MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Waterluvian | 2026-03-11 17:16:50+00:00
I think the sticking points are:

1. You cannot return anything (say an immutable result that has consumed the input)

Okay, so don't return anything, just mutate the original. Except:

2. You cannot mutate the original, return nothing, but the mutated original isn't a subset of the original. For example: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/GYVwdgxgLglg9mABB...
by getly_store | 2026-03-11 17:17:19+00:00
Hosting, storage, and scaling aren’t free; costs scale with active users, data egress, and state. In-app purchase splits and platform fees erode margin, so “free hosting” rarely survives at millions of concurrent players. Model revenue net of ops costs and, if needed, use a hybrid backend with careful risk budgeting, auth, and anti-cheat.
by getly_store | 2026-03-11 17:17:38+00:00
Yes—the 24.5% figure is suspect because it multiplies three numbers, ignoring how revenue shares vary by tier, price, and region. A credible estimate needs the full sale distribution: tiered take rates, refunds, taxes, and processing margins; a single mean price isn't representative. With transaction-level data, compute the weighted take: sum(take_rate_i * sale_i) / sum(sale_i), or present a bounded range from the observed distribution.
by k310 | 2026-03-11 17:17:42+00:00
The author compares desktop Linux with MacOS. Let me tell you, I cling to old mac apps and refuse to "upgrade" because almost all the new versions are subscription-only, making your mac "rented" unless you are good at finding FOSS apps that get the job done. I am.

He makes a good case for keeping a spare mac around (mini's are good for this) for those "unique" mac doings.

I keep all my Nikon photos as files. I once wanted to export all my photos from iPhoto. Well, guess what? They were stored in a tree structure by date. Maybe in a database these days. I found a way. (without spending a lot of time programming or scripting,)

Anything is possible!

I once worked for a company that was mac-only. Some genius decided to go all Windows. I found an add-on for outlook that saved messages as text and served them to and from a Sun workstation and a mac laptop, and read and composed mail there.

and by the way, as far as integration of messages and phone, whenever I get a phone call, every mac and ipad starts chiming, and it's a mad dash to find the phone. Yes, I have taken phone calls on the watch, Dick Tracy style, but I still feel weird about that.
by bluGill | 2026-03-11 17:17:54+00:00
If you want something to be clear you need to take time to re-read and revise it. If you really want to be sure there needs to be a full day between writing and revision (otherwise you will read what you meant to write, not what you actually wrote). For a presumably non-native speaker I expect he needed that extra effort.

Technically I should wait a day to hey the reply button here. I don't see anything wrong with this post now, but it is a reasonable bet that there is something that someone else sees.
by ajross | 2026-03-11 17:17:58+00:00
> have no reason to believe there's not at least some exfiltration

Is it genuinely your opinion that that activity (just look at all the equivocation!) constitutes a risk at the same level as alleged by the linked article?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. HN has a tunnel vision disease on this subject. "Yes yes, DOGE bros stole the SSA database, but let's please talk about how awful Google is." It's clinical at this point.
by jillesvangurp | 2026-03-11 17:18:03+00:00
Mostly works for me. Most of my projects I have some guardrails for what to do around testing, deploying, etc. Seems to work. You are right that LLMs are good at avoiding work and finding loopholes to do so. But generally if you ask codex to "hey look at my gh prs and label the ones that don't meet the contributor guidelines with 'slop'" it might do a decent enough job. Maybe add a skill that spells out criteria. Maybe set up openclaw or similar to do this every morning and then give you the list of prs it will auto close after you say the word.
by kbaranzini | 2026-03-11 17:18:37+00:00
Location: California, USA | Remote: Yes | Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python, Flask, SQLAlchemy, TypeScript, JavaScript, HTML/CSS, Zope (interface/component), Cerberus

Resume/CV: https://baranzini.dev
Email: obsidiancloud25@gmail.com

4 years solo game dev in Unreal Engine (4000+ hrs systems blueprinting). 6 months into writing code, independently arrived at Clean Architecture. Built a full-stack app with fully isolated domain layer, dependency inversion via zope.interface, and TypeScript interface ports on the frontend. No employment history. Fast learner with real systems instinct.
by tshaddox | 2026-03-11 17:18:38+00:00
> If something clearly helps survival and not an improbable thing to develop, the chances are high we would already have it.

