MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by eliasoe | 2026-03-04 14:45:13+00:00
The main difference is that term-cli is intentionally not MCP. There's been a shift away from MCP, to the more token-efficient combination of CLI tools plus agent skills. Microsoft explains it well here: https://github.com/microsoft/playwright-cli

Beyond that, term-cli focuses on agent-centric features like file transfer, full mouse support, color annotations, joint agent+human sessions (via term-assist) and more. I had Claude Opus drive the interactive colored menus of OpenCode (TUI) while reproducing a bug.

term-cli is designed to meet agents' needs, and not just wrapping a terminal. Another example: humans click on coordinates, but agents are really bad at counting terminal columns due to tokenization. So with term-cli, agents instead define the string they want to click on.
by joshstrange | 2026-03-04 14:45:21+00:00
I know, but that doesn't mean there aren't people (like me) that buy the top-end Pro devices (iPhone/Mac) and would like some more choices. I _love_ the orange color of the new iPhone and I would buy a green or orange MBP Pro if it was offered.

I used to only want black/silver "base" colors for resale reasons but that has fallen far on my needs for a laptop since I keep/repurpose them or cycle them through friends/family instead of reselling in most cases now.
by csmpltn | 2026-03-04 14:45:25+00:00
For the vast majority of people and cases, it really is that simple - but like I already said, "the process doesn’t have to be transparent, or consistent, or fair - in-fact it rarely is". There are exceptions to every rule, but for most people, it really does come down to some self reflection:

1. Do I consistently deliver more (in output, impact, or reliability) than peers at my pay level?

2. Is my work visible and tied to meaningful business outcomes, rather than low-impact tasks?

3. Am I known as dependable and easy to work with, especially under pressure?

4. Would the company feel a real loss-operationally or financially-if I left?

5. Have I made myself clearly more valuable to the organization than what I currently cost?
by gyomu | 2026-03-04 14:45:51+00:00
When Steve came back Apple was months from bankruptcy; their product lineup was full of duds.

Today Apple is the most profitable company in the world, and every product line is ruthlessly optimized/scrutinized to maximize their revenue/supply chain use/suss out consumer needs for the next cycle.

There isn’t a world where Apple has a $4T market cap and where their notebook offering fits in a neat 2x2.
by densh | 2026-03-04 14:45:56+00:00
Don't get me wrong it's a fantastic product and great price point, but the only thing it makes me think of is the complete failure of iPadOS. Ultra portable MacBook with is A18 with 8G of ram is infinitely more useful to me (for non-pen input) than full M4/M5 chip with more ram that's completely wasted due to needless OS restrictions.
by bonecrusher2102 | 2026-03-04 14:45:56+00:00
Agree. Also as a PM, one of the most important things you can do, once you've decided or understood "this is the most important thing we can be working on," is to sell that vision internally so you have high alignment and thus can move fast with shipping (i.e. Sales, Marketing, Legal et al are all on board and ready to help you get to market).

SHOWING internal folks something is always more compelling than words on a slide. So if you have good alignment with your Engineering team that the thing is possible, you can go off on your own and vibe-code something to garner internal alignment... and then throw it away and let your Engineers build the real thing. And they won't have to spend extra time on a PoC that's only meant to show off internally.
Show HN: I built a browser-based 3D modeler because I'm scared of Blender
by whothatcodeguy | 2026-03-04 14:45:57+00:00
process demo - https://i.redd.it/fbhlwsq1gcmg1.gif render demo - https://i.redd.it/smddwtryhcmg1.gif
in-app demo - http://app.topomaker.com/demo

After long stretches in 2d animation and film, recently I've been really drawn to 3d. It's closer to the way my brain thinks and I feel like it has so much power to realize cool ideas. Naturally, I kicked off a google search and fired up Blender. After an hour, I went on a walk and got sad realizing I'm going to have to become a master before I can do anything fun. That's when my dev ego brain struck the usual phrase "i'll just build my own".

So, I built Topomaker (name tentative), which is a minimal browser-based 3D modeler and animator. You can color individual faces, build simple characters or objects, animate them on a timeline, and export to gif, mp4, glb, or obj. The goal wasn't to make a Blender competitor, but more of a sketchpad or alternative. Something you can just doodle in, make some funny animations or characters for a small game with a closer connection to the web since thats my programming language of choice. Anyone who's tried to get Blender assets to match up in a Three.js environment knows the process — I wanted something that just lives in that ecosystem natively.

