MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by remywang | 2026-03-12 04:56:14+00:00
1. Right after initialization you'll be prompted to export the private key and store it somewhere safe, e.g. your password manager

2. You don't need to know unless you want to implement the protocol! To use (the very barebones) implementation all you need to do is fork the repo & give access, which I admit can be too much for family/friends so you might have to set it up for them (and I bet they'd be stoked to have a website of their own!)
by 1313ed01 | 2026-03-12 04:57:16+00:00
Confluence used to be built on top of pretty standard plain wiki markup that could be edited without being forced into a bad visual editor, even easy to edit in an external text editor to not have to spend so much time in the web UI at all. I remember having an Emacs mode for it installed.

Looking this up now, Wikipedia says the wiki markup was abandoned already in 2011. Not that I think Confluence was ever a great wiki, but at least having pages that were backed by some resonable plaintext markup was much better than not having that.
by marijan_div | 2026-03-12 04:57:26+00:00
Stryker is far more than ambulance gurneys. They’re one of the largest med-tech suppliers, with equipment in operating rooms, ICUs, and surgical departments everywhere.

If a wiper actually hit internal systems, the bigger concern isn’t consumer data but disruption to manufacturing, logistics, and hospital support. That kind of outage could ripple through a lot of hospitals pretty quickly.
by dkowalski | 2026-03-12 04:57:52+00:00
this is exactly the problem we keep running into. the cost isn't just "how many tokens did this call use," its "how many tokens did this entire user action consume across all the agent loops, retries, tool calls, and embeddings."

most observability tools show you the LLM call as one flat span. you can see it cost X tokens but you cant correlate it with the API request that triggered it, or see that the agent looped 4 times because the first 3 outputs failed validation. so you end up building custom logging and hoping the numbers add up.

we've been building an APM (immersivefusion.com) where cost is a first-class dimension on every trace. so you can see one request flow from the UI through your backend through the agent workflow, and each span carries its token cost. the idea is you should be able to answer "what does a checkout cost when the recommendation agent is in the loop" without stitching together 3 different tools.

for the forecasting question specifically, i think the answer is you need a few weeks of production data with good instrumentation and then you can build a distribution. the variance is real but its not random, its usually a few specific flows that blow up (retries on bad structured output like @hkonte mentioned, or RAG queries that hit the wrong chunk size). once you can see which flows are expensive the guardrails become obvious.

also wrote a longer piece on this if anyone's interested: immersivefusion.com/blog/end-to-end-observability-from-ui-to-ai-agent-to-invoice
by NitpickLawyer | 2026-03-12 04:57:53+00:00
Interesting model release. It offers ~same capabilities as gpt-oss-120b but with faster inference (should be cheaper as well) and they're also providing (some?) pre-training and (all?) post-training datasets. In some benchmarks it is behind qwen3.5-122b that recently released. Focus on "agentic" stuff, and nvfp4 native. Glad to see nvda pushing for more models, more accessible models, and opening up some of their datasets.
by xdc0 | 2026-03-12 04:58:02+00:00
How does such a system sustain itself?

The majority of the content on the internet is supported by ads with the expectation that you, a human that has money, will consume something and spend money on them.

If people are replaced by some synthetic representation of themselves, what is the incentive to sell advertisements on the internet if there are no humans?

Fake/artificial traffic is a big problem today, it will be harder and harder to detect but its presence will be more and more obvious.
by adola_ring_2026 | 2026-03-12 04:58:30+00:00
This is great. We're building Adola (https://adola.app), a subscription-free smart ring with a similar focus on data ownership. One of the biggest hurdles we've found is that even if the hardware is solid, the vendor-locked APIs (Oura/Whoop) make it really hard for users to actually 'own' their biometrics.

