MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: PgQueuer – A PostgreSQL job queue that works without PostgreSQL
by jeeybee | 2026-03-01 21:38:06+00:00
PgQueuer turns PostgreSQL into a background job queue using LISTEN/NOTIFY and FOR UPDATE SKIP LOCKED. v0.26.0 adds an in-memory adapter so you can run the same code in tests and CI without a database. Internally it's now built on port protocols, so you can swap the persistence layer entirely.

EDIT; HN trims the full url to readme about in-memory https://github.com/janbjorge/pgqueuer?tab=readme-ov-file#in-...
by nyarlathotep_ | 2026-03-01 21:38:12+00:00
> My last Linux desktop was fabulous. Happily drove a 4K display, I loved living in XFCE every day. There was one issue that was extraordinarily frustrating: if the machine sat unused for somewhere around 24-72 hours it would enter a very strange power state. The machine was still powered up to some degree, but was completely unresponsive. I could use it every day with no issue, for weeks. If I didn't use it for that 24-72h timeframe, boom, it would get into this state.

This has always been my core Linux desktop woe--there's always, no matter what CPU GPU (including (and most often), no dGPU at all) combo/distro I've used, been sleep wake issues of some variety.

I've had AMD CPUs with both fedora and Ubuntu that would never sleep if they weren't woken to desktop (i.e if not logged in, then allowed to automatically turn off the display) they'd never sleep. On those and any of the machines since, I never get more than a month of uptime without it being unresponsive when trying to wake it or similar, regardless of if Kernel updates have been installed etc.
by hluska | 2026-03-01 21:38:40+00:00
My grandpa had a gift for people - the man could start a conversation with anyone, form fast friends and remember their spouse’s middle name in twenty years.

As he put it, it’s a coin toss. Maybe you’re bothering them or maybe they’re grateful to have someone to distract them. Each is equally true before you start the conversation.

The key is being able to read social cues. If you can, you can stop bothering them.
by srean | 2026-03-01 21:38:59+00:00
> However, in other most languages, you have to read() in tiny chunks, parse, process, serialize and finally write() back to the disk. This works, but is verbose and needlessly limited

C has those too and am glad that they do. This is what allows one to do other things while the buffer gets filled, without the need for multithreading.

Yes easier standardized portable async interfaces would have been nice, not sure how well supported they are.
by pixelready | 2026-03-01 21:39:07+00:00
I don’t totally disagree, insofar as a very low GPA is probably a countersignal of common sense and work ethic. The problem you get is by converting these things from measures to targets, and then putting them on a permanent record.

Suddenly everyone is competing for limited slots, the minimum standard for hiring goes from high GPA to perfect GPA, any misstep in your learning process, any teacher who didn’t like you, any elective that may have enriched you personally but you weren’t particularly good add it, etc… gets distilled down into a numerical value (like a credit score) that bureaucrats treat as some sort of object truth. The ATS filters you out without you ever having had a shot, orgs optimize for low-risk tolerance individuals and organizations are starved of potential creative problem solvers and other types of change agents.
by ranger_danger | 2026-03-01 21:39:07+00:00
> Dedication

> This implementation is named after the Serbian singer
Bora Đorđević (also known as Bora Čorba) who was born
in 1952 and died in 2024. His birth year matches the
number of the GZIP standard RFC 1952 that describes
a common CRC32 implementation, and the original proof
of concept for this method used the polynomial x21 +x15 +
x14 + x11 + x10 + x7 + x3 which is x1952×8 mod G(x).

That is indeed dedication.
by try_the_bass | 2026-03-01 21:39:09+00:00
Still seems like a really weird hill to die on. It's just branding, as far as I can tell?

And the President of this country has frequently rewritten laws based on their own personal whims, for a very long time now. Trump's actions in this vein might be the most blatant in this regard, but Executive power has been allowed to grow relatively unchecked for a number of decades already, largely because Congress has been unwilling or unable to do anything about it.

