systems when they try.

I do use basic LLM assistance, at a chatbot level. It is close enough and quick enough to give me a good head start when writing something new, and its problems are fairly quick to see and fix. But the fully baked tools are overkill for the value they offer, at least where I work.

I'd say that you need to know your environment, know what AI tools are available, and know which ones work best in your particular slice of the industry. Because if I ever go back to modern stacks, I know the AI tolls will have far more value.
by applfanboysbgon | 2026-03-14 13:12:54+00:00
I didn't make any claims about their utility. I said that they are not like people. They are machines through and through. Regular software programs. Programs that are, I suppose, a little bit too complex for the average human to understand, so now we have the Eliza effect applying to an entirely new generation.

"I had not realized ... exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people." -- Eliza's creator
by zane__chen | 2026-03-14 13:13:11+00:00
I wanted to really understand how AI agents work, so I spent two weeks building one from scratch. Then I turned my learning into a step-by-step tutorial.

18 progressive steps — each adds one concept, each has runnable code.
Some highlights from the journey:

- Step 0: Chat Loop — Start with the basics. Just you and the LLM, talking.
- Step 1: Tools — Give your agent the ability to take actions.
- Step 2: Skills — Dynamically load capabilities as needed.
- Step 6: Web Tools — Agent can search and read the web.
- Step 11: Multi-Agent Routing — Multiple agents, right one for the right job.
- Step 15: Agent Dispatch — Agents that can collaborate with each other.
- Step 17: Memory — Long-term knowledge that persists across sessions.

Each step is self-contained with a README + working code.

[https://github.com/czl9707/build-your-own-openclaw](https://github.com/czl9707/build-your-own-openclaw)

Hope this helpful! Feedback welcome.
by u1hcw9nx | 2026-03-14 13:13:30+00:00
Summary:

The company paid independent testing organization VTT to do limited tests for battery. The VTT.fi did just the test it was paid to do, nothing more.

The result: Donut battery behaves just like any other battery is expected to behave in same testing. For example, you can fast charge normal lithium ion battery at Donut speeds 4 times.

Founders behind Donut have new AI startup Asilab, marketed with similar bullshit "This changes everything" story. It seems that they are just hustlers separating dumb investors from their money.
by SKYFOR | 2026-03-14 13:13:31+00:00
Radar is an interesting direction because it works much better in poor visibility conditions compared to cameras.

If autonomous systems combine radar, lidar and camera data effectively, the redundancy could make perception systems significantly more reliable, especially in fog, rain or low-light environments.

The real challenge is probably not only sensing, but how well the system fuses and interprets all that data in real time.
by mcherm | 2026-03-14 13:13:45+00:00
Many people are taking what I believe to be the wrong message here.

I believe the author's intent was (or should have been) to describe how THEY wanted to receive communication, not how EVERYONE should.

A skilled communicator will craft their message for the audience. Some want "just the facts" with no social lubricant. Others want the banter to build person-to-person relationships. Some want a quick statement of context for everything. If you can adjust the message to the audience you will be more successful at working with them.

I have begun including "how I want you to communicate with me" as part of my standard "introduce myself to new team members" talk.
by incanus77 | 2026-03-14 13:13:51+00:00
Totally resonates with me. I was a kid in the country from a yard sale-scrounging sort of family, and we didn't have money for a computer, but we had a strong ethic of DIY and of education. I had a TI-99/4A (1981) in the late 80s, and an IBM PCjr (1984) in the 90s, but I still stretched them both to the limits of what I could figure out, find in any book I could get my hands on, experiment with $1 shareware I'd find at the mall, or learn about from talking to someone. No net, no meetups, no one else with a computer like mine. I'd come across a Packard Bell at the mall Sears, or a Tandy at Radio Shack, or a 486 setup for Wolfenstein 3D in the university bookstore during a journalism field trip. Figured out how to make a RAM disk to fool a PC game running on my PCjr into thinking there was a C: drive, all kinds of stuff like that. Just kept hacking and pushing and learning.
by decodebytes | 2026-03-14 13:14:46+00:00
If anyone happens to be interested in sandboxing, a community of us are building https://nono.sh

For what it's worth, it's not just whipped up in claude, a lot of us have a long background in security - I originally created sigstore.dev and was a distinguished engineer at red hat where I built and contributed to a lot of open source security work.

Comes and check it out, any support is appreciated as there is a lot of noise around with all these projects going through weekly hype cycles.
by samdjstephens | 2026-03-14 13:14:47+00:00
I really like this too - having the previous plan and implementation in place to create the next plan, but then clearing context once that next plan exists feels like a great way to have exactly the right context at the right time.

