MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by igor_ryabenkiy | 2026-03-05 15:03:48+00:00
Over the past few years the expectations for Series A in Europe have shifted quite a bit.

In 2020–2021, strong storytelling and early traction could sometimes carry a round. Today the bar is higher. Series A capital is increasingly seen as fuel for a machine that already works, not a way to fix fundamentals.

In many cases investors expect something like €2–3M ARR with predictable growth. But revenue alone isn’t enough. Investors also look for validated acquisition channels, strong retention, a clear monetization model, and a team that has already shown it can execute.

Cap table structure also matters more than many founders realize. By Series A, founders typically still hold around 60–70%. Over-diluted cap tables often create problems for future rounds.

Europe also has its own dynamics. Unlike the US, the market is fragmented. Companies rarely scale by focusing on a single country, so founders often need a pan-European or global expansion strategy earlier.

Timing also matters. Many founders start fundraising too late. In practice, the process often begins 6–9 months before the round while the company continues to grow. If growth slows because “we were fundraising,” investors notice immediately.

Curious how others see it: what does “Series A ready” look like today?
by matthewdgreen | 2026-03-05 15:03:49+00:00
If two companies come to you with an offer to sell the refunds, and one has strong ties to a central figure in the administration — which can, in the future, subject or exempt you from new tariffs and otherwise use the Federal government’s powers to mess with you - are you truly free to choose either offer? Or is there a risk and a benefit to taking the one that’s tied to the administration? (And frankly, can you even be certain either way?) This kind of conflict (even the appearance of this kind of conflict) is why we generally don’t want government officials or their families to be profiting directly off the policies they oversee. It is at best unseemly, and that’s being kind.
by labcomputer | 2026-03-05 15:04:20+00:00
> No trolling: What is wrong with that?

Because you can't define a named custom formula by composing the built-ins. So every cell is just the same copy-pasted formula string. When you need to change something, you have to change it everywhere and pray that you didn't miss one usage.

I can't count how many times I found a bug in a spreadsheet because someone (who might be me) missed one or two instances.
by shagie | 2026-03-05 15:04:25+00:00
It depends on the loading. If you've got it 9-12" high apart and are putting paperbacks on there... that shouldn't be a problem.

However, when the shelf becomes multiples of that, then people start putting hardcover volumes or laying the book flat and stacking them high within the shelf.

It won't necessarily fail, but it can substantially sag with heavier loads.

This is an issue for boardgammers who are after larger and heavier shelf spaces which is why the Kallax shelving is much preferred. I'll also note that Ivar shelving is solid wood rather than particleboard.
by MongooseStudios | 2026-03-05 15:05:09+00:00
SEEKING WORK
Location: Austin, Texas
Remote: Preferred
Technologies: Go(Golang), Python, Jenkins, Kubernetes, Docker, Dart/Flutter, I've also done work with AWS, Azure, and GCP.
Email: Located on the about page (not the landing page) of https://mongoosestudios.github.io

Mostly a back end dev, but I'm happy to learn new things to work on a new project. I write real code, not AI slop. I believe in writing tests and going the extra mile to deliver a good UX.
by npongratz | 2026-03-05 15:05:12+00:00
> And that error is that they look for technical compliance when so much of the law is subjective and holistic.

I know it sounds like an oversimplification, but "got off on a technicality" is a common thing among the well-connected and well-heeled. Sure, us nerds probably focus too much on the "technicality" part, since we are by definition technical, but the rest is wishy-washy, unfair BS as far as many of our brains work much of the time.
by slibhb | 2026-03-05 15:05:17+00:00
> What matters in the end is that this tech is not to empower a common person (although it could).

How do you figure? 20 dollars/month is insanely cheap for what OpenAI/Anthropic/Google offer. That absolutely qualifies as "empowering a common person". It lowers barriers!

A lot of the anti-AI sentiment on HN concerns people losing their jobs. I don't think this will happen: programmers who know what they're doing are going to be way, way more effective at using AIs to generate code than others.

