MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by k8smonkey | 2026-03-12 09:43:01+00:00
I built a real-time multiplayer card game in Flutter Web + Spring
Boot

SuecaLoca (https://suecaloca.com) — a Portuguese card game (Sueca) with random
"crazy rules" per round: poison cards, jackpot tricks, forced card exchanges
between partners, etc.

Stack:
- Flutter Web frontend (single codebase, targets iOS Safari / Android /
desktop)
- Spring Boot 4 backend with WebSocket (STOMP-less, raw TextWebSocketHandler)
- Hexagonal architecture — domain has zero framework dependencies
- Bots fill empty seats so games always start (scheduled executor, not
threads)
- Hosted on Render (backend) + Cloudflare Pages (frontend)

Interesting problems I ran into:
- iOS Safari silently kills WebSocket connections when the tab is backgrounded
— solved with a JS visibilitychange listener via conditional Dart imports
(dart.library.html) since didChangeAppLifecycleState doesn't fire on Flutter
Web
- MediaQuery.viewInsets.bottom is always 0 on iOS Safari (layout viewport
doesn't resize when keyboard opens) — had to use window.visualViewport.height
via JS interop
- Multi-device session conflict after profile recovery — server sends a
sessionTakenOver event to the old device before closing its socket, stopping
the infinite reconnect loop

Happy to answer questions about the architecture or the Flutter Web iOS
gotchas — there's surprisingly little written about those.
by marceldegraaf | 2026-03-12 09:44:15+00:00
Counterpoint on the "going all-in": we have a 7 year old Elixir/Phoenix project that currently sits at ~100K LOC and I couldn't be happier.

It has been absolutely wonderful building this with Elixir/Phoenix. Obviously any codebase in any language can become a tangled mess, but in 7 years we have never felt the language or framework were in our way.

On the contrary: I think Elixir (and Phoenix) have enabled us to build things in a simple and elegant way that would have taken more code, more infrastructure, and more maintenance in other languages/frameworks.
by haritha-j | 2026-03-12 09:44:46+00:00
Yes, but the whole point of having nukes as a deterrent is that the US wouldn't have arbitrarily killed their leader in the first place. "If i'm going down, everyone else is going down" is the feature, not a bug.

To be clear I don't like the idea of MAD one bit. But this is indeed how it's meant to work.
by jodrellblank | 2026-03-12 09:45:05+00:00
> “1) even normal users just using the web will find RAM to be the bottleneck and that will degrade their user experience over time”

> “For $600 in 2026, your computer shouldn’t be a bad experience in any way”

In the article, Gruber normally uses a 64GB Mac, expected the 8GB RAM to be a problem and was surprised to find that it wasn’t, and judged the Neo as not being a bad experience in any way.
by roysting | 2026-03-12 09:45:33+00:00
I agree. I also appreciate how the commenter feels at peace with acknowledging and accepting the fact that he does not want to guess because we simply do not have enough information and may never have enough.

It’s exactly what frustrates me so much about supposed “scientists” like the one quoted in the article; they say “we don’t know what something is for” then these “scientists” offer and apply all kinds of fanciful imaginative purposes and state them with authority that people accept.

I think it should be professionally disqualifying for scientists to propose any kind of theory or fanciful and imaginative purpose unless there has been rigorous debate and there is a solid theory backed by multiple points of evidence. Making unverifiable claims based on internal imagination and biases does not help and can even cause corruption of science, as I know for a fact happens.

You only have to hear “scientists” with PhDs openly say variations of the following most egregious example; “I just draw the graph and then look for the data to support it”, to know why sciences are so corrupted in many places.

I understand why people do it, especially if it’s your life, but science is largely about the disciplining human nature, something that seems to be crumbling and failing in many ways across many domains in the American empire.
Show HN: Execute local LLM prompts in remote shells
by tgalal | 2026-03-12 09:45:41+00:00
Instead of giving LLM tools SSH access or installing them on a server, the following command:

$ promptctl ssh user@server

makes a set of locally defined prompts "magically" appear within the remote shell as executable command line programs.

