MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by BoxOfRain | 2026-03-05 16:25:14+00:00
There's still one example of a working offshore radio ship, the Ross Revenge in southern England which you can go and visit. She's one of the former Radio Caroline ships, the studios are still fired up every month for a weekend of broadcasting and they run tours. Radio Caroline themselves are still alive and kicking as a legal station broadcasting 24/7 online and on 648 AM; ironically the latter transmission comes from a former BBC World Service site. She wasn't really a 'pirate radio' ship as she was a Panamanian-flagged vessel in international waters so not subject to the Wireless Telegraphy Act in theory, but British citizens specifically would have committed an offence working on her in her free radio days. What really did Radio Caroline in as an offshore broadcaster was the Anglo-Dutch action against the clandestine organisation which supplied the ship, that and the move from a 3-mile to a 12-mile limit which forced her into more exposed waters.

Other than the RNI ship she was probably the best-equipped radio ship that ever put to sea, and certainly the strongest. She was a long-range trawler built for Arctic conditions, and the engineering which went into the radio station was really impressive; Peter Chicago her engineer by all rights should be up there with the greats in hacker lore. Most radio ships were clapped-out old vessels at the end of their lives, they were essentially slapped with transmitters and sent to sea to die since you can never take a radio ship back into port once it's broadcast. The Ross Revenge on the other hand was a very strong ship who was left purposeless midway through her life due to the Cod Wars. The generating and transmitting facilities were really sophisticated for radio pirates, there were plenty of redundancies and the ship could radiate multiple medium and short wave services.

The broadcast studios and accommodation are still active but most of the machinery spaces and the hull itself aren't in good condition. They've raised half a million pounds for repairs, but that's not actually all that much in the maritime conservation game. Hopefully it will be enough to stabilise the immediate problems with the hull and open a door to lottery funding though. If you're in the area I'd go and see her while you've definitely got the chance!
by tootie | 2026-03-05 16:25:56+00:00
It's unbelievable he's still given any semblance of credence for anything he does. Trump is just palpably stupid. He is bad at absorbing information, he is bad at analytical thinking, he is impatient, vain and rash. Aside from his tenuous legal justification, he never once publicly expressed even a fundamental understanding of the basic mechanics of tariff collection nor what balance of trade actually means. You'd constantly see his proxies on TV just put words in his mouth to bend his foolish policy into some coherent. And we're seeing it again with the attack on Iran. No strategy, no achievable objectives, no comprehension of basic facts on the ground. He's really really really just stupid.
by Dunedan | 2026-03-05 16:26:54+00:00
The even more concerning news to me is that chardet 7.0 is now vibe coded AI slop, as documented in the PR for the rewrite [1]:

> I put this together using Claude Code with Opus 4.6 with the amazing https://github.com/obra/superpowers plugin in less than a week. It took a fair amount of iteration to get it dialed in quite like I wanted, but it took a project I had been putting off for many years and made it take ~4 days.

Given the amount of changes I seriously doubt that this re-implementation has been reviewed properly and I wonder how this is going to be maintainable going forward.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47259177
by nashvillewebdev | 2026-03-05 16:27:09+00:00
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

Remote:Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: PHP (Plain + Laravel), JavaScript/Typescript (Vue, Angular), CSS/SASS, UI/UX, MySQL, C#, Basic Kotlin/Python, Figma, Vitest/XTest/Playwright

Résumé/CV: https://resume.christopherwilson.tech/christopher-wilson-res...

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-wilson-webdev/

Email: hireme@christopherwilson.tech
by IanCal | 2026-03-05 16:27:11+00:00
> No, we are literally trying to find a use case where using a lower accuracy LLM makes sense for a vision task.

They're reconfigurable on the fly with little technical expertise and without training data, that's really useful. Personally in projects for people I've found models have fewer unusual edge cases than traditional models, are less sensitive to minor changes in input and are easier to debug by asking them what they can see.
by lapcat | 2026-03-05 16:27:34+00:00
> A 1 or 2 vote "majority" in a chamber is not really meant to allow you to do anything.

1) Democrats had a filibuster-proof super-majority during Obama's first term.