Well sure, but "not an improbable thing to develop" is doing a lot of work there. Again, everything complex is "improbable to develop," in the sense that evolution takes a lot of time and is very path dependent.
Show HN: Launching Our XR-Native Operating System
by ayush_xeneva | 2026-03-11 17:18:42+00:00
Hello HN, we are thrilled to announce that we are now launching the Beta Version of XenevaOS as a sandbox next month. For the first time, you’ll be able to experience our Free & Open Source Operating System that has been written with a custom kernel from the ground up for XR.

The finished version of the Operating System is targeted to run on XR (AR/VR/MR) devices natively in a standalone manner. The main advantage of our OS is the fact that since it has a custom kernel specifically written for XR, it is able to achieve very low latency and is optimized for target hardware. It will be able to run efficiently on minimal hardware resources.

One of the ways we're making this possible is by minimizing abstraction layers.

Due to limited server access, user slots are also limited in the initial rollout.
Register through the following link to be among the first to test the Beta next month - https://explore.getxeneva.com/

If you want to look at the codebase, you can also go through our GitHub Repository - https://github.com/manaskamal/XenevaOS
by perfmode | 2026-03-11 17:18:43+00:00
The distinction between effective and administrative fraud is useful and I think underappreciated. A lot of the conversation in these threads conflates the two, which makes it hard to reason about what actually needs fixing.

I want to push back a little on "science is self-correcting" though. It's true in the limit, but correction has a latency, and that latency has real costs. In fields like nutrition, psychology, or pharmacology, a fraudulent or deeply flawed result can shape clinical guidelines, public policy, and drug development pipelines for a decade or more before the correction lands. The people harmed during that window don't get made whole by the eventual retraction.

The comparison I keep coming back to is fault tolerance in distributed systems. You can build a system that's "eventually consistent" and still have it be practically broken if convergence takes too long or if bad state propagates faster than corrections do. The fraud networks described in TFA are basically an adversarial workload against a system (peer review) that was designed for a much lower rate of bad input. Saying the system self-corrects is accurate, but it's not the same as saying the system is healthy or that the current correction rate is adequate.

I think the practical question isn't whether science corrects itself in theory but whether the feedback loops are fast enough relative to the rate of fraud production, and right now the answer seems pretty clearly no.
by SkiFreeWin3 | 2026-03-11 17:18:54+00:00
totally agree, and fwiw, nothing in this implementation requires that the agent verifies it themselves. the hope is something that ultimately exists as a verification mechanism on one side of an agent-to-agent interaction/delegation.

because it is true that, even though we've got some adversarial aspects built into the verification, that's not truly blind from the actor (unless you explicitly design the use of these in that way, which is what I've considered as the better design)
by Aurornis | 2026-03-11 17:19:18+00:00
> but I wish I could define in TypeScript “any object passed into this function is now typed _never_.

Having explicit language to differentiate between pass by reference and pass by value avoids this confusion. It requires a little more thought from the programmer but it’s really minimal once you internalize it.

Rust takes this a step further with an explicit ownership and borrowing model. The compiler will refuse your code if you try to write something that that violates the borrow checker. This is endlessly frustrating to beginners but after adapting your mind to ownership safety you find yourself thinking in the same way in other languages.

I always found real-world JavaScript codebases frustrating because there was so much sharing that wasn’t entirely intentionally. It only got fixed when someone recognized a bug as a result.
by tracker1 | 2026-03-11 17:19:25+00:00
I've found it's easy enough to have AI scaffold a working demo environment around a single component/class that I'm actually working on, then I can copy the working class/component into my "real" application. I'm in a pretty locked down environment, so using a separate computer and letting the AI scaffold everything around what I'm working on is pretty damned nice, since I cannot use it in the environment or on the project itself.