But even if it is true and we do see job losses in tech: are software devs really "in a precarious position"? Do they really qualify as "those that have little"? Seems like a fantasy to me. Computer programmers have done great over the past 30 years.

More broadly, anti-AI sentiment comes from people who dislike change. It's hard to argue someone out of that position. You're allowed to prefer stasis. But the world moves on and I think it's best to remain optimistic, keep an open mind, and make the most of it.
by freetonik | 2026-03-05 15:05:25+00:00
There was an interesting case in Finland. Finnish customs used to apply a 22% tax (ELV) on top of the car tax for imported used cars from other EU countries. On top of that, Finnish law required VAT to be charged on the car tax itself.

There were multiple court cases and this practice was found unlawful (and actually against EU law). But the government did not issue automatic refunds, and instead requested that people "actively appeal" with some time limits. They also refused to pay interest on the money withheld.

AFAIK, only about 50M Euro was paid back. A lot of funds gathered between 2002–2005 was never returned.

I've been living in Finland for 10+ years, and this whole story was super surprising for me to learn because the prevailing notion among people here is that Finland is the land of law, and everything is done correctly and legally, always, and we can and should trust the authorities.
by einr | 2026-03-05 15:05:28+00:00
- Ctlr + ABCVYXZ

Yes, different computers have different keyboards. Macs have had Mac conventions since 1984, and if you're not used to it you're not used to it. Instead of sticking to "the thing I'm not used to is wrong", I would suggest trying to be objective about which is the better UX.

I spent the first 25 years of my computer use being a Linux and Windows user and barely ever touching a Mac, so I've had to adjust, but to be honest, the truth is that Apple was always right and Microsoft made the wrong call.

Ctrl is meant to send control characters. This has been well defined since the birth of ASCII. In macOS, cmd-C is always copy, cmd-V is always paste. It does not matter what mode or program you are in.

Windows was designed for an IBM PC where the keyboard only had Ctrl and Alt, and when they copied Apple conventions (like cmd-X, C, V for cut, copy, paste) they made the wrong decision in using Ctrl for it. We've paid for this debt ever since. GNOME, KDE, XFCE, [...] devs continued this travesty by copying Windows, and so now on Linux Ctrl-C is copy in GUI apps, unless it's a terminal, in which case Ctrl-C will break out of your process, and copy is Ctrl-Shift-C. This is insane and bad UX.

The correct choice for a Linux DE would have been to use the "super" key ("Windows logo") for copy/paste etc, but of course they couldn't do that because 1) not everyone had that key and 2) it would confuse Windows users.

- Select with touchpad?? You must physically press its button like WTF

System Settings -> Touchpad -> Tap to click

- Mouse with backward/forward button?? Good luck!!

This is stupid. I will agree that Apple's insistence to not really support anything other than their own severely limited input devices is boneheaded. I recommend installing SensibleSideButtons.
by aeyes | 2026-03-05 15:05:59+00:00
I don't get any of your examples.

There are many different keyboard layouts, at least nowadays there is only one German layout. For Spanish there are 2 different layouts which are both actively sold.

The meaning of yellow on traffic lights is no problem, you'll see it for no longer than 2 seconds. Unless it flashes yellow which means that the traffic light is shut off, then "right before left" applies.
Some countries only have a green light, no red and no yellow. Now that is a problem because if the light is off because you a) don't see it, you have to know that it is there, and b) don't know if it is operational.

The end of a speed limit indication means the same as no speed limit indication. The lawful limit for the type of road applies, 50 in the city, 100 for rural roads, unlimited for Autobahn.
Thats why on the Autobahn there will be a speed limit indication after every on-ramp, if there is no speed limit sign then it is unlimited.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2026-03-05 15:06:00+00:00
Best case consumers may be refunded for tariffs directly charged to them by shipping companies like FedEx and DHL (USPS too, but can you really see them having the competence to do this?!).

What consumers will presumably never be refunded for are the increased prices they've been paying for imports of any kind (from Walmart, Amazon, grocery store) where someone else was the importer.
by mindslight | 2026-03-05 15:06:03+00:00
The same as the tax rate on a blessing of unicorns that I also couldn't buy.