Which is why I think opposing this particular abuse of Executive power (if it really is such a thing) is a really weird hill to die on.
by CloakHQ | 2026-03-01 21:40:09+00:00
Half joking, sure, but the "click around the app" problem is already real for teams running browser automation at scale. The issue isn't the clicks themselves - it's that every Chrome instance looks identical to a bot detector the moment you spin up ten of them from the same machine. The fingerprint (canvas, WebGL, navigator properties, etc.) is basically screaming "I'm automated".
Dealing with this from the ops side: the headache isn't writing the automation, it's keeping each browser session isolated enough that sites don't treat them as the same entity. MCP or CLI doesn't really change that underlying problem.
by hedora | 2026-03-01 21:40:13+00:00
I’ve got two linux desktops and a mac. Combined, the linux desktops hit issues far less often than the mac.

The Linux desktop environment I use (LXDE) is not perfect, but it hits fewer issues than Mac OS. For instance, my Linux box doesn’t try to melt due to finder reindexing, and alt-tab works. Also, I don’t have to position the mouse cursor outside the window to resize (that bug predates tahoe, fwiw). I haven’t had any system services or local IPC crap wedge on Linux like they do on MacOS (I have seen systemd wedge those sorts of things, so I don’t use it).

The integration with iMessage, Notes, Photos and phone calls are clear wins for the mac, but that’s about it.

Some people would say you need nvidia+linux for local inference, but, in practice, AMD iGPU and Apple Silicon both work well (and you can get 32GB of unified ram for much less than a 32GB video card), and the ecosystems are fine. So, I’d call that a tie for anything that can reasonably be called a personal computer or workstation. Some people would argue Linux wins.

If you grab a copy of devuan and slap steam on top of it, then it’ll be able to run far more commercial and open source games than MacOS.

As a daily driver, Linux on a modern vanilla SoC box comes with far less day-to-day hassle. (It’s getting the same level of “we actually tried this exact config” as MacOS does.)

Anyway, I wouldn’t really claim Linux has “issues” vs macos at this point.
by jiggawatts | 2026-03-01 21:41:29+00:00
This reminds me of a visit to an Equinix data centre where the sales person was droning on and on about how incredibly reliable their power supplies were, how uninterruptible everything was, etc, etc…

Essentially, he was trying to assure us that no-no-no, we don’t need multiple zones like the public clouds, they can instead guarantee 100% uninterrupted power under all circumstances.

A bit bored and annoyed, I pointed to the giant red button conspicuously placed in the middle of a pillar and asked what it is for.

“Oh, that’s in case there’s a fire!”

“What does it do?”

“It cuts… the power… uhh… for the safety of the fire department.”

“So… if there’s a wisp of smoke in a corner somewhere, the fireys turn up, the first thing they do is… cut the power?”

“… yes.”

“Not 100% then, is it?”
by kaydub | 2026-03-01 21:41:49+00:00
I avoid most MCPs. They tend to take more context than getting the LLM to script and ingest ouputs. Trying to use JIRA MCP was a mess, way better to have the LLM hit the API, figure out our custom schemas, then write a couple scripts to do exactly what I need to do. Now those scripts are reusable, way less context used.

I don't know, to me it seems like the LLM cli tools are the current pinnacle. All the LLM companies are throwing a ton of shit at the wall to see what else they can get to stick.
by svilen_dobrev | 2026-03-01 21:41:52+00:00
good work..

one suggestion.. all these page-content-rewrites might be fine for a magazine, but here the user is searching, probably comparing, probably hundreds of items. Mostly because of inadequate/impossible filtering, combined with quite tough market - the net has to be cast wider and wider. So, just give plain pages, with choosable page-size. SPA not exactly needed.

btw Remote-ness is highly volatile factor, cannot be booleanly relied.

example search: i am in Bulgaria, so anything there + anything ~~remote in EU + anything ~~remote in that GMT+2 timezone +/- 3h. Exclude anything from (list of shitty agencies). Now Read all those and check

- see if they are in my city or are enoughly remote (can be certain-country/ies-remote, or even certain city/ies-remote =~~hybrid), or pretending to be remote..