For personal projects, I'm able to use it a bit more directly, but would say I'm using it around 5/6 level as defined here... I've leaned on it a bit for planning stages, which helps a lot... not sure I trust swarms of automated agents, though it's pretty much the only way you're going to use the $200 level on Claude effectively... I've hit the limits on the $100 only twice in the past month, I downgraded after my first month. And even then, it just forced me to take a break for an hour.
by PeterStuer | 2026-03-11 17:19:32+00:00
So how would you avoid this specific situation as a web-crawler that tries to be well behaved? You strictly adhere to robots.txt as specified by each domain. The problem is not with any of the sites but the density (1000-10000) by which the hoster packed them. If e.g. the crawler had a 1 sec between page governor even if robots.txt had no rate specified, which to be fair is very reasonable, this packing could still lead to high server load.
by lokar | 2026-03-11 17:19:58+00:00
The current bill Trump is pushing for requires "documentary proof of citizenship ", this can actually be very hard. It means an original/certified birth certificate, as well as any subsequent name changes (mostly married women).

This is completely unnecessary.

We establish citizenship, very reliably, at time of registration. This is on of the main jobs of the registrar of voters. They have plenty of time to look up the details of the person and establish citizenship (and intentionally lying in this process is a serious crime).

We then establish identity at the time of voting, again, very reliably.

Intentional voter impersonation or voting when not eligible is vanishingly rare in the US.
by perfmode | 2026-03-11 17:20:06+00:00
There's something real in the impedance mismatch argument that I think the replies here are too quick to dismiss. The browser's programming model is fundamentally about a graph of objects with identity, managed by a GC, mutated through a rich API surface. Linear memory is genuinely a poor match for that, and the history of FFI across mismatched memory models (JNI, ctypes, etc.) tells us this kind of boundary is where bugs and performance problems tend to concentrate. You're right to point at that.

Where I think the argument goes wrong is in treating "most websites don't use WASM" as evidence that WASM is a bad fit for the web. Most websites also don't use WebGL, WebAudio, or SharedArrayBuffer. The web isn't one thing. There's a huge population of sites that are essentially documents with some interactivity, and JS is obviously correct for those. Then there's a smaller but economically significant set of applications (Figma, Google Earth, Photoshop, game engines) where WASM is already the only viable path because JS can't get close on compute performance.

The component model proposal isn't trying to replace JS for the document-web. It's trying to lower the cost of the glue layer for that second category of application, where today you end up maintaining a parallel JS shim that does nothing but shuttle data across the boundary. Whether the component model is the right design for that is a fair question. But "JS is the right abstraction" and "WASM is the wrong abstraction" aren't really in tension, because they're serving different parts of the same platform.

The analogy I'd reach for is GPU compute. Nobody argues that shaders should replace CPU code for most application logic, but that doesn't make the GPU a "dud" or a second-class citizen. It means the platform has two execution models optimized for different workloads, and the interesting engineering problem is making the boundary between them less painful.
by 0xy | 2026-03-11 17:20:24+00:00
It's a pretty easy argument. You have Biden's admin presiding over the largest cybersecurity failure in U.S. history resulting in China stealing data on millions of Americans including both campaigns [1] versus an isolated lone actor stealing much less data.

Allowing China god mode access to U.S. telecommunications infrastructure versus one guy with a USB stick.

Biden's senior FBI officials and National Security Advisers admitted they didn't even have the logs to determine when or how they were breached, and the hack was via law enforcement portals.

Breathtaking incompetence. The 2024 election was completely compromised due to this security lapse, as both campaigns were wiretapped.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/chinese-hackers-have-infil...
by softfalcon | 2026-03-11 17:20:25+00:00
This... so much this.

> too many SKUs and models - it takes a paragraph to figure out how 2 Dell laptops from the same release year differ.

And yet, I just watched a YouTube video where a "PC guy" was like, "adding the Neo just completely confuses the Apple product line. Are we heading towards having too many Apple options that confuse the buyer here?"