Our goal is to give users direct access to the raw PPG and sensor data without it being gated by a cloud subscription. Integrating with a platform like Open Wearables is exactly the kind of ecosystem we'd love to support.
by kstrauser | 2026-03-12 04:58:35+00:00
Here it’s because the old PC they picked is worse in every way than the brand new PC, except for RAM, which the Mac largely mitigates by having ludicrously fast flash hanging off the CPU. Of course an older, worse PC is going to be cheaper than a new Mac. (Except in this case, buying the boat anchor saves you a whopping $20. It’s not even better specs for the same price: it’s worse than the Apple gear that costs the same.)

If we want to compare new vs used, then how much would you have to spend to buy a brand new PC laptop as powerful as last year’s MacBook Pro?
by YZF | 2026-03-12 04:58:47+00:00
Everyone says there's no historical examples but there is no exact parallel either. I wouldn't argue based on historical precedence here.

The challenge is that regime is large and armed and they can hide and weather the storm. They'll hide in hospitals, and mosques, and schools and amongst civilians.

Getting them and disrupting their organization to a point where a popular revolt can take over seems ... lessay hard.

What needs to happen is that some parts of the military, who are a bit less fanatic, switches sides. The probability of that is very hard to gauge. There are stories of some defecting but hard to know if it's true or not.
by lelanthran | 2026-03-12 04:59:23+00:00
> The dynamics of content production are shifting hard right now. Things that used to signal something interesting are being generated in minutes with little thought. It's getting democratized, but also commoditized.

That's true, but it also means that Show HN has less value than it used to: the SNR is falling off a cliff :-(

I planned to post a Show HN for a new product I want to launch (all human written by myself, with only the GEO docs vibed currently), but not sure now that any decent/quality product will ever get air. All the oxygen is being sucked out by low-effort products.
by 1659447091 | 2026-03-12 04:59:27+00:00
> I don’t live by thought exercises.

But you live with regret and rumination and thinking up possible future scenarios; that and "living by thought exercises" are two sides of the same coin -- if not the same side. Which is what the argument was meant to playfully point out, in its round-a-bout philosophical way. You can get up to thinking of all the sci-fi timeline altering stuff of the past the same as you can carry regret from thought exercises directed toward future events, thus getting in your feels and self-berating.

It is all thought exercises. The other option is to release the burden of guilt and simply enjoy the timeline you have now. Kids sense these things that their parents carry. Anyway, in no way was I implying your experience or feelings or sharing is wrong or judged
by pastescreenshot | 2026-03-12 05:00:00+00:00
Probably worse in the boring B2B way, not the consumer-breach way. Stryker is deep in hospital operations, so the immediate risk is supply chain and support disruption rather than leaked patient data. The Krebs post says one hospital system already could not order surgical supplies, and if the Intune remote wipe detail is true, recovering internal devices and admin workflows could take a while even without any medical devices themselves being compromised.
by basch | 2026-03-12 05:00:28+00:00
I guess I’d rather have something approaching bittorrent, edonkey/kad, ipfs, blockchain, webarchives.

You have named networks that are federated together, and people can publish to the networks they are invited to or sign up for. The networks survive even with individual servers go down. Data is cached all over at the edges.

Your version is just way too susceptible to rot, unless you see that as a feature. I see it as most of the good content falling into the ether sooner rather than later.
by Amirlan | 2026-03-12 05:01:24+00:00
i’m building extensy - the fastest ai builder for chrome extensions.

it’s powered by nia by nozomio (yc s25), which is arguably the most powerful context layer on the market right now. if you want to build browser tools that actually understand the page they’re on, this is it.

first 10 users get 20% off with code: EXTENSY20
Show HN: Restailor – open-source AI job fit and resume tailor and job tracker
by fomoz | 2026-03-12 05:02:06+00:00
Hi guys,

I made my Restailor project open source. You're welcome to use the code in case you're looking for a new job or just want to play around with an LLM integration for this purpose. You're also welcome to use my prompts.

It's working end-to-end and I built the infra to scale and support a lot of users using it (Next.js + FastAPI + Redis + Postgres). It also has applied job tracking and analytics.

LLM integrations are with Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, and xAI.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-03-12 05:02:13+00:00
Absolutely nothing.

