MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by shevy-java | 2026-03-05 10:21:48+00:00
> By design you can't know if the LLM doing the rewrite was exposed to the original code base.

I agree, in theory. In practice courts will request that the decision-making process will be made public. The "we don't know" excuse won't hold; real people also need to tell the truth in court. LLMs may not lie to the court or use the chewbacca defence.

Also, I am pretty certain you CAN have AI models that explain how they originated to the decision-making process. And they can generate valid code too, so anything can be autogenerated here - in theory.
by binaryturtle | 2026-03-05 10:22:57+00:00
Isn't the real issue here that tons of projects that depend on the "chardet" now drag in some crappy still unverified AI slop? AI forgery poisoning, IMHO.

Why does this new project here needed to replace the original like that in this dishonourable way? The proper way would have been to create a proper new project.

Note: even Python's own pip drags this in as dependency it seems (hopefully they'll stick to a proper version)
by flohofwoe | 2026-03-05 10:22:58+00:00
The 'Handmade Network' is essentially this (in a good way though) - and long before LLMs got good enough for code-generation - instead as a counter philosophy to the soulless "enterprise software development" where a feature that could be implemented in 10 lines of code is wrapped in 1000 lines of "industry-best-practices" boilerplate.

Programming via LLMs is just the logical conclusion to this niche of industrialized software development which favours quantity over quality. It's basically replacing human bots which translate specs written by architecture astronauts into code without having to think on their own.

And good riddance to that type of 'spec-in-code-out' type of programming, it should never have existed in the first place. Let the architecture astronauts go wild with LLMs implementing their ideas without having to bother human programmers who actually value their craft ;)
by nicbou | 2026-03-05 10:23:11+00:00
Germany is desperately wishing for a wonder weapon that will help them catch up and overtake other nations technologically. They constantly talk about smart cities and AI pie-in-the-sky projects while their administration is paper-based, risk-averse and parsimonious. They would not recognise not use such a breakthrough solution if it was handed to them.

Berlin's Chief Digitalization Officer's Twitter account was pure black comedy, until he was replaced by someone who - to my knowledge - has been AWOL for years.
Fly.io deleted my apps and DBs in an unrelated organization without warning
by pakejro | 2026-03-05 10:23:23+00:00
Hi HN,

I’m experiencing a destructive and seemingly erratic behavior from Fly.io's automated systems that resulted in a total loss of data across multiple organizations.

I have been using Fly.io since July 2023 with two distinct organizations:

Org A: Used for some Selenium-based automation experiments in late 2025 and other unrelated private projects through the years.

Org B: A long-standing production environment with a Postgres database, active since 2023 with a consistent billing history.

The Incident
Recently, I discovered that everything across all my organizations has been nuked. Apps, databases, and even the volume snapshots (backups) have vanished. The dashboard for my database volume now simply says "deleted 16 days ago."

The contradiction in their system is staggering:

In both organizations, I see a semi-transparent banner: "Your account was flagged by our fraud protection system. Learn more" (the "Learn more" is not even a link).

However, the "Billing" page for Org B still claims the account status is in "Good Standing."

To make it even more surreal, I recently received an automated email from billing@fly.io stating: "Your organization Org B got 100% discount this month!" while my data was already gone.

The critical issue: The database in Org B contains irreplaceable data. While I have older backups, the recent records are unique and cannot be reconstructed. Recovery is my absolute priority.

The Shadow-Lock Loop
My account is NOT banned—I can still log in—but I am stuck in a programmatic "shadow-lock" loop:

Support Tickets: My emails to billing@fly.io (including specific Machine and Volume IDs) have gone unanswered for almost 3 days.

Paid Plan Upgrade: I tried to upgrade to the $29/mo Launch plan to access prioritized support, but the dashboard throws a "Failed to Get Current Plan" error every time I try to add a payment method.

Community Forum: I can't even post there; I get a "Validation Error" when trying to set a username.

Red Flags for the Community

Zero Notification: No email, no warning, and no notification of any violation before the wipe.

Instant Snapshot Deletion: Deleting persistent volumes AND their snapshots simultaneously without a grace period is a terrifying prospect for any PaaS user.

Cross-Org Contamination: A flag on an experimental organization (Org A) led to the silent destruction of a completely separate, clean production organization (Org B).

I have all the technical IDs ready. Although the dashboard says the volume was deleted 16 days ago, I am desperately hoping that a human engineer can still locate a backup or snapshot in their storage before the data is scrubbed forever.

