MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by SsgMshdPotatoes | 2026-03-12 23:54:37+00:00
True, if you look for all "obvious patterns" and filter those out of the dataset, not much will be left probably. Maybe the best is then to just publish as complete a dataset as possible, so all questions, all user answers, for each user the nr of questions they did, time for each question, etc. Then people using that dataset can draw their own conclusions.
by sedatk | 2026-03-12 23:54:41+00:00
> the only thing keeping it alive is people being overly zealous over it

Hard disagree. It turned out to be great for mobile connectivity and IoT (Matter + Thread).

> the cost to administer it is like '50'.

I'm not sure if that's true. It feels like less work to me because you don't need to worry about NAT or DHCP as much as you need with IPv4.
by agentultra | 2026-03-12 23:55:27+00:00
That’s not the point of nor the reason for knowledge work.

The fundamental mechanism of knowledge work is people. They haven’t changed at all. And what they need to understand and learn hasn’t changed. All the agents in the world and all of the methane guzzling data centres can’t tell you what to write in the specification nor if what the computer has generated faithfully implements that specification.
Show HN: Tarvos – Relay Architecture for infinitely building with coding agents
by Photon48 | 2026-03-12 23:55:30+00:00
Relay Architecture is a new way to run AI coding agents. Instead of one agent executing your entire plan until it degrades, you run a relay. Each fresh agent reads the full plan, picks up a minimal handoff from the previous one, works at peak capacity, and passes the baton forward. The team covers a distance no single agent could sustain.

The problem it exists to solve: LLMs degrade as context fills up — this is measured, not anecdotal (Chroma Research). Every AI coding tool today runs a single agent start to finish. By phase 4 of your plan, half the context window is spent remembering what was already done. I was restarting sessions by hand, copy-pasting progress notes just to keep quality up. That's not autonomous development. That's babysitting.
The architecture has four components: the Master Plan (your PRD, read fresh by every agent — never accumulates in context), the Baton (a hard-capped 40-line handoff note — the constraint is intentional, a bloated handoff recreates context rot in the next agent), the Signals (trigger phrases agents emit so the orchestrator dispatches without understanding the code), and the Context Budget (real-time token tracking, automatic handoff at threshold).

Tarvos is the reference implementation for Claude Code. Each session runs in its own git worktree. Accept merges to your branch, reject discards cleanly.

Open source, MIT. Works today, rough edges exist.
by wvenable | 2026-03-12 23:56:01+00:00
When I got my first PC (a 286 with a 2400 baud modem) I had to wire my computer to the telephone line from my bedroom all the way to the kitchen. I had some very long telephone extension cable and every morning for 2 weeks my parents woke up with chest-high line running down the hallway.

After those 2 weeks, my parents decided to get me my own phone line in my room. That's also week I started running my own BBS. I ran it for several years.

Those were strange and interesting times.
by sockgrant | 2026-03-12 23:56:17+00:00
I agree some people go to work to work, and claude is find / good for them, but I feel that characterization of us who are loving claude is disingenuous. I’m a creative, while I loved coding and honed my craft, it was creating that always had me hooked. Claude is creating on steroids. Not to mention, it can help you massively improve your code cleanliness. All of the little nice-to-have features, the cleanups, the high unit test coverage, nagging bug fixes, etc., they’re all trivial to do now.

It’s not the same as writing code, but it’s fun.

If your coworkers can’t outpace your code output they’re either not using opus4.6 or they aren’t really trying.

It’s pretty easy to slam 20 PRs a day with some of them being complex changes. The hardest part is testing the diffs, but people are figuring that out too.
by jcgl | 2026-03-12 23:56:39+00:00
In any scenario where you want to do traffic steering at a network level. Managing multiple network upstreams (e.g. for network failover or load balancing) is a common example that is served well by numerous off-the-shelf routers with IPv4. That's an important feature that IPv6 cannot offer without using NPTv6 or NAT66.