Our domestic manufacturing industry is so far gone, it's doubtful whether even skillfully-applied tariffs could encourage any of it to come back on their own. Never mind this clown show, which apparently didn't even do the basic political work to make sure the tariffs would stay in place more than a year, despite having both houses of Congress.
by jerf | 2026-03-05 15:06:04+00:00
As sibling says, the Court very definitely did not order them to refund anything. They could have, and they didn't. The Court knew from the beginning that this was coming back to them.

You may see other judges rule that the refunds don't have to be paid, for any of several reasons. Whatever your desired outcome is, none of it matters until this gets to the Supreme Court. Given the nature of money, it doesn't even matter if some higher court refuses to give an injunction against the refunds being issued until after the appeal is considered and some set of refunds goes all the way through... no company that gets any money from a pre-SC refund can really use it until the entire matter is resolved at the SC level.
by Qiu_Zhanxuan | 2026-03-05 15:06:24+00:00
In your last point, wasn't that just Miley pandering to the US and Israel ?

Bombing an Embassy/Consulate is a direct attack on sovereign territory according to international law, so technically Israel started first, but I agree, it's splitting hair, both sides attacked each other in various ways, via proxies, sabotage, killing scientists, economic damages, sanctions long before any of this happened.
by nknutalapati | 2026-03-05 15:06:37+00:00
Hi HN — I've been experimenting with ways to make AI agent actions auditable and enforceable at runtime.

This project has two parts.

1. LICITRA-MMR — An append-only audit log using a Merkle Mountain Range instead of a simple hash chain. With a hash chain, verifying one event requires replaying the entire log. With an MMR, verification uses a logarithmic proof (~14 SHA-256 operations for ~10k events).

2. LICITRA-SENTRY — A small control layer between agents and tools.

Flow: agent → authorization service → signed execution ticket → proxy → tool

After approval, the system issues a signed ticket containing agent identity, tool name, hash of the exact request payload, and expiration. The proxy verifies the signature and recomputes the request hash before allowing execution.

This blocks: payload mutation after approval, replay of approvals across agents, and direct tool access without authorization.

Limitations I want to be upfront about: single-operator trust model, simple pattern-based content inspection, no distributed verification, not integrated with frameworks yet.

SENTRY repo: https://github.com/narendrakumarnutalapati/licitra-sentry

Happy to answer questions about design tradeoffs or where this breaks.
by 3371 | 2026-03-05 15:06:45+00:00
I totally agree, and I was fully aware of how common people make language for fun when I replied.

But I feel like the rationale would still stands: Considering LLMs' natures, common boilerplate tasks are easy because they can kind of just "decompress" from training data. But for a new language design, unless the language is almost identical to some other captured by the model, "decompression" would just fail.
by dragonwriter | 2026-03-05 15:07:04+00:00
Neither does the maintainee that claims a mechanical test of structural similarities can prove anything either waybwith regard to whether legally it is a derivative work (or even a mechnaical copy without the requisite new creative work to be a derivative work.)

And then Pilgrim is again wrong by saying that the use of Claude definitively makes it a derivative work because of the inability to prove it the work in question did not influence the neurons involved.

It is all dueling lay misreadings of copyright law, but it is also an area where the actual specific applicable law, on any level specific enough to cleanly apply, isn’t all that clear.
by red_admiral | 2026-03-05 15:07:14+00:00
I'm with you here, but I see another problem.

The expected functionality of chardet (detect the unicode encoding) is kind of fixed - apart from edge cases and new additions to unicode, you'd expect the original and new implementations to largely pass the same tests, and have a lot of similar code such as for "does this start with a BOM".

The fact that the JPlag shows such a low %overlap for an implementation of "the same interface" is convincing evidence for me that it's not just plagiarised.
by indoordin0saur | 2026-03-05 15:07:24+00:00
This actually has me just as concerned as rising temperatures. And its a pretty hard thing to argue against, no matter your politics. Elon even brought it up when he did that interview with Trump in late 2024 to convince him that we should still care about CO2 levels in the atmosphere, even if you think the threat of a changing climate is overblown. Trump really had no response.
by scuff3d | 2026-03-05 15:07:53+00:00
It absolutely does not create green threads. Green threads can be preempted and switched by the runtime. Go does this for example.