Be careful: On Fly.io, an automated flag on one organization can apparently lead to the total destruction of everything you've built across your entire account over the last 2.5 years.
by zelphirkalt | 2026-03-05 10:23:49+00:00
Not the GP, but when I take strolls through some open source project hosted on GitHub, usually I am not impressed either. Unnecessary OOPism, way too long procedures, that instead could be pure functions, badly named variables, and way, way, waaay too many willy-nilly added dependencies. If that is what the LLMs mostly learn from, I am not surprised at all. But then again this stuff was also written by humans. I remember one especially bad case of a procedure in a very popular project (in its niche) that was basically a 1 man show. A procedure of 300+ lines doing all kinds of stuff, changing the global state of that service it is implementing. But that code was or is relied upon by tech giants and other businesses and no one improves it. They are happy with paying that one guy probably not so much money.
by lxgr | 2026-03-05 10:23:58+00:00
> Did I actually receive 999999 minutes? Yes, indeed I did. But unfortunately, I was only given 7200 minutes to spend my 999999 minutes and I could only spend them 1 minute at a time.

Well, not with that attitude! Initiate a 139-party conference call from your phone and you'll just about make it.
by wolvoleo | 2026-03-05 10:24:49+00:00
Hmm if I were to use this I'd want it synced with my desktop (self hosted). I don't spend so much time on the tiny screen of my phone. When I'm at home or the office I have glorious 24" displays and real keyboards so I just use those. It wouldn't work if the phone is the only way to get to this.

Also I'd want it to connect to my messaging apps so I don't have to tell it when I connected with someone. I have better things to do than keeping logs up to date. I have all my messaging apps integrated into a self hosted matrix instance.

But it's a nice idea especially with ADHD.
Are companies preventing sensitive data from being sent to external LLM APIs
by jayakrishna96 | 2026-03-05 10:25:12+00:00
I’m curious how engineering and security teams are handling governance around AI usage inside companies.

As more teams integrate APIs from providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, and other LLM services, it seems possible for sensitive data to accidentally end up in prompts.

Some questions I’m trying to understand:

• Do companies route AI API traffic through some internal gateway or proxy?
• How do you prevent sensitive information (customer data, credentials, internal documents) from being sent to external models?
• Is AI usage across teams actually tracked anywhere?
• If an auditor asked how AI systems are governed in your company, would you have a clear answer?

I’d be interested to hear how teams are currently handling this in practice.
by utopiah | 2026-03-05 10:25:47+00:00
> to teach you things way faster than the old alternatives

I'm not sure if you ever had a teacher or instructor that you didn't trust, because they were a compulsive liar or addiction or any other issue. I didn't (as least not that I can remember) but I know I would be VERY on guard about it. I imagine I would consequently be quite stressed learning with them, even if they were brilliant, kind, etc.

It would feel a bit like walking on thin ice to get to a beautiful island. Sure, it's not infeasible and if you somehow make it, it might be worth the risk, but honestly wouldn't you prefer a slower boat?
by PatrickNav | 2026-03-05 10:26:11+00:00
Paloha est une agence de communication à Montpellier, basée à Lattes (34970). Fondée en 2021 par Patrick et Angélique Navarro, frère et sœur passionnés de création et de digital, l’agence s’est construite depuis 5 ans autour de la créativité, de la performance et de l'ambition. Notre équipe de 13 experts accompagne les marques partout en France en branding, webdesign, gestion des réseaux sociaux, production vidéo, shooting photo, publicité digitale et marketing d’influence. En tant qu’agence de communication à Montpellier, nous aidons les entreprises à clarifier leur image auprès de leur audience, développer leur visibilité et accélérer leur croissance digitale. Plus de 400 entreprises nous font déjà confiance. Donnez vie à vos ambitions.
by mfabbri77 | 2026-03-05 10:26:14+00:00
If the AI product is recognised as "derivative work" of a GPL-compliant project, then it must itself be licensed under the GPL. Otherwise, it can be licensed under any other license (including closed source/proprietary binary licenses). This last option is what threatens to kill open source: an author no longer has control over their project. This might work for permissive licenses, but for GPL/AGPL and similar licenses, it's precisely the main reason they exist: to prevent the code from being taken, modified, and treated as closed source (including possible use as part of commercial products or Sass).
by nicktikhonov | 2026-03-05 10:28:21+00:00
From what I've seen, it's really easy to get PersonaPlex stuck in a death spiral - talking to itself, stuttering and descending deeper and deeper into total nonsense. Useless for any production use case. But I think this kind of end-to-end model is needed to correctly model conversations. STT/TTS compresses a lot of information - tone, timing, emotion out of the input data to the model, so it seems obvious that the results will always be somewhat robotic. Excited to see the next iteration of these models!
by formerly_proven | 2026-03-05 10:28:41+00:00
I've only seen pen and paper at work in connection with things where real paper signed with actual pens was required by law in such unambiguous terms that nobody felt like taking the risk of PDFs or a boolean database column. So, less than once per year. I've never printed anything for work and I'm not really sure how I would correctly print something. I think there is one printer in my branch office, somewhere?