2) The filibuster is not in the Constitution. It can be abolished at any time by a simple majority vote.

The Democrats don't do anything because they don't want to do anything. There's always a convenient excuse. You can blame Manchin or Sinema or whomever, but they're Democrats too.
by api | 2026-03-05 16:27:49+00:00
This was true until the advent of nuclear energy, and became very much less true after the addition of solar PV, industrial-scale wind, and Li-Ion (and now Na-Ion) batteries.

I'd say this statement has been almost entirely false since roughly 2020. The only areas where fossil fuels aren't readily replaceable are long-haul aviation (only a few percent of global emissions) and long-haul shipping (also a few percent). So we can probably cut emissions by 80-90% with no meaningful impact to standard of living.

At this point the pro fossil fuel position is kind of like "you realize camp fires are why we don't get eaten by lions!" Yes, that was true once.

BTW the degrowthers are also wrong. We can cut emissions by 80-90% without degrowth.
by axpvms | 2026-03-05 16:27:58+00:00
Do not call me, father, do not seek me,
Do not call me, do not wish me back.

We’re on a route uncharted, fire and blood erase our tracks.
On we fly, on wings of thunder, never more to sheath our swords.
All of us in battle fallen, not to be brought back by words.

Will there be a rendezvous? I know not.
I only know we still must fight.
We are sand grains in infinity, never to meet,never more see light.

Farewell then my son. Farewell then my conscience.
My youth and my solace my one and my only.

And let this farewell be the end of a story,
Of solitude vast and which none is more lonely.
In which you remain,barred forever and ever,
From light and from air,with your death pangs untold.
Untold and unsoothed, not to be resurrected.
Forever and ever, an 18 year old.

Farewell then, no trains ever come from those regions
Unscheduled or scheduled, no aeroplanes fly there.
Farewell then my son, for no miracles happen,
As in this world dreams do not come true.

Farewell…

I will dream of you still as a baby,
Treading the earth with little strong toes,
The earth where already so many lie buried.
This song to my son, is come to its close.

Son (Pavel Antokolsky, 1943)
by dgxyz | 2026-03-05 16:28:31+00:00
During the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital incident they posted an entirely unverified and unattributed story stating that the cause was an Israeli air strike, pushed this as breaking news and 43 minutes later changed the attribution to Hamas and PIJ sources confirmed.

This lead to two of my female Jewish friends getting spat on and having their hair pulled on the tube and called murdering zionists.

This happens a lot with the BBC in the rush to publish. It is not an excusable situation. There are real consequences. The decline is parallel to the rise in social media and moving the news teams out of London and attention dynamics.

You can find a list of problems in the corrections and clarifications here - work through 2023 to 2025: https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarificat...
by aeon_ai | 2026-03-05 16:28:33+00:00
You've likely paid attention to the litigation here. Regardless of what remains to be litigated, the training in and of itself has already been deemed fair use (and transformative) by Alsup.

Further, you know that ideas are not protected by copyright. The code comparison in this demonstrates a relatively strong case that the expression of the idea is significantly different from that of the original code.

If it were the case that the LLM ingested the code and regurgitated it (as would be the premise of highlighting the training data provenance), that similarity would be much higher. That is not the case.
by jfalcon | 2026-03-05 16:28:55+00:00
>someone raised the question of “what would be the role of humans in an AI-first society”.

Norbert Wiener, considered to be the father of Cybernetics, wrote a book back in the 1950's entitled "The Human Use of Human Beings" that brings up these questions in the early days of digital electronics and control systems. In it, he brings up things like:

- 'Robots enslaving humans for doing jobs better suited by robots due to a lack of humans in the feedback loop which leads to facist machines.'

- 'An economy without human interaction could lead to entropic decay as machines lack biological drive for anti-entropic organization.'

- 'Automation will lead to immediate devaluation of human labor that is routine. Society needs to decouple a person's "worth" from their "utility as a tool".'

The human purpose is not to compete but to safeguard the telology (purpose) of the system.
by linsomniac | 2026-03-05 16:29:09+00:00
You probably want to sign up for SNDS: https://sendersupport.olc.protection.outlook.com/snds/faq

That should allow you to be more proactive about users reporting your messages as spam, either intentionally or unintentionally.