- see if they are written in or require a human language i do not speak

- and only then maybe check the actual role :/

in 3 months i have read like 5-25 of these per day, picked from ~10-100.. from 5 sites, eventually - if there were any.

i Agree that linkedin is full of shit, although they are the only ones that do have an exclusion operator "-something", and have somewhat working boolean filtering (X OR Y) AND (Z OR T).. eh, within their sea of shit :/

good to have some sane alternative, thanks
by rzerowan | 2026-03-01 21:42:05+00:00
I wonder what would it take o implement layout compatibilty packs , to allow the user at install to select which layout they are most comfortable with , v2.0 , Photoshop compatible , stable or experimental. All calling into the same base.

Of course such an effort most likeky would need to be a paid effort fulltime rather than volunteerr work.

It always felt sad to me it never reached the usablility/familiarity that Blender has.
by latexr | 2026-03-01 21:42:13+00:00
Right now on the front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47142183

Also interesting and somewhat related: https://pudding.cool/2025/06/hello-stranger/

If you struggle with small talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRG-YubP1rw

But to give a piece of advice not from a comment, is there any interest you have which other people may share and gather for? If you like games, for example, a local game shop is a good place to meet others. There’s usually always someone there, they tend to be welcoming to newcomers, and having something to do (play a game) can make you forget some of the awkwardness.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-03-01 21:42:22+00:00
So exactly how am I going to convince my management to open a req for a junior developer who is not going to help us meet our quarterly goals and take time away from the other senior developers that will either have to work longer hours or do less work?

I’m not going to work as a charity and neither are any of my coworkers. We are all here to exchange labor for money.
by ekr____ | 2026-03-01 21:43:00+00:00
A few points of technical clarification might help here.

1. The reason for a relatively small initial congestion window (cwnd) is to avoid situations where a lot of connections start up and collectively exceed the capacity of the network, causing congestion collapse. Instead, you start slow and then gradually ramp up, as you learn the available capacity. Slow start started in TCP but it's in QUIC too. Initial windows actually used to be a lot smaller and TCP only moved up to its current 10 packet initial window (IW10) after a bunch of experimentation that determined it was safe.

2. The congestion window is actually a property of the sender, not the receiver. The receiver advertises the size of their flow control window, but that's about the buffer, not the sending rate (see section 7 of RFC 9002 for the discussion of slow start in QUIC). So in this case, the server controls cwnd, no matter what the client advertises (though the server isn't allowed to exceed the client's advertised flow control window).

3. QUIC and TCP behave fairly similarly in terms of the broad strokes of rate control. As I noted above, QUIC also uses Slow Start. The amplification limit you mention is a separate limit from initial cwnd, which is intended to avoid blind amplification attacks, because, unlike TCP, QUIC servers can start sending data immediately upon receiving the first packet, so you don't know that the IP address wasn't forged. However, even if the peer's IP is authenticated, that doesn't mean it's safe to use an arbitarily large initial cwnd.
by daxfohl | 2026-03-01 21:43:42+00:00
Yeah, IMO one of the first things we'll see change is more of a migration back to monoliths. Right now adding a feature has to go through multiple teams, a dozen services, a coordinated implementation and deployment schedule, a Byzantine and often manual set of integration tests, etc. Yeah AI can help with that, but the point is that AI doesn't need it. On a monolith, it sucks for dev teams because parallel development at large scale is difficult and other teams' bugs can delay the launch of your unrelated project. Hence, microservices became popular. With AI, development happens so fast that it's largely serial. So there's no real coordination needed. A whole feature is one PR, one set of tests, one app to run locally if you want, one deployment, one thing to look at and roll back if there's a bug. Creates a virtuous cycle all the way up.

I imagine lots of established companies will struggle migrating back to that pattern, but I have to think most new companies will head in that direction, which should let them catch up quickly.

Anyway that's my take. We'll see.
by Veserv | 2026-03-01 21:43:44+00:00
You have asserted without evidence that the increased certificate chain size is the primary scaling bottleneck. I assert that the bottleneck is most likely due to accidental complexity elsewhere on the argument that claimed problems look to be far in excess of the essential complexity.

> Not before key exchange it doesn't. There's no magic bullet here.

