MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by patmorgan23 | 2026-03-12 15:31:30+00:00
Uh what's undemocratic about the state legislature, which created the current system of small local districts, Changing how schools are funded and governed?

Small parroquial government entities that are funded inequitably are bad, actually. And the current system of schools districts is a legacy of segregation and white flight. Local government boundaries are entirely arbitrary, should the city let water or fire services suffer in one council district because it doesn't produce enough taxes to support it?

A child's academic opportunity shouldn't be determined by their zip code and parents income. Everyone should have access to free high quality public schools.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2026-03-12 15:31:52+00:00
There's two sides to it. Russia of course wants the war to become a quagmire for everyone supporting Ukraine.

But the reason the US and Israel is even able to do what they are doing is because Russia is spending all its resources fighting Ukraine.

Russia is too weak to do anything to meddle in the conflict. Five years ago Russia would have its navy in the area, private militias on the ground and been an all around nuisance. Today they are non-existant outside of Ukraine.

A sound analysis on it:

Trump, Putin, and the war in Iran

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQfGM1IidoA
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-12 15:32:07+00:00
> they're using their private-credit portfolio as a Tier 1 capitalization

Banks' private-credit lending constitutes part of their risk-weighted assets. So yes, it's part of their CET1 [1], which is part of Tier 1 capital, and since it's equity measured it incorporates fucking everything.

4.5% is the U.S. minimum. Regulators start throwing their toys out of the pram when a bank breaches 7%. To be clear, I'm not seeing anyone in the near future breaching those limits. Deutsche Bank, the stupidest of the lot, seems to have let DB USA stuff most of the risk in its German AG.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/common-equity-tier-1-ce...
by aurareturn | 2026-03-12 15:32:46+00:00
There's likely going to be a separation between the top earners and the average.

IE. If a top tier dev make $1m today, they'll make $5m in the future. If the average makes $100k today, they'll maybe make $60k.

AI likely enables the best of the best to be much more productive while your average dev will see more productivity but less overall.
by jonpurdy | 2026-03-12 15:33:03+00:00
Your description of the test and your replies to questions indicate you've come up with a pretty great assessment for the role(s) you hire for. Especially where you mentioned:

> The test was a few of those questions and a few which were easier to cheat, and almost nobody had good scores on just the cheatable section

I also like how you allow/encourage self-assessment, where if a candidate can't do the test in ~20 minutes under zero pressure, they probably won't be a good fit in the role itself.
by fennecfoxy | 2026-03-12 15:33:21+00:00
I wouldn't be surprised if even in the same model, the organ block size varied wildly depending on what you're looking for (i.e. his probes).

But if there are sizes that are common, then that could also point to an architectural flaw, because whilst it could be universal constant-ness it could also be bounded by some inner working - and perhaps this is something that could be improved upon.
by guenthert | 2026-03-12 15:33:24+00:00
Why stop there? Why not demand proof of correctness? After all, that's now within reach using LLMs producing the formal specification from a simple prompt, right?

SBCL does a fine job in detecting type mismatches within the frame of ANSI Common Lisp, not Haskell. While I would agree that a strict type system eases long term maintenance of large systems, for "explorative computing", proof-of-concepts, RAD or similar that tends to get in the way. And if such proof-of-concept looks promising, then there is no shame in rewriting it in a language more suitable for scale and maintenance.
by jnbridge | 2026-03-12 15:33:34+00:00
The cross-language type-mapping problem is where every interop approach eventually runs aground. The component model's challenge is the same one that hit every bridge technology before it: whose type system is "canonical"?

.NET's Common Type System was supposed to be the neutral ground for dozens of languages. In practice, it had strong C# biases — try using unsigned integers from VB or F#'s discriminated unions from C#. The CLR "primitive types" were just as much a random collection as the WIT primitives are being described here.

The practical lesson from two decades of cross-runtime integration: stop trying to tunnel high-level types. The approaches that survive in production define a minimal shared surface (essentially: scalars, byte buffers, and handles) and let each side do its own marshaling. It's less elegant but it doesn't break every time one side's stdlib evolves.