For example, I have locally defined prompts for `llm-analyze-config` and `askai`. Then on (any) remote host I can:

$ promptctl ssh user@host
# Now on remote host
$ llm-analyze-config /etc/nginx.conf
$ cat docker-compose.yml | askai "add a load balancer"

the prompts behind `llm-analyze-config` and `askai` execute on my local computer (even though they're invoked remotely) via the llm of my choosing.

This way LLM tools are never granted SSH access to the server, and nothing needs to be installed to the server. In fact, the server does not even need outbound internet connections to be enabled.

Github: https://github.com/tgalal/promptcmd/
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-03-12 09:46:02+00:00
> just regretting for a moment before the void that I can't witness what'll happen to the world in the future.

If I may ask, were you regretting about the decisions made in past or decisions that you won't see in future and jokes aside, what was the most important thing in that moment, was it about family, (does anything like random-thing-we-worry-about-for-too-long/work/tech/whatever-else even runs through the mind)?
by mike_hearn | 2026-03-12 09:46:51+00:00
> But in that same time there was $400bn in waste and fraud through Covid relief funds [1].

The cost of academic fraud should also include the indirect costs of bad decision making.

The Covid relief funds were only needed because politicians implemented extremely aggressive policies based on unproven epidemiological models built on fraudulent practices. I investigated all this extensively at the time and it was really sad/shocking how non-existent intellectual standards are in the field of epidemiology. The models were trash RNGs that couldn't have been validated even if they'd tried, which they never had because the field doesn't consider validation to be necessary to get a paper published. So the models made wildly wrong predictions based on untested, buggy, non-replicable models, which then led to lockdowns, which led to economic catastrophe, which led to the relief programme. All of the fraud in that programme - really the entire cost of it - should be laid at the feet of academic fraud.
by yunseo47 | 2026-03-12 09:47:09+00:00
I think a human-like piece with minor mistakes resonates more emotionally than a perfectly written piece that looks like it was written by AI. However, since there seems to be a grammar debate going on here, I'd like to add: Is it a bad thing for non-native speakers to use AI to correct grammar or awkward expressions? I think it definitely has positive aspects in terms of lowering language barriers.
by bdbdbdb | 2026-03-12 09:47:15+00:00
You need to think about the tech support you do for your parents and decide if it would really be less by moving them to another platform, where "there's no start button" and "where did the top of the window go" and "how do I install this obscure app Ive used for twenty years"

Most of the support questions I field from my folks and in-laws are actually phone things these days. 90% of what I have to deal with is "this thing came up on my phone during the week and I clicked on it, am I hacked? No I don't remember what it said"
by dmos62 | 2026-03-12 09:47:36+00:00
Some counter-arguments:

- We already trust computers to run our markets, banks, cars, energy infrastructure, etc. Is a computer popularly untrustworthy?

- Do low-tech physical ballot systems offer good guarantees? See 2024 Russian elections [0], for an extreme counter-example.

I'd say cryptography or smart algorithms can go a long way in upholding certain invariants, but you need some infrastructure for that: e.g. key pairs per voter and a trustless counting system. If you can't get that, then you're relying on the good will of others: in some cases it's the volunteer counters, in others it's whoever deploys and operates the trust-based black box e-voting system. I think that cryptocurrencies alone should be proof to anyone observant that a trustless voting system is doable, though I'm honestly surprised by this thread, because it alludes to the opposite.

[0] https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/03/20/t...
by Amezarak | 2026-03-12 09:47:39+00:00
US "parties" are giant coalitions compared to the "parties" in parliamentary democracies. You're solving a problem that doesn't exist.

Change the American voting system tomorrow and legislators will belong to different nominal parties that end up forming precisely the same coalitions.

Love him or hate him, Trump is a great example of this - in 2016, Trump effectively formed a new party focused on anti-immigration and protectionism, which rapidly grew to dominate the "conservative" coalition. But those other parties, ranging from libertarians to the Chamber of Commerce (highly pro immigration and highly pro free trade) parties are still there in the coalition.
by thefz | 2026-03-12 09:48:30+00:00
> And there’s the whole thing with the second USB-C port only supporting USB 2 speeds. That stinks. But if Apple could sell a one-port MacBook a decade ago, they can sell one with a shitty second port today.