Most of my use cases for using LLMs in production is call centers

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47241412

Where basically it’s: accepting user input -> LLM to figure out which tool to call (user’s intent) -> JSON -> call API with strict security boundaries just like with a web app.

What’s the worse that could happen that couldn’t happen with a web app if I have bad security around the underlying API?

I’m sure that if you did successfully break my systems they could get it to say inappropriate things back to them for the lulz, but who cares?
by close04 | 2026-03-12 05:04:57+00:00
Interesting point. But I don’t think you must experience something to be afraid of it, even as a population. Nobody experienced the terror of a world ending nuclear war, large asteroid strike, or solar flare (alien invasion if you want to go that far), etc. and they still terrify a lot of people. Sometimes even more than death itself.

To be more pragmatic, it’s now pretty common today for people to die and modern medicine brings them back. For practical purposes the person was dead, by some other interpretations they weren’t, if you consider the only “real” death to be the permanent one.
by jiggawatts | 2026-03-12 05:06:17+00:00
I'm not claiming either side is actually winning, I'm merely predicting that they'll both claim to have won.

On the topic of the weapons program: The Israeli approach is to regularly "mow the lawn" to keep their regional opponents perpetually behind. Iran's nuclear weapons and ICBM programmes have almost certainly been damaged, perhaps enough to delay them for half a decade or more. Then it'll be time to mow the lawn again, or hope that by then a more moderate leadership can sign an agreement with a new US president that's a bit more trustworthy than the current one.
by YZF | 2026-03-12 05:06:23+00:00
You'd be surprised that Israeli media has decent coverage of the damage from Iran's attacks to Israel and the gulf. Random e.g.: https://www.timesofisrael.com/at-least-25-iranian-attacks-ha...

The CBC hasn't done any good reporting in the last decade that I can tell. They just copy-paste from news agencies based on their ideological principles or something.

Another source is: https://understandingwar.org/analysis/middle-east/iran-updat...

You can definitely get some color on YouTube. Iran is fighting back but that's not what's going to decide the war (e.g. the damage to Israel or to the Gulf states). They are taking a lot more damage then they're dishing out and the scale of their counters goes down every day. The straits are a very different story since it doesn't take much to threaten the ships to the extent nobody wants to take a chance. One drone, or mine, or a missile, and the straits are closed. Even if the US and Israel are able to pretty much completely suppress Iranian attacks on Israel and the Gulf states the straits might remain closed.

EDIT: https://www.ynet.co.il/news/blogs/article/skwano1cbe#autopla...

This is Hebrew but I just saw reporting about 6 ships on fire from Iranian attacks and there are photos...
by altairprime | 2026-03-12 05:06:39+00:00
There is value in technical excellence, but it’s not substituable for having and using a voice that isn’t the crowd-averaged AI normal. Better an unpracticed voice than a dull one, etc. (Also, AI is nullifying a great deal of excellence in favor of barely sufficient, just like Java did! so betting on the continued value of technical prowess requires some particular specializations that are not so easily replaced as the high quantity of devopseng cogs turn out to be.)
by adola_ring_2026 | 2026-03-12 05:06:54+00:00
We’re seeing the same 'subscription fatigue' in the hardware space. I’m part of a team building Adola (https://adola.app), a smart ring for health tracking. We decided to go entirely subscription-free because the trend of paying $6/month just to see your own biometric data (Oura/Whoop) is starting to feel like a tax on health.

It’s refreshing to see more devs pivoting back to one-time purchases or hybrid models. Hardware is harder to do that with because of cloud/server costs for the data, but we’re betting that users prefer owning their device over renting their biometrics.
by duskdozer | 2026-03-12 05:06:59+00:00
>Knowing whether or not the AI changed the meaning of what you wrote is not reliant on knowing which specific rules you broke. It's only reliant on you actually reading what the AI spat out and deciding “yes, this is what I meant” or “no, this is not what I meant”.

That's fair.

>Unless you're arguing that the rule violations are something the author intends to be part of the meaning of what one wrote?