I just started it a couple weeks ago so there are probably tons of bugs, but feel free to play around with it and let me know what you think!
by woxpas | 2026-03-04 14:46:06+00:00
I built Woxpas because I got tired of re-explaining myself every time I switched between LLMs.
I use Claude for writing, ChatGPT for quick lookups, Cursor or VSC with claude code for coding, and sometimes even Gemini CLI for low level scripting. Each one has its own memory — none of them talk to each other. Every new session is a cold start.

Woxpas is a single memory vault that sits between you and whatever AI you use. It connects via MCP (Model Context Protocol) so any compatible client can read and write to it. Tell Claude you prefer TypeScript and Tailwind — that preference is available in your next ChatGPT session too.

How it works:

- MCP server (SSE transport, OAuth 2.0 auth) with 15 tools
- Extraction pipeline: messy notes go in → structured knowledge comes out (entities, commitments, events, claims)
- Conflict detection: tell Claude "launch March 15" and later tell ChatGPT "launch April 1" → Woxpas flags the contradiction
- Explorer graph: Connecting entities, topics via semantic bridges, temporal awareness and other similar connections for viewing and exploring
- Preference file: a flat markdown file (~15KB) with your identity, work context, communication style. Think of it as a portable .bashrc for your AI tools
- Daily digest: AI-generated briefing that reasons about dependencies, spots blind spots, surfaces what needs attention, calls out patterns and more.

The "will this be true in 6 months?" heuristic: durable identity-level info ("I prefer Python") goes in the preference profile. Situational info ("meeting with John tomorrow") goes in the vault as a timestamped memory.

Architecture: The preference file is flat markdown — human-readable, editable, portable. The vault behind it is a full pipeline: embeddings, vector search, structured extraction, conflict detection.

Why now: Anthropic and Google both just launched memory import tools. The industry is validating that memory portability matters. But their solutions move memory INTO their platform. Woxpas keeps it outside all of them.

Happy to answer questions.

We're in beta at the moment — rough edges exist. Feedback welcome

Docs: https://woxpas.ai/docs/preferences
by praptak | 2026-03-04 14:46:13+00:00
Yes, I should have added "...this way" because I meant that to address GP's claim of the metric-based numerical measurement.

In general, I agree that you can and should judge (not necessarily measure) thing like simplicity and good design. The problem is that business does want the "increased this by 80%, decreased that by 27%" stuff and simplicity does not yield itself to this approach.
by slfnflctd | 2026-03-04 14:46:17+00:00
> now nobody fully understands what was generated

To be fair, a lot of the on call people being pulled in at 3am before LLMs existed didn't understand the systems they were supporting very well, either. This will definitely make it worse, though.

I think part of charting a safe career path now involves evaluating how strong any given org's culture of understanding the code and stack is. I definitely do not ever want to be in a position again where no one in the whole place knows how something works while the higher-ups are having a meltdown because something critical broke.
by strcat | 2026-03-04 14:46:19+00:00
LineageOS also discourages and doesn't support replacing the core of the OS with a rootkit providing persistent app accessible root. GrapheneOS is no different from LineageOS in that regard. People do this with GrapheneOS regardless of our strong recommendation not do it. Our reasons for discouraging it aren't vague. It very directly harms the security model and is not a good approach to implementing any of the features hacked together through it. Those features should be properly implemented to fit within the overall approach taken by GrapheneOS. Giving root access to a huge portion of the OS harms security even if you never use the feature. It does not mean you can't do it, we only recommend you don't.
by ViktorRay | 2026-03-04 14:46:46+00:00
Because ask yourself, if you were telling your friend to buy a Macbook, which one would you tell them to buy?

Well first I would ask them what they are planning to use the Macbook for.

Then I would make the recommendation. There is Macbook Neo for basic stuff. Macbook Air for regular stuff and Macbook Pro for gangsta stuff.