This is the kind of reasoning behind why I can not take any Apple product review seriously, or any Apple fan seriously.
by eru | 2026-03-12 09:48:36+00:00
> For example, realtors made sense back in the day when there was no internet. But, what value does a real estate agent add in 2026? An owner can list their apartment/house directly online. The buyer and search, find and contact the owner directly, a lot of times even for free (FB Marketplace, WhatsApp groups, etc.).

Is anyone forcing you realtors where you live?

FB Marketplace is just another middle man. (And that supports my thesis from another follow up comment: you want lots of competing middle man!)

Btw, real estate agents in eg the UK take about half the cut in a typical home sale compared to the US.

> Car dealerships rank right on the second in my list.

Yes, and as far as I know they are only a problem in the US, and that's because the US has crazy regulations that pretty much mandate car dealerships. In eg Germany you can buy your car direct from Volkswagen or from any dealership you want.

> We don't need more agents. We need democratized access to information.

Let a thousand flowers bloom. We need more agents, more competition. (But also make direct access legal, where possible.)
by lukan | 2026-03-12 09:48:48+00:00
I don't have the answer here.

I just know, that if I would point a average human to a messy old codebase, he or she would just shrug helplessly. Even most programmers.

But if I tell claude to start digging in, refactor, update outdated tools .. it produces results. So there is some "understanding" I don't know how else to call it. So surely it is not a general intelligence, but it is certainly useful.
by igsomething | 2026-03-12 09:48:49+00:00
Dependency hell. Usually how it goes is you have to develop a new feature, you find a library or a newer version of the framework that solves the problem but it depends on a version of another library that is incompatible with the one in your project. You update the conflicting dependency and get 3 new conflicts, and when you fix those conflicts you get 5 new conflicts, and repeat.
by mike_hearn | 2026-03-12 09:49:48+00:00
That only confirms a very small subset of fraud. There are many ways to do scientific fraud that will yield internally consistent papers that pass replication as practiced today.

An example is papers which claims of the form, "We proved X by doing Y" where Y is a methodology that isn't derived from and can't prove X. This sort of paper will replicate every time because if you re-derive a correct methodology the original authors say you didn't really replicate their study and your work should be ignored, but if you use their broken methodology you'll just give an intellectually fraudulent paper the stamp of replication approval.

This kind of problem is actually much more widespread than work that looks scientific but in which the data is faked.
Invoice OCR API for Automated GST Data Extraction in India
by azapi_ai | 2026-03-12 09:50:02+00:00
Invoice processing and GST data management can be time-consuming when handled manually. An Invoice OCR API helps automate this process by extracting important information directly from invoice images or PDFs. Using AI-powered OCR technology, the system can detect fields such as invoice number, vendor details, invoice date, line items, and total amounts. It can also capture GST-specific data like GSTIN numbers, HSN/SAC codes, taxable values, and tax amounts. Automating invoice data extraction helps businesses reduce manual entry errors, speed up reconciliation, and simplify GST compliance when handling large volumes of invoices.

https://azapi.ai/blog/invoice-ocr-api-with-gst-extraction-india/
by orwin | 2026-03-12 09:50:03+00:00
By the way, the '30k' protestors killed numbers I've heard from US media was fake. OSINT numbers of 15k death is way more likely, and the number from HRANA is 7k confirmed, 11k to be confirmed [0], 50k inprisonned (of which it seems a lot will be executed, which IMHO is worse, and liberating them would have been a more correct, if flimsy, ground for invasion than the current excuse)

[0] https://www.en-hrana.org/the-crimson-winter-a-50-day-record-...
by schipperai | 2026-03-12 09:50:33+00:00
thx! yeah git push is intentionally allowed, it's normal dev workflow operation. but git push --force on the other hand gets flagged as 'git_history_rewrite = ask'.

if you want regular push to also require approval you can set that in your config with nah deny git_write and you get other 'git_writes = ask' for free.
by happymellon | 2026-03-12 09:51:08+00:00
> are you saying SVP’s words are not important and should be ignored?