I often do follow ups, that would have been short message replies before, as plans, just so I can clear context once it’s ready. I’m hitting the context limit much less often now too.
by Decabytes | 2026-03-14 13:14:59+00:00
S-expressions are a cheap dsl too. I use it in my desktop browser runtime that is powered by wasm that I’m developing
As the “HTML”^1 and CSS^2 in fact it works so well I use it also reused it to do the styling for html exports in my markup language designed to fight documentation drift^3.

1. https://gitlab.com/canvasui/canvasui-engine/-/blame/main/exa...

2. https://gitlab.com/canvasui/canvasui-engine/-/blob/main/exam...

3. https://gitlab.com/sablelang/libcuidoc
by suheilaaita | 2026-03-14 13:16:02+00:00
I Agree on the customer empowerment point.

I'd push back slightly on the production grade point. The models aren't the ceiling, the user's mental model of software is, depending on his experience/knowledge.

Someone just starting out will get working prototypes and solid MVPs, which is genuinely impressive. But as they develop real engineering intuition — how Git works, how databases behave under load, how hosting and infra fit together — that's when they start shipping production-grade things with Claude Code.

Based on what I'm seeing, the tool can handle it. The question is whether the person behind it understands what they're asking for. Anthropic, for example, mostly uses claude code to develop claude code.
by twic | 2026-03-14 13:16:11+00:00
I think you're talking about microphonics:

https://zikman.audio/blog/cable-microphonics-what-it-is-and-...

Also sometimes called the stethoscope effect.

I think strictly speaking, this isn't actually microphonics, because that means that mechanical noise causes electrical noise, which then results in audible noise, whereas what is happening is just transmission of vibrations up the cable into the ear.

Anyway, it can be fixed with better cables. They don't have to be fancy (they don't have to be the 349 euro cables that site is selling!) - i have a pair of KZ ZS10 Pro X earphones, and using the stock cables, i don't get rustling through those.

(more generally, i have an embarrassing number of Chi-Fi earphones, and don't get rustling with any of them)
by pshirshov | 2026-03-14 13:16:18+00:00
I believe it's more correct to reference circular calls as "livelocks", not "deadlocks" - something is happening but the whole computation cannot progress.

For the rest - pure untyped actors come with a lot of downsides and provoke engineers to make systems unnecessarily distributed (with all the consistency and timeout issues). There aren't that many problems which can be mapped well directly to actors. I personally find async runtimes with typed front-ends (e.g. Cats/ZIO in Scala, async in Rust, etc) much more robust and much less error-prone.
by neogodless | 2026-03-14 13:16:31+00:00
Am I the only one confused by the very first quote?

> "your feelings about how I might receive this are your problem to manage, not mine, just give me the information."

Followed immediately by

> a person receiving a message bears responsibility for their own emotional reaction to its content

So it's not "your feelings about how I might receive this" but rather "my feelings about how I might receive this are my problem to manage."

EDIT: Ooops I found a comment expressing this thought:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47372043
by embedding-shape | 2026-03-14 13:16:52+00:00
I think that says more about you than the ecosystem at large, people been modding computers for decades at this point, hardly new that some people seem to care more about looks than actually features/functionality/specifications :)

Personally I'm with you (but black), my entire desktop is just one color, and if a component is available in RGB and non-RGB and the difference isn't too big, I pay extra for that non-RGB version (which doesn't make sense it's even the case, but here we are).

I guess you could argue that we're all obsessed with the looks, some that all RAM slots are occupied, some that RGB is everywhere, some that the PC case should be off-white and slowly morph into beige, others that everything should be minimally black.
by virtualritz | 2026-03-14 13:16:53+00:00
I haven't hit the "dumb zone" any more since two months. I think this talk is outdated.

I'm using CC (Opus) thinking and Codex with xhigh on always.

And the models have gotten really good when you let them do stuff where goals are verifiable by the model. I had Codex fix a Rust B-rep CSG classification pipeline successfully over the course of a week, unsupervised. It had a custom STEP viewer that would take screenshots and feed them back into the model so it could verify the progress resp. the triangle soup (non progress) itself.

Codex did all the planning and verification, CC wrote the code.

This would have not been possible six months ago at all from my experience.

Maybe with a lot of handholding; but I doubt it (I tried).

I mean both the problem for starters (requires a lot of spatial reasoning and connected math) and the autonomous implementation. Context compression was never an issue in the entire session, for either model.