It seems there is still good differentiation between the Macbook lines.
by strcat | 2026-03-04 14:46:48+00:00
LineageOS also discourages and doesn't support replacing the core of the OS with a rootkit providing persistent app accessible root. GrapheneOS is no different from LineageOS in that regard. People do this with GrapheneOS regardless of our strong recommendation not do it. Our reasons for discouraging it aren't vague. It very directly harms the security model and is not a good approach to implementing any of the features hacked together through it. Those features should be properly implemented to fit within the overall approach taken by GrapheneOS. Giving root access to a huge portion of the OS harms security even if you never use the feature. It does not mean you can't do it, we only recommend you don't.
by billyhoffman | 2026-03-04 14:46:49+00:00
For years Apple has been selling an M1 Apple MacBook Air for $649 via Walmart. It was still using the old wedge case design and is literally unchanged from fall of 2020 when it came out. It was the base model with 256 GB storage and 8 GB of RAM model, no upgrade options, no colors.

The price point was designed to get customers who would not pay for a $1000 computer into using a Mac. Sourcing those 2020 era M1 components, screens, etc, let alone M1's, was probably becoming a problem in 2026.

The Macbook Neo is a modern way to meet that price point. The video ad is more instructional about what macOS is, and how it would work with an iphone the customer may already have.

It does very basic Apple Intelligence (they show the photo editing in the video), but this is not for running models locally (they even show the ChatGPT native app and say "runs all your favorite AI apps")

People complaining about the 8 GB limit are missing who the target market is for this machine. Its a Mac, for $599!
by dgacmu | 2026-03-04 14:46:49+00:00
My kid's school chromebook is 4GB and it's barely usable -- to the point of being offensively bad. I bought them a macbook air to use at home so they could get things done.

This would be a _drastic_ improvement over what I see most middle school kids using, at a similar-ish price point. 8 isn't great but 8 with apple's really rather decent nvm paging is a step up.
by paxys | 2026-03-04 14:47:14+00:00
With every new device Apple releases the split between iPadOS and macOS gets more awkward.

Makes no sense for a $1500 "Pro" iPad to have desktop-class RAM, storage, an M5 chip, and be stuck with a Fisher Price OS, while this one has the equivalent specs of last year's iPhone and gets full macOS. Just unify the two already.
by sublinear | 2026-03-04 14:47:43+00:00
I think most are going to pass on this. I'm not sure Apple has ever figured out how to sell anything to the price conscious consumer since the iPod Shuffle.

As always, you can get a more performant laptop for the price. Price sensitive consumers have shown time and time again they will put up with all the little annoyances of a cheap laptop if it means more performance. I'm not saying those details Apple puts into their products aren't nice, but yeah this is barking up the wrong tree. For those people, any laptop purchase is going to be their one and only device that isn't their phone.

Those who absolutely need MacOS and have this budget will just get a Mac Mini.
by alpn | 2026-03-04 14:47:46+00:00
In case anyone else is wondering -

Neo:

Height: 0.50 inch (1.27 cm)
Width: 11.71 inches (29.75 cm)
Depth: 8.12 inches (20.64 cm)
Weight: 2.7 pounds (1.23 kg)

Air:

Height: 0.44 inch (1.13 cm)
Width: 11.97 inches (30.41 cm)
Depth: 8.46 inches (21.5 cm)
Weight: 2.7 pounds (1.23 kg)
by gandalfgreybeer | 2026-03-04 14:48:06+00:00
> dead on arrival for anyone doing real work

Honestly, we’re not the target market for this. I’m pretty sure at this price point though, it will sell like hotcakes. Once people get slightly into the ecosystem, it’s usually a big win for Apple since their stickiness is from my experience of people around me undeniable once you get one product
by masfuerte | 2026-03-04 14:48:06+00:00
Cheers. I was more confused by how you were doing multiple matches. So I read the paper, which describes the AllEnds algorithm. If I understand correctly, the reverse pass captures all of the match starts and these need to be remembered for the forward pass. Which is what you were showing above, but I didn't follow it.