It's conceivable that OSes could support some sort of traffic steering mechanism where the network distributes policy in some sort of dynamic way? But that also sounds fragile and you (i.e. the network operator) still have to cope with the long tail of devices that will never support such a mechanism.
by epolanski | 2026-03-12 23:57:12+00:00
> AI doesn’t help me with these. At least not much. Mostly because the time I spend coding is time I spend understanding, diagnosing, and perfecting. Not the code. The product.

It can actually help a lot here too.

In fact I rarely have AI author or edit code, but I have it all time researching, finding edge cases I didn't think about, digging into dependencies code, finding ideas or alternative approaches. My usage is 90% of the time assisting with information gathering, criticizing (I have multiple reviewer skills with different personas, and I have multiple LLMs run them).

Even when it comes to product stuff, many of my clients have complicated business logic. Talking multi-tenant-company warehouse software where each process is drastically different and complexity balloons fast even for a single one of them. It helps to connect the dots between different sources of information (old Jira task, discord dumps, confluence, codebase, etc).

And it can iteratively test and find edge cases in applications too, same as you would do manually by taking control of the browser and testing the most uncommon paths.

I would do much less without this assistance.

I really don't get why people focus so much on the least empowering part (code), where it actually tends to balloon complexity quick or overwhelm you with so much content and edits that you can't have the energy to follow while maintaining quality.
by dbspin | 2026-03-12 23:57:41+00:00
Isn't it obvious why?

We contact support services to fix material problems. 'This booking is wrong.' 'I want a refund for that.' AI systems aren't empowered to solve these problems. At best they can provide information. If the answer is information - the user can likely already find it online themselves (often from a better AI model than they're going to find running your support line). If they're calling, they most often want something done.
by paganel | 2026-03-12 23:58:04+00:00
> So bank exposure to private credit generally means banks lending to non-banks who then lend to corporate borrowers.

Isn't this similar in spirit to the infamous (according to Western media) Chinese shadow banking market? There are articles [1] more than 10 years old talking about the collapse of China because of that practice, but it looks like the US is all too happy to do a very similar thing. I also wonder how big of a market we're talking here, as I was too lazy to check. A few hundred billions? $1 trillion? $2 trillion? More?

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2014/12/03/china-shadow-bank-collapse-e...
by jkaplowitz | 2026-03-12 23:58:15+00:00
At least if this "Store cookies?" question is implicitly referencing EU regulations, those regulations don't require consent for cookies which are considered essential, including a cookie to store the response to the consent question (but certainly not advertising tracking cookies). So the respectful replacement for "Ask me again" is "Essential cookies only" (or some equivalent wording to "Essential" like "Required" or "Strictly necessary"). And yes, some sites do get this right.
by FrankWilhoit | 2026-03-12 23:58:38+00:00
The discussion in the article is diffuse, but the answer to the title question is Joshu's "mu", because it is too late to ask it. It is like asking whether the tariffs would, or are meant to, restore American manufacturing. That question could have been asked before the factories, and the energy and transport infrastructures that enabled them, were torn out. Now that they have been, there is no point in even asking the question.
by ptak_dev | 2026-03-12 23:59:22+00:00
The artifact limitations are real — I've hit those same walls, especially on the $20 plan. What I've found is that Claude works much better when you constrain the scope of what you're asking it to generate and build a workflow around it rather than trying to get everything in a single shot.

That's the approach I took building a career document tool (https://super.myninja.ai/apps/6de082c7-a05f-4fc5-a7d3-ab56cc...) — instead of asking Claude to generate an entire polished resume in one pass, the system breaks it into a conversational workflow: first understanding your background, then the target role, then generating sections iteratively with live preview. Each step stays well within token limits and the output quality is dramatically better because the model has richer context at each stage.

The visualization features announced here are exciting for the same reason. The value isn't in generating one massive artifact — it's in having the model make smart decisions about what to visualize and how, ideally in an interactive loop where you can refine. I expect we'll see a lot more tools built around this pattern.
by xeonmc | 2026-03-12 23:59:26+00:00
That’s exactly what I mean, there are no inverse trig that needs to be involved anywhere, see the matrix section in the article. It is trivial to recognize that vector inputs are pretty much the same space the k coefficients and mentally treat cos and sin as a shorthand symbol in terms of vector products.