WASM's linear memory model actually gets this right at the low level — the problem is everyone wants the convenience layer on top, and that's where the type-system politics start.
by amluto | 2026-03-12 15:33:40+00:00
On a MacBook, one can download a data set, reboot, install updates, etc and still have the dataset. Those nice-ish AWS instances will wipe their local storage if they are stopped. Sure, one needs backups, but this is still annoying.

Also, at on-demand prices, three months of continuous usage of a single c8gd.2xlarge will pay for that MacBook Neo. The MacBook Neo has a larger SSD than the AWS instances. To be fair, the MacBook Neo has seriously nerfed external IO bandwidth, so the c8gd.2xlarge will outperform it in networking. That being said, I think that any other Mac in the current lineup will utterly smoke c8gd.2xlarge if you are willing to use Thunderbolt-connected network adapters.

Given how little power modern Macs use, a little closet full of Macs with a decent network switch will easily run on a single 20A circuit and will perform better than quite a few thousands of dollars per month of AWS products. Sadly, you’re kind of stuck on MacOS (which is not actually a fantastic server OS) and the management tools are poor. Oh, well.
by Sohcahtoa82 | 2026-03-12 15:34:01+00:00
As a cybersecurity guy...

There are a lot of cybersecurity people that really know nothing about actual security and just rely on what their tools tell them. And products like Wiz love to "prove" their value by raising tons of red flags.

This is especially true for vulnerability management, which is basically Boy-Who-Cried-Wolf as a Service. The entire CVE ecosystem used to be great, but now it's turned into resume-driven-development where people exaggerate the severity of a vulnerability in order to have a CVSS 9.8 on their resume.
by vidarh | 2026-03-12 15:34:09+00:00
This is a compatibilist view. However, we can tell that most people don't adhere to a compatibilist view of free will because it tends to make people very upset if you suggest they have no "genuine" free will or agency, and the moral implications behind the assumption of genuine agency are e.g. baked into everything from our welfare systems to our justice systems, that assumes people have an actual choice in what they do.

For that reason I strongly disagree with the compatibilist view - language is defined by use, and most people act in ways that clearly signal a non-compatibilist view of free will.
by naravara | 2026-03-12 15:34:21+00:00
80% of the federal workforce is based outside of the DC/Maryland/Virginia area.

The ones who are around the capital are the ones doing policy or back-office work that’d be the equivalent of a corporate HQ, and they have benefits from being concentrated in a region where there’s a lot of other Federal back office work because they can recruit from a talent pool of people who are experienced in the particular requirements of Federal work. It’s the same sort of agglomeration effects that drives finance to concentrate in NYC or the film industry to concentrate in LA.

Taking the USDA as an example, it doesn’t literally operates farm. The vast majority of what it’s doing is functionally insurance and financial services. The stuff that needs direct interaction with farms like inspections or scientific research are done out of field offices.

If America has an equivalent of The Capitol from Hunger Games where a bunch of absurdly wealthy and out of touch elites pull the strings on how the rest of the country lives for their own benefit, I’d submit Wall Street or Silicon Valley before I posit DC.
by ericmay | 2026-03-12 15:34:30+00:00
> My PC has had a scanner connected to it for over 20 years

You're basically the only person in America doing this. Tens of millions of folks are just scanning it with the app on their phone and it's objectively a much better experience lol. The resolution of the photo taken on your smartphone is beyond good enough, there's no need to over-engineer something here.

> You can't invade the user's privacy nearly as well in a browser (which is great for analytics/marketing), so there's a lot of incentive to the app creator to force a mobile app. But I think we should be honest that it's not for the user, it's for the company.

I agree with your first sentence, but not your second one.

Banking applications can certainly get more/different data on you from using the app, but the job of the bank is to protect money and to know their customer. Privacy is secondary, of course outside of things like other people knowing your account balance, unauthorized access, &c. That's for the bank, because they don't want to lose your money, but it's also for you because you don't want other people getting access to your money.
by Goofy_Coyote | 2026-03-12 15:34:34+00:00
It took me too long to understand it’s satire. BP went through stratosphere before I noticed.