I think what I wanted to get at is more like this:

1. I think that they may be part of the meaning

2. I think that people would be primed to accept changes even if they change the meaning

3. I suspected that it would always correct something and wouldn't just say LGTM even if the input was fine

To check, and at the risk of this being hypocritical, I asked for a grammar correction on part of your post that I thought had no mistakes, and both in context and isolation, it corrected "spat out" to "produced." Now, this isn't a huge deal, but it is a loss of the connotation of "spat out," which is the phrasing you chose.

I think grammatical errors are low-cost, and changes in meaning and intent are high-cost, so with 2. above, running it through an LLM risks more loss than it gains.
by fhub | 2026-03-12 05:07:08+00:00
Profit is just one metric that affects the stock. YoY Revenue growth was historically in 40s and high 30% year on year. But last year was sub 20%. Investors are re-evaluation SaaS company multiples through a new lens of AI. Personally I wonder if Fortune 500 can renegotiate lower margin pricing with the "We could just build this with AI in house" BATNA argument.
by tomhow | 2026-03-12 05:07:10+00:00
Having been reading generated comments almost daily for over three years now, I have a pretty good sense of it. There's a bunch of signals: how new the account is; how the comments look visually (the capitalization and layout of the paragraphs, particularly when all of one user's comments are displayed in a list). Em-dashes and short, emphatic sentences, make it more obvious of course.

There are cases that are more borderline; usually when someone has used a translation service or has used an LLM to polish up a comment they wrote themselves. For these ones there's less certainty, and whilst we discourage them, we're not as rigid in our aversion to them or as eager to ban accounts that do it.

But ones that are entirely generated are still pretty easy to spot, even just from visual appearance.
by rendaw | 2026-03-12 05:07:21+00:00
Yeah, I think GP is right and this all feels like word play to me.

Let's say you're making your ideal wood chair for your living room. You're "fretting" over getting the arms, legs perfectly aligned, surfaces smooth, identical chamfers, etc. But fretting is bad and makes it hard to get anything done so you stop. Then you end up with a roughshod chair.

You shouldn't "fret" too much, but you also shouldn't "fret" too little. You should "fret" exactly the right amount which is... tautologically true, and not particularly insightful. Giving your best is committing yourself to fretting.
by MichaelRo | 2026-03-12 05:07:27+00:00
>> gradually evolving them into a modern liberal democracy

Yeah, this is the key observation. "a modern liberal democracy", a.k.a. replacing locals with third world, arresting citizens for posting comments online while letting rapists and murderers go with minimum sentences so they can strike again, making gayness and wokeness obligatory or at least the norm, colonizing white people and calling it reparatory justice, importing radical Islam and liberally supporting revolution (like in Iran) so we can all have a wonderful ayatollah regime... all that.

Definitely removing centuries old pure British tradition is a step forward into "modern liberal democracy", I cannot deny that!
by raw_anon_1111 | 2026-03-12 05:08:06+00:00
Consider how many Macs in total that Apple sold during the years that Apple sold the 11 inch Air and that they discontinued it, I doubt it was a raging success.

Especially seeing that with the Apple now selling the 13 inch Neo and it decided to sell a larger Air instead of a small one, I don’t think it sold that well.
by godelski | 2026-03-12 05:08:40+00:00
I think you think that because we don't agree that I have some grave misunderstanding of some, to be frank, basic facts. I assure you, I perfectly understand what you're bringing up here and in the last comment.

But I think you still haven't understood my point about trade-offs. At least you aren't responding as if these exist.

Our disagreement isn't due to lack of understanding the conditions, it is due to a difference in acceptable limitations. After all, perfection doesn't exist.

So you can't just solve problems like this by bringing up limitations in an opposing viewpoint. I assure you, I was already well aware of every single one you've mentioned...
by thezipcreator | 2026-03-12 05:10:20+00:00
We've had machine translation for a while and I don't think anybody particularly thinks of it as a bad thing? Writing something and then having a machine directly translate it (possibly imperfectly) is a lot different than a machine writing the thing.