So, once it gets going, a traditional engine can produce matches iteratively with no further allocation, but RE# requires allocation proportional to the total number of matches. And in return, it's very much faster and much easier to use (with intersection and complement).
by danielhanchen | 2026-03-04 14:48:11+00:00
Oh I wrote up a post on X on this exact question! https://x.com/danielhanchen/status/1979389893165060345?s=20

1. Cursor used online RL to get +28% approval rate: https://cursor.com/blog/tab-rl

2. Vercel used RFT for their AutoFix model for V0: https://vercel.com/blog/v0-composite-model-family

3. Perplexity's Sonar for Deep Research Reasoning I think was a finetuned model: https://docs.perplexity.ai/docs/getting-started/overview

4. Doordash uses LoRA, QLoRA for a "Generalized Attribute Extraction model" https://careersatdoordash.com/blog/unleashing-the-power-of-l...

5. NASA flood water detection https://earthdata.nasa.gov/news/nasa-ibm-
openly-release-geospatial-ai-foundation-model-nasa-earth-observation-data6

6. Online RL for robotics - imagine you teaching a robot in the future via some mini finetuning

7. OpenAI's RFT page has more: https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/rft-use-cases

8. For larger models - https://www.mercor.com/blog/expert-data-drives-model-perform...
by ern_ave | 2026-03-04 14:48:12+00:00
> I'm not sure what specific groups you mean

The specifics are irrelevant. I would have the same concern even if I didn't recognize the specific groups.

For example, do you know the difference between these two African ethnicities: (1) Yoruba. (2) Shona.

No? Well, me neither. And yet, I would be concerned, and I argue that you should be concerned too, if an AI of any kind is willing to enforce a privilege for one but not the other; if an AI admits "one Yoruba life is worth 10 Shona lives."

That's not what I want an AI to do. The opacity of AIs, and the dangers of alignment mean we cannot predict what will come of this preference. Do you not see how dangerous this is?

> but is this not a reflection of widely accepted social norms?

Are you making an is-ought argument here?? Are you really saying, "this isn't a big deal because society does it too"

That strikes me as incredibly shortsighted and dangerous. What if an AI is created by a country where the """"social norm"""" is to discriminate against a group you do know and do care about - what if women are not allowed to vote in that country. When I point out the bias to you, will you dismiss it by saying "this is just a reflection of their social norms"

I doubt it. I think you'll say "this is wrong."

Why can't you say that here, even without knowing the specific groups?

Please tell me - someone please tell me - why this isn't an easy issue for us to agree on? Why can't we agree, "it's not okay to make jokes about specific groups" - why can't we agree, "all lives have equal value"
by opan | 2026-03-04 14:48:34+00:00
Failing RAM is rarer than it seems from posts online. My theory is that it's so easy to test for that everyone says to do it even if it's unlikely to be your problem. It reminds me of people who needlessly recap (replace capacitors) everything in hopes of it fixing a problem, often not even bothering to test each cap or exhausting other options first. IME dirt/corrosion/oxidation (often solved by cleaning) is a much more prevalent problem than bad caps. After that, solder that needs reflowing is still a more common issue than bad caps.

That being said, I really did have one bad stick of RAM once in my life, and it really does cause strange seemingly random problems.
by exogenousdata | 2026-03-04 14:48:49+00:00
I actually really prefer your answer. I would likely counter with, “what potential issues could you see with doing things this way?” But a) you’ve shown me that you don’t charge into solutions without first attempting to define the problems, b) your follow-up answer reveals to me what kind of things you think are important, and c) I’d probably quickly ask something like,”let’s assume that in the past, we’ve had issues with missing changes when emailing this back and forth,” and encourage some more dialogue.

I do dislike interviews where a candidate can fail simply by not giving a specific, pre-canned answer. It suggests a work culture that is very top-down and one that isn’t particularly interested in actually getting to the truth.
by PKop | 2026-03-04 14:48:49+00:00
It's crazy the original interviewer allowed it to come to this which sounds like a waste of time for everyone involved, instead of simply saying; "Very good that is a legitimate solution to the problem. Now let's pretend you have to build something new, what would you do?"