FWIW: We've been sending Microsoft properties e-mails for over a decade, fairly small scale (maybe 5-20K unique recipients at MS properties in a month), and every 2-4 years we have to submit our IP to their "whitelist me" site and then we're golden again.

This time was different, when we submitted our IP to the whitelist site it said "Nothing is blocking your ability to send to us". They did end up responding to our whitelist request a week later asking if we were good or still needed help, which is a first.
by neilv | 2026-03-05 16:29:15+00:00
Historically, Smalltalk has many browsers (views). This System Browser is one of many browsers, and the most busy-looking.

You can browse within it, and also spawn off other kinds of browsers from it.

And these browsers are extensible with others. As someone new to Smalltalk, I was pretty easily able to add a visual class hierarchy browser into this environment:

https://www.neilvandyke.org/smalltalk-chg/

Half the things we know or think about in HCI, the people at PARC figured out before we were born, and sometimes before the hardware to test it existed.

https://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/
Show HN: Beads planner plugin for Claude Code
by jbdamask | 2026-03-05 16:29:30+00:00
I swear by Yegge's Beads https://github.com/steveyegge/beads. Just love it. One of the things Steve talks about in his best practice guide is that the only things that belong in Beads are things that are being actively worked on; it's not a backlog.

I also really like Claude's planning mode, except for the fact that it's tightly coupled with execution.

A pattern I've found is to work in different loops: a planning loop and an execution loop.

Planning loop:
1. Use GitHub issues for backlog items. Whenever I get an idea, I just make an issue with minimal detail.
2. Pull issue into Claude Code
3. Create branch
4. Use a home-grown planning skill that reads the Issue and operates pretty much the same way as Claude's but without the straight-to-execution annoyance
5. Once the plan is finalized, decompose it into Beads
6. Check in branch and tag as "ready"

Execution loop:
Watch GitHub for "ready" issues. When one is found, checkout a worktree then start building. All the beads are self-contained in the issue so there's no need for more discussion with the LLM.

I turned the planning phase into a Claude plugin that I can invoke with a slash command, /beads-planner issue 44. The execution loop can be ralph or even just interactive CC sessions.

Everyone is coming up with their own way to build but figured I'd share because this works for me. YMMV
by leodido | 2026-03-05 16:29:34+00:00
Didn't leave it out. It was grouped with AppArmor in the table, which was imprecise. I'm splitting the row. SELinux labels are on the inode, so renames preserve the context. Copy resistance is policy-dependent (works for `sandbox_t`, not for `unconfined_t`). See my reply to `botanicalfriend` user above.
by genedai | 2026-03-05 16:29:55+00:00
I got tired of AI giving me "it depends" answers when I asked it product management questions. So I built a SKILL.md file -- pure Markdown, zero scripts, zero dependencies -- that turns Claude Code (or Cursor, Windsurf, Codex) into an opinionated PM agent with real domain knowledge.

The architecture is intentionally boring. A single SKILL.md file acts as a router: it maps 40+ user intents to 6 knowledge modules loaded on demand from a `knowledge/` directory. Each module contains frameworks, decision trees, quality gates, and anti-pattern detectors. There are 12 templates in a `templates/` directory. Total system: ~130KB across 20 Markdown files. No build step, no runtime, no API calls. You can read every line before installing.

What makes it different from just prompting "act like a PM": the knowledge modules encode actual domain logic. The finance module has 32 SaaS metrics with exact formulas and stage-specific benchmarks. Ask it about 8% monthly churn and it doesn't say "that's high" -- it computes `1 - (1 - 0.08)^12 = 63%` annual churn, flags it as a red severity indicator, and tells you the benchmark for your stage. The discovery module enforces Mom Test principles and catches "Solution Smuggling" (sneaking a solution into a problem statement). The artifacts module has 8 story splitting patterns and 9 epic breakdown patterns, not just a template to fill in.

The quality gate system is the part I'm most interested in feedback on. Every output passes through universal gates (assumptions must be labeled, outcomes must be measurable, no "Feature Factory" outputs) plus domain-specific gates loaded from the active knowledge module. The agent is designed to push back -- if you ask for a PRD without a clear problem statement, it will challenge you rather than generate filler.