Let’s hope one of these fake AI grifters doesn’t take this as a serious idea, raised a couple hundred million, and do real damage.

(I’m not against AI, I just don’t like nonsense either in tech, or people)
by Pannoniae | 2026-03-12 15:34:41+00:00
This is satire but this is where things are heading. The impact on the OSS ecosystem is probably not a net positive overall, but don't forget that this also applies to commercial software as well.

There will be many questions asked, like why buy some SaaS with way too many features when you can just reimplement the parts you need? Why buy some expensive software package when you can point the LLM into the binary with Ghidra or IDA or whatever then spend a few weeks to reverse it?
by davedx | 2026-03-12 15:34:45+00:00
My process has organically evolved towards something similar but less strictly defined:

- I bootstrap AGENTS.md with my basic way of working and occasionally one or two project specific pieces

- I then write a DESIGN.md. How detailed or well specified it is varies from project to project: the other day I wrote a very complete DESIGN.md for a time tracking, invoice management and accounting system I wanted for my freelance biz. Because it was quite complete, the agent almost one-shot the whole thing

- I often also write a TECHNICAL-SPEC.md of some kind. Again how detailed varies.

- Finally I link to those two from the AGENTS. I also usually put in AGENTS that the agent should maintain the docs and keep them in sync with newer decisions I make along the way.

This system works well for me, but it's still very ad hoc and definitely doesn't follow any kind of formally defined spec standard. And I don't think it should, really? IMO, technically strict specs should be in your automated tests not your design docs.
by MBCook | 2026-03-12 15:34:49+00:00
I think you’ll be quite a bit happier. Between the quality of life stuff like the ancient life sensor, the pure quality stuff like a better screen and speakers, and extra RAM so it lasts longer that seems like a good decision.

The Neo is neat and for someone who mostly does surfing and standard office work kind of stuff I suspect it’s a pretty great little laptop for way less than Apple usually charges.

But it’s not going to compete with an M5 anything.
by Obscurity4340 | 2026-03-12 15:35:23+00:00
Honestly, its overkill. When my MaBook went kaput, i had to start doing everything on my iPhone. Had to get a good mobile documents office suite (Collabora is great ), do all my banking with both mobile apps or desktop browser apps, etc. Its been dfine, i doubt i would use a full size computer for that anymore.
by sozal | 2026-03-12 15:35:44+00:00
Yeah, you’re right. The most of the gain is from the execute tool (batching many steps in one call), not from CDP vs Playwright. If Playwright MCP added a similar sandboxed “run script that calls other tools” and the model used it the same way, token use and turn count would likely get much closer. So the win is API design (batching + scoping + lean tool defs), not the protocol. The post is about showing that this kind of design matters, we’re not claiming our stack is inherently lighter.
by 0xy | 2026-03-12 15:35:57+00:00
By torching Russia reputationally by showing their radar and guidance equipment to be utter garbage in Venezuela and Iran. I'd say it's the opposite.

Both Russia and China's equipment is worthless and was dismantled by the US like it was made of plastic.

The 'Trump is a Russian asset' narrative came from DNC propaganda that was later proven to be completely fabricated, by the way.
by rob | 2026-03-12 15:36:22+00:00
It's crazy how fast I'm able to identify these bots now. You just get an uncanny valley type of feeling immediately reading it. Sure enough you click the profile and it's a brand new account with one or two similar posts in the same style. There's some sort of writing style here that identifies it because I've picked upon it multiple times quickly but it's hard to articulate into words.
by deathanatos | 2026-03-12 15:36:36+00:00
> One dreaded and very common situation is when a failing CI run can be made to pass by simply re-running it. We call this flaky CI.

> Flaky CI is nasty because it means that a CI failure no longer reliably indicates that a mistake was caught. And it is doubly nasty because it is unfixable (in theory); sometimes machines just explode.