Why on Earth did the company have to be so willingly obtuse and stupid about it including what sounds like the CEO (well at least he gave him another shot, but there doesn't need to be implicit assumptions about the "point of the interview", just come out and address it head on explicitly.)
by strcat | 2026-03-04 14:48:55+00:00
You're confusing Motorola Mobility with Motorola Solutions. These haven't been part of the same company since 2011. We would happily support devices from Motorola Solutions with their collaboration too but have no contact or partnership with them as they're an entirely different company. We want to support more devices meeting our requirements and if people have issues with one of the choices due to their opinions on geopolitics they can use another.
by hereme888 | 2026-03-04 14:49:00+00:00
I did not miss any points. You are uninformed. Iran was less than a month away from having a viable nuke, and they've been swearing to use it against America and Israel for the past 47 years. In the last set of negotiations, Iran refused to rule out building the nuke. That's the official information, and if you think they're lying, you have no alternative sources of trustworthy information besides terrorist-aligned ideologies.

Presidents can take such defensive actions. It's legal.
by handedness | 2026-03-04 14:49:08+00:00
You keep coming back to this. GrapheneOS accepting community patches with a reduced feature set degrades the nature of the project. It's an absurd proposal.

Fork it, make your own. Not only are they OK with that, they're actively supportive of it.

Criticizing them for not actively supporting the Balkanization and unavoidable dilution of the security and therefore total value of their project makes me wonder whether the strength with which you hold your opinions has any meaningful connection to the extent to which you even understand the subject matter. It's just mind-boggling the things you assert every single time an OS you don't even use comes up.

Your love of Qubes OS (which I share) somehow even increasingly seems rooted in something that just isn't reality. If it were, you'd be able to fairly assess both projects and see the relative strengths and weakneses of both with useful accuracy.

As it stands, you're just spouting harmful noise. Please don't do that.
by BenoitEssiambre | 2026-03-04 14:49:11+00:00
If you're at a place that rewards complexity, you might be able to pitch simplicity as something that to get right, requires deep understanding of complex information theoretic concepts and deep understanding of ontological knowledge about the domain (it helps that this is true https://benoitessiambre.com/simple.html ). You can talk about the Bayesian Occam's Razor ( https://benoitessiambre.com/abstract.html ) and about minimizing the entropy of code ( https://benoitessiambre.com/entropy.html ), of tests ( https://benoitessiambre.com/integration.html ) and even of infrastructure ( https://benoitessiambre.com/pgcentrism.html ).
by antirez | 2026-03-04 14:49:29+00:00
Fine tuning is a story that is nice to tell but that with modern LLMs makes less and less sense. Modern LLMs are so powerful that they are able to few shot learn complicated things, so a strong prompt and augmenting the generation (given the massive context window of Qwen3.5, too) is usually the best option available. There are models for which fine tuning is great, like image models: there with LoRa you can get good results in many ways. And LLMs of the past, too: it made sense for certain use cases. But now, why? LLMs are already released after seeing (after pre-training) massive amount of datasets for SFT and then RL. Removing the censorship is much more efficiently done with other techniques. So I have a strong feeling that fine tuning will be every day less relevant, and already is quite irrelevant. This, again, in the specific case of LLMs. For other foundational models fine tuning still makes sense and is useful (images, text to speech, ...).
by jonpurdy | 2026-03-04 14:49:41+00:00
This is very useful context. Especially around Contact Scopes etc. It's never made sense to me that iOS shares if the user is choosing to not share their contacts.

Apple seems to basically do privacy-related things to an 80% level but not bothering with getting it totally correct. This makes business sense because the extra 20% is way more difficult, but it's great to see GrapheneOS going all the way.
by NoLinkToMe | 2026-03-04 14:49:45+00:00
Tbh the M1 sold at Walmart for $699 and BestBuy at $650 before. M1 is about equivalent in benchmarks to the A18. Both 8GB of RAM and similar storage. Only the M1 had a bit better battery life, magsafe and such.

The budget market consists of a lot of scrappy users that are willing to go out of their way and able to find good deals. And I think Apple has in some ways catered to that market by providing excellent mid-priced laptops like the M1 at $999 price points, which end up in new-in-box deals at places like Walmart/BestBuy at $650 price points, as well as similar refurbished and even lower second hand price points.

I bought a new MBA M2 a few months ago at a similarly low price point as this Neo. Apple has been providing fantastic value at budget for a while now through indirect sales channels on older models, though I agree this is another step-up with affordable new direct models.