I get it, other than price, the Neo and Air are a bit confusing product wise. Have they looked at how Asus, Lenovo, and Dell are doing their products though? It's absolutely wild the disparity between PC and Apple for laptops.

I run both PC's and Mac devices in our house, we use what fills the job. Recommending PC laptops for family members feels like a total crapshoot though. Every time, I do all I can to find the right device for their needs and there are just so many trade-offs. Maybe I get all the right specs, ensure it doesn't thermal throttle, keyboard/trackpad are A-OK... but the webcam is trash. Ooof... now Mom is complaining about how no one can see her properly at bridge club call.

I brought up how the Neo might do to the PC industry what the Air did to Ultrabooks back in the day. The amount of hate I got on YouTube/Verge with copy-paste, "hahaha, wut, with 8 GB of RAM? lmao, lol, you Apple bot?!" was expected, but also disappointing. There is clearly a market segment happy to continue to put up with the mess that Dell/Lenovo are selling (anything but a Mac).

Wild how tribal we are to our corporate computer overlords.

The era where something like Framework with its fully customizable, repairable, modular laptops becomes the standard can't come soon enough.

For the time being, I'll let Apple/PC continue to duke it out. Hope some competition helps in the long run. :shrug:
by portly | 2026-03-11 17:20:26+00:00
I can share mine. I am not sure if this connects with you because maybe you are more experienced.

I'm DevOps writing boring Python microservices for €. I have no CS background and never did systems programming. However, writing Python always bothered me because there are so many layers between you and what's happening on the metal. For me, Django is the peak example of this, to me it feels almost like doing no code. It makes me very uncomfortable writing it.

Then I heard about this new programming language Zig on YouTube and I just gave it a try. After using it for a few months, I really like it. I guess mostly because it is so explicit.

It is almost like the language encourages you to think in terms of system design. Zig offers a lot of freedom so you can design the perfect tool for your problem. And somehow, it feels very effective for it. I think it is a blessing that there are few third party libraries for the same reason.

For example. I am working on a tool to parse CIM (some XML standard). If I had to use Python for this, my solution would probably use the most popular xml parsing library and then go from there. Yawn.

Instead, with Zig I started to think with a very fresh mind about the problem. I started thinking more from the first principles of the problem. And I got very excited again about programming. During my swimming practice or biking, I kept thinking about the design and how I can make it simpler and improving it by simply not doing certain busy work. I can't fully explain it. But the language gets you in that mindset.

Maybe other system languages also offer this experience, Zig (marketing?) just happened to cross my paths at the right moment.
by leetrout | 2026-03-11 17:20:53+00:00
Signed up to walk my first ever in my life 5K at the end of this month and I'm already getting some improvement in my balance with just walking more and faster.

Tell me more about the slackboard... any particular way you play with it? 41 and have lost what very small amount of snowboarding skills I had in my 20s before I was 30. I have looked at them and the balance boards because I know I need to do _something_.
by ravenstine | 2026-03-11 17:21:05+00:00
When I write JavaScript, I make as many things immutable as I can. Sometimes it adds verbosity and leads to less efficient computational patterns, but overall I believe I run into far fewer bugs that are hard to make sense of. There are things about the design of Temporal I don't really like, but immutability was a solid move.

What I don't understand is why they had to make string formatting so rigid. Maybe it has to do with internationalization? I'd have liked if it included a sort of templating system to make the construction of rendered date-time strings much easier.
by mancerayder | 2026-03-11 17:21:21+00:00
Is the rebuttal posted anywhere? I collapsed the huge first few threads but nothing is there. True or false, Amazon are saying it's not true that it's due to AI, and in fact their change in operational processes to add review is broader:

https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/aws/aws-service-outage-ai-b...
by jfengel | 2026-03-11 17:21:41+00:00
We pay it back all the time. Our debt exists in the form of Treasury bills and bonds, which are dutifully paid when they mature (anywhere from a month to 30 years later).