I haven't seen any production process in automotive involve hand-written paper and I doubt it exists. Automotive supply chains have always been under massive cost pressure and therefore were always at the forefront of the most deeply digitized and automated supply chains.
by einpoklum | 2026-03-05 10:28:54+00:00
> Open source software maintainers have been one of the first to feel the downsides. ... The last thing they needed was to receive slop-coded pull requests from contributors merely looking to cheat their way into having a credible GitHub resumé... As a result, projects have closed down public contributions and dropped their bug bounties...

Has this really been people's experience?

I develop and maintain several small FOSS projects, some of which are moderately popular (e.g. 90,000-user Thunderbird extension; a library with 850 stars on GitHub). So, I'm no superstar or in the center of attention but also not a tumbleweed. I've not received a single AI-slop pull request, so far.

Am I an exception to the rule? Or is this something that only happens for very "fashionable" projects?
by DaedalusII | 2026-03-05 10:28:54+00:00
agencies create many regulations which affect companies, with no input from congress. the ATF in 2017 banned 'bump stocks' by reclassifying them as machineguns with zero input from congress.

companies and the people who work for them are subject to the state via the law and regulations. if they violate the law, the state will use violence to enforce the law, with a government entity called law enforcement and law enforcement officers.

if new technologies are invented, like the internet, missiles, nuclear power, and so on, which represent an ability to manage and allocate violence, or remove the state ability to control violence, the government needs to reassert their monopoly on that violence and take control of it. without this monopoly, how will they collect taxes and enforce the law?

without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea
by marginalia_nu | 2026-03-05 10:29:12+00:00
Most of the people doing the most rote and monotonous work were and are doing so in some of the least productive circumstances, with clear ways of increasing speed and productivity.

If development velocity was truly an important factor in these businesses, we'd migrated away from that gang of four ass Java 8 codebase, given these poor souls offices, or at least cubicles to reduce the noise, we wouldn't make them spend 3 hours a day in ceremonial meetings.

The reason none of this happens is that even if these developers crank out code 10x faster, by the time it's made it past all the inertia and inefficiencies of the organization, the change is nearly imperceptible. Though the bill for the new office and the 2 year refactoring effort are much more tangible.
by mrweasel | 2026-03-05 10:29:30+00:00
> Nvidia should invest more in expanding production capacity

Not if they expect build out of AI data centers to slow down. Once both OpenAI and Anthropic goes public there's going to be a pressure on them to either turn a profit or at least have the stock price go up. One way that can happen, if subscriptions, government contracts and ads aren't working, is cutting back on cost. Cutting costs means doing more with the existing GPUs and datacenters and running them for longer.

Even if the both companies can turn a profit, there's going to be a pressure to not spend on datacenters, if existing facilities can be pushed harder or used more efficiently.

OpenAI and Anthropic going public is going to mean reduced spend on datacenters and GPUs.
by zelphirkalt | 2026-03-05 10:29:32+00:00
If only more engineers admitted, that something they wrote is not good code, but a product of its time, then I think we would get more realistic expectations.

It's OK to say that something you made is shit. It is OK to say that you were not given time to do xyz.

How you recognize something has been made fitting at least is, when you see it in use without much of a change for some 3 or 4 years and while you are the person maintaining it, you rarely ever need to touch it, because you built it in a way that is simple enough to not have tons of bugs yet flexible enough, to cover use-cases and anticipated use-cases.
by embedding-shape | 2026-03-05 10:29:40+00:00
> Probably most people wouldn't enjoy using JSON to encode HTML pages.

Probably yeah, but also, people don't know how enjoyable it is to just use lists and elements within it to represent HTML. Hiccup is a great example of this where you can do something like:

[:h1 "Hey"
[:strong
{:style {:color "red"}}
"there"]]

And it just makes sense. I'm sure we've yet to find the best way of writing HTML.
by war851 | 2026-03-05 10:29:41+00:00
Most AI governance discussion is policy and process. This is an
architectural pattern: the database owns the process, the LLM is
a stateless semantic call, and compliance falls out as a side effect
— not extra work.

The core: an orchestrator (a state machine, not an LLM) reads the
current step from DB config, assembles the prompt, executes one
constrained LLM call, stores the full input/output, and advances.
The LLM never decides what happens next. The DB does.

What you get for free:

- EU AI Act — every LLM call has a defined input, defined output
contract, and is TDD-testable with golden examples. Process
definition and data lineage are explicit in the DB.
- GDPR — data evolution is field-level and mapped: you know exactly
what personal data exists, which step created it, and how to
delete it cleanly.
- Auditability — every prompt, every response, and every decision
is reconstructable from DB state at any point in time.
- LLM-agnostic — swap the provider, nothing changes. The governance
model is in the DB, not the model.