And in any case inverse trig functions are just components of logarithms of quaternions, and trig is components of exponentiating half-axis-angle into quaternions.
by UltraSane | 2026-03-12 23:59:39+00:00
No, the extremely nasty Islamic Theocracy that runs Iran is fighting for its survival after killing 20,000 protestors. Iran police chief has said that anti-government protesters will be treated as 'enemies'. "And we will do to them what we do to an enemy. We will deal with them in the same way we deal with enemies," he added.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/589307/iran-police-chief-sa...
by tialaramex | 2026-03-12 23:59:45+00:00
LLVM is quite sure that, for example, two pointers to different objects are different. That's true even if in fact the objects both lived in the exact same spot on the stack (but at different times). That's... well it's not what Rust wants but it's not necessarily an unacceptable outcome and Rust could just ask for their addresses and compare those...

Except it turns out if we ask for their addresses, which are the same integer, LLVM remembers it believed the pointers were different and insists those are different too.

Until you call its bluff and do arithmetic on them. Then, in some cases, it snaps out of it and remembers that they're identical...

This is a compiler bug, but, apparently it's such a tricky bug to fix that I stopped even looking to see whether they'd fixed it after a few years... It affects C, C++, Rust, all of them as a result can be miscompiled by a compiler using LLVM [it's easiest to demonstrate this bug with Rust but it's the same in every language]. But as you've probably noticed, this doesn't have such an enormous impact that anybody stopped using LLVM.
by antonymoose | 2026-03-13 00:00:47+00:00
Reminds me of a case that just popped up in my neck of the woods.

Man gets pulled over on an expired plate. They search based on this fact, find a pill bottle (for Irritable Bowel Syndrome) and magically find he’s trafficking cocaine and fentanyl.

Months later a lab test exonerates the poor guy.

https://www.wyff4.com/article/deputies-falsely-identify-ibs-...
by autoexec | 2026-03-13 00:01:32+00:00
> I don't think the best path is praying for failure. Embrace it

"Embrace failure" is exactly the attitude every company is going to take. They've already been working at bottoming out our expectations.

We should have been running companies out of business with regulations and abandonment when their human-written software leaked our private data to criminals, or when their untested forced-updates shut down our systems and sent our IT teams scrambling, or when their unoptimized code forced us to upgrade our hardware or negated any performance gains we should have seen from investing in upgrades.

The quality, reliability, and security of the software we all use and depend on is going to nosedive, and companies already know they can get away with it. They aren't going to start caring about how we feel about that now. "Pay more and settle for less" is where we are today. "Embrace Failure" is the future we're sprinting towards.
by testing22321 | 2026-03-13 00:01:58+00:00
Compared to other developed countries many tens of millions of Americans have a much worse quality of life.

Part of the problem is they just don’t know it.

How much paid maternity leave do you get? Paid time off to move house?
How’s your healthcare when you take a few years off work to raise your kids, or learn to paint?

These are basic human rights for many around the world.
by to11mtm | 2026-03-13 00:02:16+00:00
I mean, I don't use CC itself, just Claude through Copilot IDE plugin for 'reasons'...

At at least there it's more honest than GPT, although at work especially it loves to decide not to use the built in tools and instead YOLO on the terminal but doesn't realize it's in powershell not a true nix terminal, and when it gets that right there's a 50/50 shot it can actually read the output (i.e. spirals repeatedly trying to run and read the output).

I have had some success with prompting along the lines of 'document unfinished items in the plan' at least...
by djoldman | 2026-03-13 00:02:18+00:00
Right. That makes sense in the contrived scenario (although in that contrived scenario we know the probabilities with absolute surety).

But TFA's estimate is perplexing because it is NOT a contrived scenario. We don't have marbles, we have some territory to cover. The territory isn't randomly distributed, we can't adequately randomly sample (presumably?).