Tradeoffs worth noting: it's CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, not MIT, since the knowledge modules represent significant curation work. It's also opinionated by design, which means it won't work well if you want a yes-machine. And it's optimized for Claude Code's SKILL.md convention -- it works in other editors that support Markdown skills but the routing system is tuned for Claude's context window management.

GitHub: https://github.com/Digidai/product-manager-skills

Install: `clawhub install product-manager-skills`
by hollywood_court | 2026-03-05 16:30:16+00:00
I'm sure there are. One of my mother's husbands — she had four, all cops — loved to tell the story about arresting a man outside of a Zippy Mart on Virginia Loop Road in Montgomery, AL.

The cashier called 911 and told them that a man had robbed the store. When he pulled up he found the man sitting on the curb just waiting for him. He had pulled a knife and stolen one pack of Big Red chewing gum from the store.

All because it was getting cold outside and he needed a place to sleep. And he also had a toothache that had been bothering him for weeks. So he hoped to see a doctor while he was in county jail.
by lokar | 2026-03-05 16:30:27+00:00
Yeah, a cleanroom re-write, or even "just" a copy of the API spec is something to raise as a defense during a trial (along with all other evidence), it's not a categorical exemption from the law.

Also, I find it important that here the API is really minimal (compared to the Java std lib), the real value of the library is in the internal detection logic.
by jdup7 | 2026-03-05 16:30:30+00:00
These are fair points and I agree with a lot of them. GSB operates at a scale we don't, and the conservatism that comes with being the default for billions of users is a real constraint. The post tries to acknowledge that ("the takeaway from all of this is not that Google Safe Browsing is bad") and we're upfront about the timing caveat since these were checked at time of scan.

Where I'd push back is on what this means for the average person. Most people have no protection against phishing beyond what their email provider and browser give them. If that protection is fundamentally reactive, catching threats hours or days after they go live, that's a real limitation worth talking about honestly. The 84% number isn't meant to say GSB is broken. It's meant to say there's a gap, and that gap has consequences for real users regardless of the engineering reasons behind it.

On the marketing angle, we aren't currently selling anything. The extension is free and so is submitting URLs for verification. We recognize it would be disingenuous to say we never will, but at the very least the data and the ability to check URLs (similar to PhishTank before they closed registration) will always be free. The dataset is also sourced from public threat intelligence feeds, not a curated set designed to make our tool look good. We think publishing findings like this is valuable even if you set aside everything about our tools.
by Leno1225 | 2026-03-05 16:30:41+00:00
“As long as the user understands basic safety instructions”
Yes, the internet has basic safety instructions, too (and probably just as many bother to read them), number one or two is “almost nothing online is ever really private”. I learned it by the mid 2000s, not knowing it in 2026 is not excusable with “people don’t need to know how everything works”.
by myrmidon | 2026-03-05 16:30:42+00:00
> What partially non-public information did he have? Be specific.

How would I know? I'm neither Lutnick nor his son.

My point is that there is an extremely obvious conflict of interest here. If your family business is directly affected by decisions and information of the public office that you hold, then the very obvious risk is that you are going favor official decisions that help your business (possibly to the detriment of the majority), and that you leverage non-public information for personal gain.

For this specific case, insider knowledge could be a precise understanding on the "shakiness" of the initial tariffs combined with an insider picture of ongoing legal cases against them (progress and expected success rate).

I'm not saying that Lutnick & sons comitted some kind of crime, but if you let your family business overlap with your public office this much, then the resulting scrutiny is more than justified, and you could make a strong point that such a situation should be avoided in the first place.
by hennell | 2026-03-05 16:30:47+00:00
But the AI has the work to derive from already. I just went to Gemini and said "make me a picture of a cartoon plumber for a game design".
Based on your logic the image it made me of a tubby character with a red cap, blue dungarees, red top and a big bushy mustache is not a derivative work...