Python's asyncio is tasked based, the event loop cannot switch out a task until it reaches a yield point.

Or in short, green threads like Go uses are preemptive multitasking, the task based model asyncio uses is cooperative. A CPU bound python task can block the event loop forever if it never yields, goroutines generally can't.

It's not a philosophical question at all. A single python program can use the multiprocessing library to run multiple chunks of work in parallel. It's heavier weight thanks to the need to basically run a full python interpreter in an os process, but it provides the functionality. And the fact that it's scheduled by the OS is irrelevant. Plenty of languages use the underlying OS threading capabilities to manage threads instead of their own runtime. Both Java and C# for example (though I think Java is adding green threads now).

You're conflating several different distinct ideas. It's a common mistake I see at work all the time. Took a good amount of reading for me to untangle them all.

Edit: I left out stackless coroutines vs stackful thread like runtime. That would be more accurate then the preemptive vs cooperative stuff, but either way the gist of my comment is correct.
by tegiddrone | 2026-03-05 15:08:01+00:00
Yeah, it is an interesting bubble to be in. I worked with a company that could not keep up with the rising SWE salaries and thus attracted a different kind of SWE. I definitely felt the difference in education with the new hires. Reading comprehension/attention was weak. AI will easily replace them, I guess.

Finding the data on this would be convenient but its still unclear to me. I'm not a fan of how that article from NU cites its sources loosely, including lazily citing Wikipedia.
by magicalhippo | 2026-03-05 15:08:09+00:00
Maybe some newer references are better, but my mind went to the Model Soups paper[1]:

The conventional recipe for maximizing model accuracy is to (1) train multiple models with various hyperparameters and (2) pick the individual model which performs best on a held-out validation set, discarding the remainder. In this paper, we revisit the second step of this procedure in the context of fine-tuning large pre-trained models, where fine-tuned models often appear to lie in a single low error basin. We show that averaging the weights of multiple models fine-tuned with different hyperparameter configurations often improves accuracy and robustness. Unlike a conventional ensemble, we may average many models without incurring any additional inference or memory costs -- we call the results "model soups."

[1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.05482
by jonlucc | 2026-03-05 15:08:14+00:00
In practice, the entities who gave money directly to the US government are the ones who paid the tariff. Those entities should be pressured to refund the consumers, but in practice, that's unlikely.

I (unknowingly) ordered something on Etsy from another country. UPS delivered the items, then sent me a letter requiring I pay the tariff and an extra tariff handling fee. UPS paid the government, so UPS should get their money back from the government, then refund me. I'm not holding my breath.
by nayroclade | 2026-03-05 15:08:40+00:00
There's a big difference between being in a field versus working in a field, from dawn to dusk, every day, regardless of the weather or sickness, in order to produce just enough food to feed you and your family, knowing that a single failed harvest (due to conditions like weather and pests that you have no control over) will leave you starving, watching helplessly as your children, spouse, friends and neighbours slowly weaken and die, knowing that even if you survive, you will face the same thing again the next year, and the next, for the rest of your lives, which will likely be short, due to the constant, exhausting labour, frequent bouts of malnutrition, and nonexistent medical care.
Show HN: 10 months ago I collected 300 daily games,today I have 773 and counting
by trizoza | 2026-03-05 15:09:04+00:00
It's crazy, the world of Wordle style games is totally booming. After I made my own daily game, I started to be interested in the area, I started to collect games I found interesting and put together a directory. I shared it here and there and add a 'submit a game' button, I'm having about 3-5 new games submitted every single week, similarly in the r/wordgames there's a new game concept launched multiple times a week. This sector is totally booming. The cost of developing a game is close to 0 and all the non-coder people who had an idea are now shipping daily games. It's wild and exciting.
by piquadrat | 2026-03-05 15:09:25+00:00
Isn't what you are describing known as Zonal Architecture (as opposed to Domain Architecture) and supposed to be the hot new way of architecting automotive platforms? Tesla was pioneering it. The Volkswagen Group spent billions to get their hands on Rivian's zonal architecture platform.

https://insideevs.com/features/724945/zonal-architecture-sof...
by jkubicek | 2026-03-05 15:09:34+00:00
There’s no point in listening to anything this administration says. Top to bottom they all just say shit. Sometimes it’s true, sometimes it’s not. Sometimes it has some basis in reality and sometimes it’s wholly fabricated.