> Luckily flakiness can be detected: Whenever a CI run fails, we can re-run it. If it passes the second time, we are sure it was flaky.

One of the specialties that I have (unwillingly!) specialized in at my current company is CI flakes. Nearly all flakes, well over 90% of them, are not "unfixable", nor are they even really some boogy man unreliable thing that can't be understood.

The single biggest change I think we made that helped was having our CI system record the order¹ in which tests are run. Rerunning the tests, in the same order, makes most flakes instantly reproduce locally. Probably the next biggest reproducer is "what was the time the test ran?" and/or running it in UTC.

But once you get from "it's flakey" (and fails "seeming" "at" "random") to "it fails 100% of the time on my laptop when run this way" then it becomes easier to debug, b/c you can re-run it, attach a debugger, etc. Database sort issues (SQL is not deterministically ordered unless you ORDER BY), issues with database IDs (e.g., test expects row ID 3, usually gets row ID 3, but some other test has bumped us to row ID 4²), timezones — those are probably the biggest categories of "flakes".

While I know what people express with "flake", "flake" as a word is usually "failure mode I don't understand".

(Excluding truly transitory issues like a network failure interfering with a docker image pull, or something.)

(¹there are a lot of reasons people don't have deterministically ordered CI runs. Parallelism, for example. Our order is deterministic, b/c we made a value judgement that random orderings introduce too much chaos. But we still shard our tests across multiple VMs, and that sharding introduces its own changes to the order, as sometimes we rebalance one test to a different shard as devs add or remove tests.)

²this isn't usually because the ID is hardcoded, it is usually b/c, in the test, someone is doing `assert Foo.id == Bar.id`, unknowningly. (The code is usually not straight-forward about what the ID is an ID to.) I call this ID type confusion, and it's basically weakly-typed IDs in langs where all IDs are just some i32 type. FooId and BarId types would be better, and if I had a real type system in my work's lang of choice…
by gregbot | 2026-03-12 15:37:01+00:00
This made me absolutely livid:

> We requested a security incident report from the ethical hackers as proof

So instead of paying him a fair bug bounty, they demand that he write a formal report for them and prove to them that there is even a problem.

Totally unhinged, but it gets worse:

> the response was a demand for money for the report, which confirmed our suspicion that this was a ransom-related incident.

Wow. So when the security researcher informs them that he would be happy to do some consulting work for them and informs them of his rates, they flip out and accuse his initial good samaritan decision to inform the company of the issue of being part of a plot by him to hold the company for ransom?

Whoever thought this is both totally delusional and a complete jerk. Truly, no good deed goes unpunished.
by le-mark | 2026-03-12 15:37:07+00:00
This concept is assuming a formalized language would make things easier somehow for an llm. That’s making some big assumptions about the neuro anatomy if llms. This [1] from the other day suggests surprising things about how llms are internally structured; specifically that encoding and decoding are distinct phases with other stuff in between. Suggesting language once trained isn’t that important.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47322887
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-12 15:37:16+00:00
> Who is the intermediary

Business development companies [0]. Blue Owl. BlackRock [1].

> are these buy side created SPVs?

Great question! Not always [2].

[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/private-credit-fund...

[1] https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/newsroom/press-releases/...

[2] https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/meta-secures-30bn...
by fennecfoxy | 2026-03-12 15:37:19+00:00
How about, as you found repeating x-y was useful for locating the block of 7 layers in the first place; I'd be incredibly curious if, knowing that block of 7, if you then iterated from repeating x-y in that block z times.

Like for those 7 layers 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 does efficiency increase if you run 1,2,3,3,4,4,4,5,6,7 or perhaps 1,2,3,3,4,5,6,6,7 etc. If only GPUs grew on trees
by philamonster | 2026-03-12 15:37:22+00:00
Right. I am in that bucket described by parent comment but also live literally at the edge of the district boundary our second child will eventually attend that I intentionally took up residence in a few years ago when we split. All kinds of motivation as to why a SD would do this but I don't need that decision influenced by a company that has no presence in the state let alone the district I live.
by tmtvl | 2026-03-12 15:37:28+00:00
As someone who also first got introduced to Lisp through SICP and Scheme, I don't really care about Lisp-1 versus Lisp-2, but I don't much fancy minimalism. I switched to CL for the type declarations and just got used to funcall and number sign+apostrophe; and minimalism means the things a larger language would provide out of the box (say, hash tables) you either need to write yourself or find a library for. Hence why various Schemes (Guile, Gauche, Chicken) have a ton of libraries beyond the standard.