Personally I would say that an SVPs words are not important and don't need to be ignored.

It's like a politician talking about abstract policies. Yes they do sort of affect me, but they don't require any affirmative action on my behalf any more than the wind does.
by aspenmayer | 2026-03-12 09:51:12+00:00
To be fair, we don’t have many government mules these days, but it wasn’t always so, and not so long ago.

The current amount of horsepower on the hoof is a rounding error, but before mechanized farming and war-fighting, these distinctions were the difference.

If we consider the capacity of technology to act as a force multiplier, it is reasonable to assume that current and future AI-assisted fighting forces can achieve more with less traditional materiel and with fewer personnel.

Drones are an especially likely way that these many AIs will become embodied and diversify, in which case I don’t think the percentages are so far-fetched.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62662gzlp8o

> Further ahead in the future, it wants its machines to be programmed to travel autonomously to a location, carry out its task - such as watching out for advancing enemy soldiers and engaging them if necessary - and then return to base after a certain time.
by JoshuaWellbrock | 2026-03-12 09:51:43+00:00
For the past few years, we've been building complex hardware/software systems with AI-assisted tools and kept running into the same structural problem: classical Scrum optimizes for adaptability but has no intrinsic mechanism for verifiable, auditable quality at scale. The traditional V-Model gives you traceability and rigor but it's rigid, project-bound, and collapses under iteration.

We didn't want to choose between them. So we spent some time working out whether they could be unified and validated the approach on real hardware/software projects before publishing anything.

The result is Agile V (https://agile-v.org), an open standard we're publishing under CC BY-SA 4.0. The core idea is that the "V" shouldn't be a one-time project journey, it should vibrate at the task level, continuously, with every build.

A few things we think are worth discussing:

The Red Team Protocol. The Test Design Agent reads the requirements, not the code, to build the verification suite. This prevents "success bias" — where tests only check what the code happens to do rather than what it was supposed to do. It mirrors how a separate QA team should work in practice, but enforces it structurally.

Living Compliance. In regulated industries (medical, aerospace, automotive), compliance documentation is typically a post-hoc chore that happens before an audit. We think this is the wrong model. Compliance should be an inherent output of the workflow itself, the audit trail writes itself as decisions are made.

Human Curation over Human Execution. The shift AI actually enables isn't automating the build — it's changing what humans are responsible for. Humans should be designing intent, reviewing evidence, and making judgment calls. Not writing boilerplate.

We published a paper on arXiv covering the framework in detail: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20684

We also maintain a set of open Agile V Skills for Cursor and compatible tools that encode the principles directly into a development workflow: https://github.com/Agile-V/agile_v_skills

We're genuinely curious whether others have run into the same tension between Agile and V-Model in regulated or safety-critical work, and whether this framing resonates or misses something. Would love to hear from people who've tried to apply formal verification or traceability in fast-moving teams.

Christopher and Joshua
by philjw | 2026-03-12 09:53:48+00:00
Apple technically supports downloading legacy app versions, but the system is broken: it usually requires the app to be in your purchase history, and developers can opt to delete their old binaries entirely.

Maybe something the EU could enforce is requiring Apple to offer the 'last compatible version' prompt for all users, not just previous downloaders, ensuring older hardware isn't artificially artificially rendered useless for basic tasks.
by avadodin | 2026-03-12 09:54:00+00:00
The nitrogen cycle can be short-circuited really easily at scale.

No need to wait for algal blooms to turn into oil.

Its usage in tanning is pretty wasteful in comparison as it was just used for its high pH and presumably thrown away afterwards.

Getting only the urea-rich golden liquid might require some coöperation like back in the day, but it is idiotic to synthesize ammonia from oil without recycling the vast amounts we have in our bladders; a mistake we have been committing for the past 100 years.
by roncesvalles | 2026-03-12 09:54:30+00:00
The vast majority of religions have been polytheistic (or atheistic).

Islam and Christianity being monotheistic was probably relevant to their expansion because they proposed a total replacement of the prevailing polytheistic belief system wherever they spread. It seems usually when polytheistic religions collide, their gods tend to merge into a syncretism.