Hegseth called Anthropic a supply chain risk. This tells you absolutely nothing about if they are or are not actually a supply chain risk. It doesn’t even tell you if Hegseth thinks they’re a supply chain risk because, again, they just say shit.

Do whatever you can to stop the nightmare MAGA project they invented this week and ignore whatever they’re saying because it doesn’t matter.
by Moldoteck | 2026-03-05 15:10:10+00:00
Yes, epr2 will get some state loans and cfds, if approved by EC.
I brought up Germany because it's a famous example of lots of subsidies going into transition/deployment

EEG costs are projected to rise per EWI because even though most expensive contracts are being over, it's paid more frequently. It's projected nr will reach 23bn/y.

"which is already solved by renewables and storage for the 99% of the cases" - it's not solved by far in Europe unless you add something on top, eg. Gas firming.

It's interesting to say nuclear is a fax machine in the internet age when nuclear is our youngest invention to extract energy while solar/wind/hydro are much older. Such arguments make no sense whatsoever
Show HN: Instillr – An app that simulates reactive instant film chemistry
by atticusinclair | 2026-03-05 15:10:43+00:00
Most vintage photo apps apply strict filters; I wanted to make one that behaved more like real film chemistry, where every photo develops uniquely, reacting to the world around us.

It's not perfect and honestly it can't replace the real thing, but it's not a bad substitute and it helps me feel more connected to the phone photos I take.
by tart-lemonade | 2026-03-05 15:11:16+00:00
> These developments entail a future where travellers could enjoy reliable, high‑speed internet while flying, and where people on ships or in vehicles crossing remote regions can stay connected without interruption.

How reliable/feasible would this be on the ground? From what I understand, shining non-trivial lasers in the sky is a massive liability because of the potential to interfere with aircraft. I don't see anything about the wavelength used, but even if it's outside the visible spectrum, it would still be subject to interference from aircraft when used on the ground or at sea.
by philipov | 2026-03-05 15:11:17+00:00
In the business, even the appearance of impropriety is damaging. People who work in finance aren't allowed to trade the same stocks as their company is trading, whether they have any inside info or not. The assumption is that simply by being close to a source of information, you are compromised. The same restrictions should apply to those close to government. By being family, he is compromised by default.
by evilos | 2026-03-05 15:11:26+00:00
Yes, standardizing on a handful of designs will help immensely, as well as building two or more reactors on one site to share the overhead costs between units.

For example, building out more AP-1000s is really a no brainer. The first-of-a-kind is always expensive and the AP-1000 was especially so due to many factors. We bore that cost and now we should reap the benefits of Nth of a kind builds.
by sumtechguy | 2026-03-05 15:11:56+00:00
> So, when this gets to a court (which it will, it's not a question of "if"), the court will consider how necessary the source work was to what you did. If you used it for a direct translation (eg from C++ to Go) then you're going to lose. My prediction is that even using it in training data will be cause for a copyright claim.

This has a lot of similarity to when colorization of film started popping up. Did colorizing black and white movies suddenly change the copyright of the film? At this point is seems mostly the courts say no. But you may find sometimes people rule the other way and say yes. But it takes time and a lot of effort to get what in general people want.

But basically if you start with a 'spec' then make something you probably can get a wholly owned new thing. But if you start with the old thing and just transform it in some way. You can do that. But the original copyright holders still have rights too to the thing you mangled too.

If I remember right they called it 'color of copyright' or something like that.

The LLM bits you are probably right. But that has not been worked out by the law or the courts yet. So the courts may make up new case law around it. Or the lawmakers might get ahead of it and say something (unlikely).