I was incorrect. Rereading the QUIC standard I see that they do not flow control the CRYPTO packet number space/stream. I thought they did because it is so easy to do that I did it as a afterthought. Truly another example of fundamental design errors introducing accidental complexity that should be fixed instead of papered over.
by CloakHQ | 2026-03-01 21:45:37+00:00
Cool approach. One thing I've run into working with teams that do browser automation for data collection: the session isolation piece solves the "agent wandering into your main profile" problem, but there's a second layer that bites people at scale — even with perfectly isolated profiles, if multiple sessions run on the same machine they tend to share hardware-level signals (canvas fingerprint, WebGL renderer, screen resolution, timezone) that detection systems pick up on.

So you end up with ten "isolated" sessions that all look like siblings from the same host. Curious if you've hit that or whether the use case here is more single-session handoff rather than running many in parallel.
by fleshmonad | 2026-03-01 21:46:00+00:00
>...abandons the family to do drugs and alcohol? How can you blame “the system” for that?

We don't live in a vacuum and there a reasons why people turn to drug use that the system exacerbates. But that is completely irrelevant, because this blog post is a systemic critique, even if it is told through the life story of an individual. To cherry pick one stanza of the entire blog post to dismiss it on the grounds that the father who left is a drug addict is one more example of the delusions or strategies of the moralizing capitalist.
by gurkenkoenig | 2026-03-01 21:46:05+00:00
There's an api in chrome 146 canary that that will change the web. WebMCP lets websites register structured tools that ai agents can call directly: no scraping, no selenium, no puppeteer. I implemented it in a demo project (456 lines of typescript, 6 tools) and wrote up what i think this means for the web.
by zargon | 2026-03-01 21:46:20+00:00
You should question this and advocate for yourself. The important number is total lifetime exposure to LDL (actually apoB, but doctors aren't routinely testing that yet). The arterial damage is cumulative. You shouldn't wait until you are at high risk of cardiac events to take action. The time to slow down the progression is now.

I'm just replying based on taking your comment at face value. LDL of 150 is very high and living with that for many years is very damaging. Obviously it's something between you and your doctor, I'm just encouraging you to consider and get reasoning from your doctor about whether this approach is really best for your health.
by kgeist | 2026-03-01 21:46:46+00:00
>The C++ standard library sets up exception handling infrastructure early on, allocating memory for an “emergency pool” to be able to allocate memory for exceptions in case malloc ever runs out of memory.

Reminds of .NET preallocating OutOfMemoryException and similar:

https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/f1b1b935ee5bafd149ae0...
by ozgrakkurt | 2026-03-01 21:48:01+00:00
This applies to a lot of things unfortunately. There is a cult of just being afraid and scaring other people.

"You can't do it, just use a library.". "Just use this library, everyone uses it.". "Even google uses this library, do you think you are better." etc.

To add another example to this, you will read that memcpy is super mega optimized on libc and you shouldn't do it yourself etc. etc. etc.

But if you just check clickhouse [1] as an example. They implemented it, it is pretty basic and they say it works well in the comments of the code.

Also you can check musl libc code etc. and it is fairly simple.

People still would argue that you used some intrinsic so it isn't portable or you just benchmarked on one case so it won't work well overall.

Well you CAN benchmark as wide as you want inside your project and have a different memcpy code per project. This kind of thing isn't as bad as people make it out to be in my opinion.

Ofc memcpy is just an example here and it applies similarly to memory allocation, io etc.

As a negative note, imo this is one of the major reasons why most software is super crappy now. Everything uses some library -> those libraries change all the time -> more breaking -> more maintenance. Similar chain happens in terms of performance because the person that wrote that library probably doesn't even know how I am using the library.

This is also why people have endless arguments about what library/tool to use while they can be learning more and more things every day.

[1] https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/blob/master/base/gl...
by inglor_cz | 2026-03-01 21:48:51+00:00
IIRC survival improvement has happened across all staging categories, including the worst one (IV, distant metastases found), so the answer would be "no".