In fact, I'd say CL is too minimalist, hence CLDR (a bit like SRFIs) and various libraries which form a sort of unofficial extended core (Alexandria, Bordeaux threads, CL-PPCRE,...)
by Aurornis | 2026-03-12 15:37:42+00:00
The scariest part of this story isn’t that they’re doing LPR at drop-off, it’s that they’re claiming to have knowledge of where the car is parked overnight.

> her daughter’s new student enrollment form was denied due to “license plate recognition software showing only Chicago addresses overnight” in July and August. In an email sent to Sánchez in August, the school district told her, “Although you are the owner on record of a house in our district boundaries, your license plate recognition shows that is not the place where you reside.”

The person in the story claims to have lent the car to some family members at that time. That appears to confirm that the car was really parked somewhere else at night. But how does this LPR company have that information?
by KellyCriterion | 2026-03-12 15:37:42+00:00
Years ago, I was at a Big4; had a co-worker whose spouse was working for MCK; we had more or less the same salary at the Big4, but spose at MCK was getting more or less exactly the double amount.

Then I listened and we started to calculate:

- In the MCK Office from 0900 - 2300 on MO-FR

- In the MCK Office from 1000 - 1600/1700 on SA

- Often in the MCK Office from 1000-1400 on SU

Overall, yes: The amont was the double amount - but in the end working hours were also roughly the double.
by twosdai | 2026-03-12 15:37:43+00:00
I too crave my car when I am running around a track on the 5th lap.

In your comparison, I think you're getting tired because you need to reason through syntax writing which you have not done in a while, its more akin to going to gym than it is to "withdrawl". Having to reason through syntax for writing is going to be a muscle memory thing which AI will reduce, but its not really the most valuable skill of programming. Reading, comprehension, ownership, and your internal mental model of programming tasks are without a doubt the most important aspect of our work.
by skipants | 2026-03-12 15:37:49+00:00
Huh. I have the opposite opinion. I'm monolingual English for all intents and purposes but I gathered that opinion from quite a few sources, including:

- We had to take spelling tests in school

- English speakers make (generally light) fun of other's spelling or grammar mistakes in a casual setting

- In a professional setting, a lot of time is taken to proofread our own emails

- There's de jure spellings for every word

- Some online communities are really weird about pointing out grammar and spelling mistakes (namely Reddit)

Language is meant to be a fluid, evolving thing but I always felt like English was treated the opposite way. Maybe that's also why it's the de facto Lingua Franca.

I do think, and hope, that this rigidity will change thanks to AI. I've started to embrace my mistakes. I care a lot less about capitalization and punctuation in my Slack messages, for example.
by aurareturn | 2026-03-12 15:38:02+00:00
I think you're being sarcastic? I'm not sure.

Anyways, this is the start. Companies are adjusting. You hear a lot about layoffs but unemployments. But we're in a high interest environment with disruptions left and right. Companies are trying to figure out what their strategy is going forward.

I don't expect to see a boom in software developer hiring. I think it'll just be flat or small growth.
by kennywinker | 2026-03-12 15:38:19+00:00
> How will anyone find the house? If I use an online estate agent, then that's still a middle man.

Right now your realtor is paying your listing fees, paying a photographer (maybe) and paying to stage the home (again, maybe). Those are all fixed fees. Then the realtor takes a percentage of the transaction. If the realtor goes away, those fixed-fee services can all still exist and be easy to use. You could even replace the realtor with a general contractor sort of person who manages them and also charges a fixed fee and it’d still be a win.