(interestingly asking it to make him some friends it gave me more 'original' ideas, but asking it to give him a brother and I can hear the big N's lawyers writing a letter already...)
by assimpleaspossi | 2026-03-05 16:31:26+00:00
One of the Peter Sellers films (Pink Panther?), he goes to prison to visit an inmate only to have the inmate take his identity, fake beard, moustache and clothes, and walks out of jail. This happens several times. In the very last scene, he's walking out of the jail, a smirk on his face, and tries to pull off his fake beard and moustache but it doesn't come off. "Good heavens! The wrong man has escaped!!"
by galaxyLogic | 2026-03-05 16:31:30+00:00
"... If AI-generated code cannot be copyrighted (as the courts suggest) ".

So, Supreme Court has said that. AI-produced code can not be copyrighted. (Am I right?). Then who's to blame if AI produces code large portions of which already exist coded and copyrigted by humans (or corporations).

I assume it goes something like this:

A) If you distribute code produced by AI, YOU cannot claim copyright to it.

B) If you distribute code produced by AI, YOU CAN be held liable for
distributing it.
by jensbontinck | 2026-03-05 16:31:35+00:00
A few patterns we've found effective deploying agents to production:

1. Proxy-based governance. Route all LLM traffic through a governance layer. The agent never holds API keys directly — the proxy holds them and issues scoped, short-lived capability tokens (ES256, 60s TTL). Single enforcement point for scanning, classification, and audit.

2. Scan all message roles. Most people scan user input. In practice, PII and secrets show up in system messages (from frameworks like LangChain), tool responses, and assistant messages from previous turns. OpenAI's "developer" role is another unscanned vector.

3. Deterministic detection over LLM judges. Using a second model to evaluate the first sounds elegant but creates a recursive trust problem. Regex + text normalization (reversing ~24 obfuscation techniques) is boring but reliable and adds ~250ms, not seconds.

4. Fail-closed by default. If your policy engine goes down, block everything. Don't fail open.

5. Presets, not configuration. Nobody writes custom Rego policies from scratch. Ship starter/standard/regulated presets and let teams tune.These came from 12 rounds of red-teaming our own pipeline — about 300 test cases across encoding bypasses, multilingual injection, Unicode evasion, and tool-result poisoning.
by amiga386 | 2026-03-05 16:31:42+00:00
The more nuanced take is that, if somehow your game is actually good or interesting despite being full of other people's assets, players will see the value that you created (e.g. making a fun game). This is missing in most "asset-flip" games.

Another example comes from Getting Over It with Bennett Foddy, which despite the fact it uses a lot of pre-bought art assets, the entire game has the indisputable hallmark of Bennett Foddy -- it has a ridiculously tricky control mechanism, and the whole game world you play in, should you make any mistakes, has a strong likelyhood of dropping you right back at the start, and it's all your own fault for not being able to recover from your mistakes under pressure. You can see this theme in his other games like QWOP and Baby Steps
by hedora | 2026-03-05 16:31:43+00:00
Yeah; that and spam texts. "I have no idea who the person you were trying to reach is, but, yes, the recent weather patterns have created strange surges in my dishwasher. The karmic energy of my spoons is all off. I am interested in having you maintain all my appliances. I'm a landlord and own 25 nude goat yoga worship rooms. They go through a lot of dishes!"

Bonus points if it correlates the spam texts with follow up phone calls from the spammers.
by rich_sasha | 2026-03-05 16:32:22+00:00
People complain about the BBC's bias. And since everyone has a different idea of what "unbiased" looks like, it's almost impossible to please everyone.

But it struck me how few serious, general, global news outlets there are left in the world that aren't tied to some major interest. Fox News, CNN, WSJ... So much stuff is owned by Murdoch or by some other mogul. The Guardian is pretty good IMO but does not even pretend not to have a lefty skew.

I was thinking about the spiral of death that happens to so many media outlets where serious news doesn't pay the bills anymore, so they either have to rent themselves out to some deep pocket, or chase clicks for ads, losing veracity in the process.

BBC is one of the few organisations left that's somewhat immune to that. I won't claim all their stuff is unbiased, but they're just as likely to publish something left- as right-biased. So now I'm rooting for them and hope they make it. Apparently it is the second most trusted news source in the US, right after the Weather Channel. So truly a global phenomenon: https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/52272-trust-in-media-2025-...