The total debt goes up because we keep issuing new bonds. But bondholders are satisfied that we do pay back our debts, so they're willing to loan us more money. They're so confident that we get the lowest interest rates; every other interest rate is pegged to that.

It's important not to be misled by analogy to personal debt. You will die some day; countries do not. If somebody loans you money they have to take into account if you will die before you pay it off. That's not a problem for the country. (Or a company; many corporations also have permanently revolving debt.)

Now, if we ever fail to pay back a debt, that entire house of cards collapses very, very quickly. We're currently at no risk of that; we make enough money to pay our debts as they come due. But a government could decide to fix the "debt problem" by failing to pay them, and that would be so unbelievably bad that it's hard to imagine why politicians even suggest it.
by UncleMeat | 2026-03-11 17:21:41+00:00
> If your theory is correct and the global elite really isn't significantly smarter than the average population then the next question is, how are they maintaining their spots against smarter competitors?

This question is only difficult to answer if we believe that our system operates on merit. A system that operates on power, connections, and backroom favors happily maintains the status of mediocre people.
by tracker1 | 2026-03-11 17:22:00+00:00
IMO, the front end results are REALLY hit and miss... I mostly use it to scaffold if I don't really care because the full UI is just there to test a component, or I do a fair amount of the work mixed. I wish it was better at working with some of the UI component libraries with mixed environments. Describing complex UX and having it work right are really not there yet.
by mothballed | 2026-03-11 17:22:13+00:00
.gov own court filings have argued Real ID isn't a reliable proof of citizenship and have refused to accept it as such.

"...based on HSI Special Agent training and experience, REAL ID can be unreliable to confirm U.S. citizenship."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.alsd.76...
by eqrion | 2026-03-11 17:22:26+00:00
> If you compile them to GC wasm instead of running directly in JS then you're just adding unnecessary overheads for no upside

Language portability is a big feature. There's a lot of code that's not JS out there. And JS isn't a great compilation target for a lot of languages. Google switched to compiling Java to Wasm-GC instead of JS and got a lot of memory/speed improvements.

> Because for example if a browser changes the type of something that happens to be unused, or removes something that happens to be unused, it only breaks actual users at time of use, not potential users at time of load.
> The largest comparable platform is OSes based on C ABI, which rely on a "kind" of dynamic typing (stringly typed, basically - function names in a global namespace plus argument passing ABIs that allow you to mismatch function signature and get away with it.

I don't think any Web API exposed directly to Wasm would have a single fixed ABI for that reason. We'd need to have the user request a type signature (through the import), and have the browser maximally try and satisfy the import using coercions that respect API evolution and compat. This is what Web IDL/JS does, and I don't see why we couldn't have that in Wasm too.

> Then what's your excuse for why wasm, despite years of investment, is a dud on the web?

Wasm is not a dud on the web. Almost 6% of page loads use wasm [1]. It's used in a bunch of major applications and libraries.

[1] https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity...

I still think we can do better though. Wasm is way too complicated to use today. So users of wasm today are experts who either (a) really need the performance or (b) really need cross platform code. So much that they're willing to put up with the rough edges.

And so far, most investment has been to improve the performance or bootstrap new languages. Which is great, but if the devex isn't improved, there won't be mass adoption.
by freejazz | 2026-03-11 17:22:36+00:00
Roblox connects them in the first place, what does it matter that it progresses outside of Roblox? That would necessarily be the case if they were to ever meet IRL anyway.

Oh it's difficult for Roblox? A $42billion company? Whose entire business model is based around kids? It's difficult for them?? Boo fucking hoo.
by mytailorisrich | 2026-03-11 17:22:48+00:00
No, that's not the case.

For instance, the median household income in the United States in 1976 was $12,686. That's $72,857.55 today based on inflation (Google/Census Bureau Data + online inflation calculator).

However, Google's AI overview says "As of early 2026, the median household income in the United States is estimated to be approximately $84,000."

So the the median household income in the US today is about $11,000 ahead of inflation since 1976. People in the US are richer now that they were then.