A friend of mine, aged 50, has worked in pediatric oncology her entire (nursing) career. The ratio of surviving kids has flipped from 30/70 to 70/30 during her tenure.
by keeda | 2026-03-01 21:48:54+00:00
I maintain that in the future, any person wishing to learn any skill (not just coding!) will need to willingly eschew the use of AI when learning until they have "built the muscles". The literature is clear that repeated, hands-on practice is really the only way to build skills.

I suspect the progression will be "No AI until intuition (whatever that is for that skill)" -> "Gradual use of AI to understand where it falls short" -> "AI native expert".

How to actually implement this at scale is still TBD ;-) Ironically, AI will be invaluable for this e.g. as a hyper-personalized tutor but it will also present an irresistible temptation to offload the hands-on practice. We already have studies indicating the former is helpful but the latter stifles mastery. At this point I can only see self-discipline as a mechanism to willingly avoid AI.

Unfortunately, our testing-oriented education system only serves to incentivize over-reliance on AI (Goodhart's Law etc.) None of our current institutions and processes are suited for what is already happening and will only accelerate from here on. Things will need to change radically.

For this reason, I once predicted apprenticeships will be a thing again, and already there are signs with Microsoft's preceptorship proposal: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3779312

This is highly encouraging because a tech giant is not only acknowledging the problem, but proposing a solution. Not a complete solution by far but at least a start.
by Agingcoder | 2026-03-01 21:49:00+00:00
My kids make fun of me because I know the shopkeepers around me by first name, along with the details of their businesses , and that shopping takes forever because I talk to everyone, customers included.

I just love it, it’s easy and I get a lot in return - from perks to incredible encounters. At work it’s been very helpful.

I developed that skill while traveling alone for a year , and it boils down to practicing and reading whether the person you’re talking to is ok with your talking or not.

In any case, it makes me immensely happy.
by cmyk_student | 2026-03-01 21:49:20+00:00
There's a third-party theme called PhotoGIMP which changes the layout and shortcuts to match Photoshop: https://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP

Longterm, we have a roadmap item for an Extensions platform: https://developer.gimp.org/core/roadmap/#extensions

So basically, you could download plug-ins, themes, shortcut presets, etc, directly into GIMP. We have a lot of pieces done - we just need someone to focus on it to finish.
by fastball | 2026-03-01 21:49:33+00:00
Most APIs and CLIs are not setup with clear separation of permissions, and when they have those permissions are mostly designed around human access patterns and risks, not LLM ones. The primary example of course being read-only vs write access.

MCPs have provided any easy way to side-step that baggage.

e.g. in an MCP, you have tools, those tools are usually binned into "read" vs "write". Given that, I can easily configure my tooling to give an LLM (e.g. Claude Code) unlimited read access to some system (by allowing all read-only tools) without likewise giving the LLM write/destructive access.

Obviously you can design APIs/CLIs with this in mind, but up until now that has not been a primary concern so they haven't.
by bogzz | 2026-03-01 21:49:34+00:00
"EXCUSE ME, SIR! I see you are moving with great intention. Might your hurriedness be in connection with those papers you hold in your hand? Pray tell, for I much desire to converse! Aah, I see, I was right to assume you were in a hurry. Anyway, it must be wonderful to be working at a place as beautiful as this, is it not? Hah ha ha yees, isn't it wonderful. Well, alright then be on your way if you must."

Sorry but I couldn't help imagining you as the fake health inspector from Fawlty Towers while reading your comment.

I do agree with you though, talking is great, we are social animals even though modern life allows us to forget this, to our own detriment.
by ticulatedspline | 2026-03-01 21:49:41+00:00
In fairness it may take even less than that to poison a human. Judging the legitimacy of a data source is not a new problem. Though this is still interesting for a couple of reasons and I'm surprised Google would fall for it.

Google's bread and butter is rankings, I would think their skill in ranking sites would trickle into some algorithm for weighting whether a source has some legitimacy. It's interesting it would pick it up and weight it so heavily with an N of 1 from some random website. That without corroboration literally anywhere else for something that would clearly have at least some other presence would be ranked so high.

I actually wonder if this is an artifact of a naive implementation of "search and regurgitate" or if the system had good reason to believe information from whoever "Thomas Germain" is was trustworthy.