It feels like the estimate could be wildly wildly off, in which case why estimate.
by smcl | 2026-03-13 00:02:22+00:00
You’re on the right track here but I don’t think it should be hand-waved away as “the least of your problems” - it’s yet another weapon that police in the USA can use against the population with impunity. They’re going to have to reckon with all of this in the coming years - cops having guns and armored cars, “qualified immunity”, the “stop resisting” workaround for brutality and now this AI
by troad | 2026-03-13 00:02:24+00:00
> Some countries alter their observance of DST in line with their observance of Ramadan, which means that the time-offset changes aligned with Ramadan.

Only Morocco does this, I believe, and it's not even clear that that's actually official time at this point. In 2018, Morocco abolished DST, but it seems unclear what that means in practice.

I'd love it if someone from Morocco could weigh in on what the actual situation is on the ground. Do people still change their clocks for Ramadan? Would they be annoyed if a website kept Moroccan users on standard time during Ramadan?
by aftbit | 2026-03-13 00:02:24+00:00
>(Do note that people can't just "not pull over" because they know there are no penalties involved; they would still be considered police, and "not complying with a police stop" would, as always, be a real crime with real penalties; if you run from the drone, it would summon actual cars to chase you!)

Or perhaps people will not be able to just "not pull over" because the police drones will be given the power to remotely command their car to stop. Heck, why even have the drones? Just require that the car monitor speeding infractions and report them for fines. Serious or repeat offenders can have their throttles locked out to the speed limit of the current road.
by UltraSane | 2026-03-13 00:02:24+00:00
"there is absolutely no "up rising" from Iranian citizens"

This is an extremely bold lie. There have been many uprisings by Iranians against their horrible government that are extremely brutally suppressed by said government.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/589307/iran-police-chief-sa...

Iranian protesters will be treated as enemies if they support Tehran's foes, the country's top police officer warned, as the Middle East war sparked fears mass anti-government rallies could reignite.

"If anyone comes forward in line with the wishes of the enemy, we will no longer see them as merely a protester, we will see them as an enemy," said national police chief Ahmad-Reza Radan in comments aired by state broadcaster IRIB late on Tuesday.

"And we will do to them what we do to an enemy. We will deal with them in the same way we deal with enemies," he added.

"All our forces are also ready, with their hands on the trigger, prepared to defend their revolution."

His warning comes after the government cracked down on anti-government protests in January, sparked a month before over economic grievances in the sanctions-hit country.

The authorities deemed the protests to be "riots" and Radan at one point issued an ultimatum to protesters to hand themselves in or face the full force of the law.

Iranian authorities acknowledge more than 3000 deaths in the unrest, including members of the security forces and bystanders, but say the violence was caused by "terrorist acts" fuelled by Iran's enemies.

The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), however, has recorded more than 7,000 killings in the crackdown, the vast majority protesters, though the toll may be far higher. More than 50,000 have been arrested, it says.

US President Donald Trump had initially cheered on the protesters, threatening to intervene on their behalf as authorities launched a deadly crackdown, but his threats soon shifted to Iran's nuclear programme.

Washington launched strikes with Israel on Iran on February 28, sparking retaliatory strikes by Tehran against Israel and US bases across the Gulf region.
by dbspin | 2026-03-13 00:02:35+00:00
For set related jobs, the hours are the shoot. If the shoot runs long, everybody's on set. It's an exploitative - and in my view, completely unnecessary - culture. The marriages, parental relationships and health costs cannot be justified by the supposed necessity of dollar savings. But currently - especially in the US, film sets all to often work sweatshop hours. More enlightened practices, like 'French hours' (a ten hour day), are also possible. The films created under these conditions don't seem any worse, and the people involved are inarguably happier and healthier.
One plan/spec to rule them all (at least replace lots of docs)
by wek | 2026-03-13 00:02:59+00:00
There have been lots of talk about PRDs being dead and spec-driven development etc.

Here is how we are planning. We iterate with our team and agents on one plan document.