Another way to think about it is that it's not their expansion that's remarkable. It's the fact that they preserved the original system so well, despite expansion across literally multiple continents and cultures. It helps to have one prophet, one book, one god.
by hrmtst93837 | 2026-03-12 09:54:51+00:00
Cache size and replacement policies can ruin even a well-tuned LUT once your working set grows or other threads spray cache lines so "just use a LUT" quietly turns into "debug the perf cliff" later. If the perf gain disappears under load or with real input sets you realise too late it was just a best-case microbenchmark trick.
by alpaca128 | 2026-03-12 09:55:35+00:00
I've seen enough reviews of recent Lego sets to doubt this. Sets with a brick or two where the color is off, sets where the final model falls apart if you look at it wrong, and when there's fan designed alternatives which are more solid and better looking it's clear it wasn't a physical limitation.

Not to mention sets that indeed just feel like a ripoff, like the pyramid of giza which costs $130 and is actually just half of a pyramid, but the backside of the model has slots that let you connect it with another half if you buy two of them. And they even admit in the marketing it's an incomplete product with "Complete the pyramid - This model comes with clear instructions and can be connected to a second model (sold separately) to create a full pyramid", of course only visible after scrolling or looking at more product pictures.
Ask HN: Anyone figured out paid trials with Stripe?
by cryptography | 2026-03-12 09:55:45+00:00
Anyone cracked the mystery behind Stripe making paid trials (not free ones!) so painfully hard—or outright impossible—to set up? Their checkout session page keeps defaulting to 'free days' no matter what I try. Is this a bug, docs issue, or intentional? Devs who've fought this beast, what's the workaround?
by schipperai | 2026-03-12 09:56:41+00:00
cool - which models are you seeing 100% on adversarial input? I'd love to see the benchmark if you published it somewhere. In my recent sessions while building nah, the deterministic layer handled about 95% of inputs with zero latency/tokens over 13.5k tool calls, 1.5 days of coding, 84% allowed, 12% asked, 5% blocked. All decision logged to ~/.config/nah/nah.log - so you can audit its efficiency
by rkagerer | 2026-03-12 09:56:55+00:00
If you don't want feature updates, go Windows 11 IoT Enterprise LTSC. It's a comparative breath of fresh air and what Windows should have been all along. No ads, no new unwanted bloat shoved down your throat, no mandatory TPM, and pretty much the longest security patch commitment of anything out of Microsoft. It works great as a daily driver.
by mike_hearn | 2026-03-12 09:58:34+00:00
This is a common misconception in discussions about scientific fraud. You don't have to be able to do a thing correctly to detect when it's being done incorrectly.

You shouldn't trust any claims by scientists about global trends in mean temperatures. We can say this with confidence, without being able to compute a better timeseries, by just looking to see if the basics of the scientific method are being followed by those who do it. If we do that check we find that they don't follow the scientific method. Specifically, they edit past observations to bring them into line with theory instead of deriving theory from data believed to be robust.

https://retractionwatch.com/2021/08/16/will-the-real-hottest...
by ethbr1 | 2026-03-12 10:00:20+00:00
> the tool itself isn't the issue, but rather the abdication of responsibility by the author

The biggest current social problem with AI content is our collective lack of transparency into how much human responsibility was taken.

Give a <100% reliable/accurate AI tool, the same post/code may have had {every line vetted by a human} or {no lines vetted by a human}... and readers have no way of telling which it is!

Because even if no edits needed to be made, the former carries a lot more signal than the latter, because it reduces risk of AI slop and therefore makes the content more valuable.

At the same time, it also costs more time to produce, so in any competitive marketplace (YouTube, paid comments, etc.) the unvetted AI content will dominate.
by drcongo | 2026-03-12 10:00:20+00:00
I can't quite work out if this is serious or not, but for anyone who doesn't know, you can set global and app-specific keyboard shortcuts in System Settings->Keyboard->Keyboard Shortcuts. Shortcuts map to menu item titles which means you can set a "Select Next Tab" shortcut and that shortcut will work in every single app that uses "Select Next Tab" in a menu - it's one of the best features on macOS.