The methodology maps directly from how Claude Code's config cascade
works — same separation of concerns, applied to application design.
The repo has the 6 constitutional principles, a bridge table, and a
full worked example: a hiring engine (01.toldi.io) where a JD PDF
becomes structured DB rows through a governed code+LLM pipeline,
then drives a candidate interview step by step.

Interactive architecture diagram in the repo. The pattern is the
point — not the hiring engine.

Curious: has anyone actually shipped something EU AI Act compliant?
What did the architecture look like?
by hwers | 2026-03-05 10:30:06+00:00
I agree, it can be incredibly frustrating at times. My rule is that if it “compiles” in my brain as an understood idea then i accept it. I also push back a lot (sometimes it points out good errors in my thinking, sometimes it admits it hallucinated). Real humans hallucinate a lot as well or confidently state subtly wrong ideas, it’s a good habit anyway. It’s basically the same approach when presented with a “formula” for something in school. If i dont know how to derive/prove it then i dont accept it as part of my memorized or accepted toolkit/things i use (and try to forget it). If it fits with the rest of my network of understood ideas i do. It’s annoying but still more time efficient than trawling through lecture slides with domain specific language etc
by DiabloD3 | 2026-03-05 10:30:36+00:00
They can trade capacity, but they generally aren't. The huge storage-only fabs owned by Samsung and Micron do runs that go for 9 months to 12 months.

Flash chips haven't been speculated on nearly as hard, and are suffering from the same sort of weird lack-of-nuance. Samsung, for example, isn't reassigning capacity to meet some sort of phantom datacenter demand that isn't already there, generically, across all datacenters, AI or not.

A lot of SSD price skyrocketing is largely "SSDs have RAM on them for cache", not "SSDs have flash chips, and they're both made at the same fabs"... which oddly effects low end SSDs that don't have external cache.

To make it worse, for the speculators who do understand this, because it isn't some universal homogeneous group, the flash chips that go into enterprise SSDs aren't the same that go into consumer SSDs.

The Big Three still aren't doing some major re-tasking of capacity, as the actual global demand isn't outstripping supply any more than normal. There is no short term problem to fix, speculators are just gonna have to stop hoarding toilet paper like its the start of Covid.

Edit: Oh, and if you want to ask how AMD/TSMC or Intel solve this? They can't, same reason why making their own in-house HBM isn't happening.
by 3rodents | 2026-03-05 10:32:29+00:00
You're not describing anything new, you're describing progress. A company invests time and money and expertise into building a product, it becomes established, people copy in 1/10th of the time, the quality of products across the industry improve. Long before generative AI, Instagram famously copied Snapchat's stories concept in a weekend, and that is now a multi-multi-multi-billion contributor to Meta's bottom line.

As engineers, we often think only about code, but code has never been what makes a business succeed. If your client thinks that their businesses primary value is in the mobile app code they wrote, 1) why is it even open source? 2) the business is doomed.

Realistically, though, this is inconsequential, and any time spent worrying about this is wasted time. You don't protect yourself from your competitor by worrying about them copying your mobile app.
by endymion-light | 2026-03-05 10:32:37+00:00
WSL is fantastic - apart from the fact that you need to clear it intermittently via disk compression. I use it for work and it's great until you get something incredibly frustrating, like needing a pass-through for your hardware.

The one thing I can say with my macbook as someone who's switched from a decade of windows, is that stuff tends to just work, minus window swithcing.
by stinkbeetle | 2026-03-05 10:33:03+00:00
> This tells me you’ve never looked at a demand curve. In for example California the demand swings from 18 GW to 50 GW over the day

Have you been looking at "net demand" curves? Total demand variation is not too large over the day. The wind/solar production enormously increases the magnitude of remaining demand difference over the day.

https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook

> and seasons.

Nobody is talking about batteries to deal with demand swings between seasons though. Capacity has to accommodate whether it's nuclear or fossil or battery or renewable. The issue is day to day variation. And it does not matter how much wind/solar capacity you have, you can't supply demand without storage. That is untrue of other generation types.

Other generation might use batteries to take the edge of peaks, but that would only be done if it made total cost cheaper. That's not the case for renewables. If there were no other generation then they would have to use storage, so it's always going to make them more expensive.
by wink | 2026-03-05 10:33:31+00:00
I think you simply can't predict any number without really measuring it.

Ryzen + GPU + 1h of gaming, but 3 screens attached.

still a "desktop computer" - stuff in the browser can spike GPU wattage, but I don't think it will be meaningfully different over several hours of true idle..

My problem is more like: I could measure that, but I'd have to recable everything to have the power meter behind the power strip with just PC + screens... which I will probably do at some point, but it involves redoing 50% of the cables in this room.