It starts with some of the key things in a PRD but shorter and to the point: goals, use cases, jobs to be done, differentiators, strategy, succcess.

Then, in the same document, we include architecture diagrams in excalidraw or mermaid.

Then we describe the implementation approach but without any code, the approach.

Goal is as short as possible while being thorough... usually a few pages.

Now, we have one unified document that we/agents can use to build. The agents use this plus a full testing plan plus the code. And we get much better results.

It is nice because a human can and will read a few page document and the agents will keep it up-to-date with what is implemented.
by skeeter2020 | 2026-03-13 00:04:18+00:00
This was driven home to me at SaaS company with > $80M ARR when the new CEO was parachuted in by the PE owner said in an all-hands "and we're close to cashflow positive when we account for our interest payments..." How can a software company generating this much subscription revenue NOT be making money? When it's servicing the > $500M the PE firm used to buy it. The rest of the playbook was boringly predictable: cut costs, sign multi-year enterprise deals, sell before the current fund's horizon and hope the music doesn't end.

As a result I prefer the naked greed of VCs where everybody - VC, owners, employees - knows the plan is IPO because at least it's transparent compared to the dirty lies a lot of PE pushes.
by thesz | 2026-03-13 00:04:21+00:00
> until all potential sources of error are close to being eliminated

This is what PSP/TSP did - one has to (continually) review its' own work to identify most frequent sources of (user facing) defects.

> if you also want to predict future performance, you need to break it down into smaller components and track each of them individually.

This is also one of tenets of PSP/TSP. If you have a task with estimate longer that a day (8 hours), break it down.

This is fascinating. LLM community discovers PSP/TSP rules that were laid over more than twenty years ago.

What LLM community miss is that in PSP/TSP it is an individual software developer who is responsible to figure out what they need to look after.

What I see is that it is LLM users who try to harness LLMs with what they perceive as errors. It's not that LLMs are learning, it is that users of LLMs are trying to stronghold these LLMs with prompts.
by burningChrome | 2026-03-13 00:04:27+00:00
Want something to be terrified of?

I work at a massive health care company. They're 100% on the AI bandwagon and are putting AI everywhere they can. Billing, Software, DevOps, everywhere. If you think you can give an Agent some information and have go to work for some user, its 100% on the table for the company to do and either a) then outsource the rest offshore or b) lay the person off or shrink the department to increase the bottom line.

Your healthcare, right now, is being offloaded to AI agents and bots and this is only the beginning.
by hsn915 | 2026-03-13 00:04:44+00:00
You have to stop thinking about it as a computer and think about it as a human.

If, in the context of cooperating together, you say "should I go ahead?" and they just say "no" with nothing else, most people would not interpret that as "don't go ahead". They would interpret that as an unusual break in the rhythm of work.

If you wanted them to not do it, you would say something more like "no no, wait, don't do it yet, I want to do this other thing first".

A plain "no" is not one of the expected answers, so when you encounter it, you're more likely to try to read between the lines rather than take it at face value. It might read more like sarcasm.

Now, if you encountered an LLM that did not understand sarcasm, would you see that as a bug or a feature?
by epolanski | 2026-03-13 00:05:24+00:00
> You 100% should be able to go to prison from tax evasion.

I said can't, not shouldn't.

In any case I'd still say it's arguable if the punishment matches the crime, I'm not saying I'm against it but I don't fully buy it either.

In Italy we have two law codes: criminal and civil. You can't go to prison for civil offenses like tax evasion in our system.
by nlawalker | 2026-03-13 00:05:57+00:00
>I think recognizing which kind of grief you're feeling is the actually useful thing here. If you're mourning the loss of the craft itself—the texture of writing code, the satisfaction of an elegant solution—that's real, and no amount of "just adapt" addresses it. You might need to find that satisfaction somewhere else, or accept that work is going to feel different. Frankly, we've been lucky there's been a livelihood in craft up to now.

The blog post is all about being clear-eyed about the source of grief, but doesn't seem to articulate that it's the livelihood that's gone, not the craft. There's never been a better time to practice the craft itself.