Personally I would like people to try learning other languages more (it's hard but rewarding) but you can't learn every language ever, and it is really hard to learn a language to fluency.
by bruce511 | 2026-03-12 05:10:37+00:00
If that's true, it would be very sad indeed. Techical excellence is a very low bar to clear. It's so easy even AI can do that part.

When I was young, and learning my technical skills, then naturally I was focused on improving those skills. At that age I defined myself by what I did, and so my self worth was related to my skills. And while the skills are not hard to acquire, not many did, and they were well paid. All of which made me value them even more.

As I've grown older though I discovered my best parts had nothing to do with tech skills. My best parts (work wise) was in translating those skills into a viable business, hiring the right people, focusing my attention where it's needed (and getting out the way where it's not.) My best parts at work are my human relationships with colleagues, customers, prospects and so on.

Outside of work my technical skills mean nothing. My family and friends couldn't care less. They barely know I have drills at all, and no idea if I'm any good or not. In that space compassion, loyalty, reliability, kindness, generosity, helpfulness, positivity, contentment and so on are far (far) more important.

I hope at my funeral people remember those things. Whether I could set up email or drive an AI will (hopefully) not even be in the top 10.
by injidup | 2026-03-12 05:11:13+00:00
My main concern is not that a direct Claude command is prompt injected to do something evil but that the generated code could be evil. For example what about simply a base64 encoded string of text that is dropped into the code designed to be unpacked and evaluated later. Any level of obfuscation is possible. Will any of these fast scanning heuristics work against such attacks? I can see us moving towards a future where ALL LLM output needs to be scanned for finger printed threats. That is, should AV be running continuous scans of generated code and test cases?
Show HN: Cloud VMs with a Built-In REST API for AI Agents
by hydralerne | 2026-03-12 05:11:59+00:00
Hey HN,

If you’re building local AI agents (or using tools like Cursor/Claude Code), giving them a place to safely execute code and manipulate files is a headache. Running untrusted LLM-generated code directly on your machine or local Docker is risky, and managing remote SSH keys for an automated agent is clunky.

I built Oblien to solve this. It provides instant, hardware-isolated cloud VMs, but the actual interesting part is how you interact with them: the Runtime API.

Every workspace runs an internal HTTP/WebSocket server on port 9990. Instead of establishing an SSH connection, your local agent just makes standard API calls to control the remote machine securely.

It exposes everything an agent needs to do real work:

• Command Execution: Run POST /exec to execute bash commands. It supports synchronous runs, or you can stream stdout/stderr in real-time via SSE for long-running tasks.
• Files & Search: A full file API to list, read, and write files. It also has a native /search endpoint powered by ripgrep, so agents can find code without pulling the whole repo locally.
• WebSockets & Terminals: You can open interactive PTY sessions multiplexed over a single WebSocket connection. It even supports streaming filesystem events (create/write/delete) to watch directories.

How local agents connect securely:
The workspaces are network-dark by default—outbound internet is on, but inbound is completely blocked.

To let your local agent in, you hit the Oblien API to get a short-lived Gateway JWT. The agent uses this token as a Bearer auth header against workspace.oblien.com. Our gateway decodes the routing info from the JWT and securely tunnels the HTTP request through the firewall directly to the VM's internal server.

It makes orchestrating remote compute feel like using a standard web API.

For example, to run a command inside the remote VM, your agent just does this:
curl -X POST "https://workspace.oblien.com/exec" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $GATEWAY_JWT" \
-d '{"cmd": ["npm", "install"]}'
Docs and API reference: https://oblien.com/docs

Would love to hear what you think of the API design, or if there are specific endpoints you'd want added for your own agent workflows.

also You can use it like Vercel—spin up a VM, add workload, expose a port, and attach a custom domain for instant preview URLs. But unlike serverless platforms, you aren't restricted. Because every workspace has an injected Runtime API (port 9990), you can programmatically execute commands, edit files, and multiplex terminals over WebSockets right from your local machine or CI pipeline. You get the hosting of a PaaS, but the low-level control of a raw Linux VM