MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mijoharas | 2026-03-01 23:53:36+00:00
Somewhat whimsical, yet somewhat grappling with dark undertones, possibly due to the trauma of the war.

The moomins starts with a great flood that washes them all away to live in a new place (I think this is a parallel to the Finns moving out of Karelia after the war. I believe this was the largest migration of people that had occured at the time, and it has been described as causing generational trauma to the Finnish).

In addition I believe MoominPappa deals with issues of depression or something?
by grayhatter | 2026-03-01 23:54:20+00:00
> My point is that you don't always need to inspect the code at such low-level detail, provided there are tests or other ways to prove that the code behaves in the way that you describe.

This is true *only* in isolation. The pain of going through said depth of detail, is what builds the intuition for the whole system. Once and twice may not be noticeable, but a new habit, and that new habit's corresponding extreme downtime because no one understands the quirks anymore... Despite a few engineers who stake their life on the testing system, tests can't catch all issues. And it's extremely difficult to stop an oil tanker.
by jamesweb | 2026-03-01 23:55:02+00:00
Been using OpenClaw and wanted a way to manage everything from a single dashboard. So I built SwarmClaw.
One command to install: curl -fsSL https://swarmclaw.ai/install.sh | bash
It connects to OpenClaw + 14 other providers (Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini, Ollama, etc.), lets you create agents with custom prompts and MCP tools, schedule tasks, and bridge to Discord/Slack/Telegram/WhatsApp. LangGraph-powered multi-agent workflows built in.
Fully self-hosted, works with local models.
GitHub: https://github.com/swarmclawai/swarmclaw
Still early — would love feedback from the community.
by dylan604 | 2026-03-01 23:55:47+00:00
First thought would be to have the remote human over watching to engage with an emergency responder when the override is used. The remote human can then decide whether it is a real emergency or not. Either way, if any one uses an override system, a remote human should get involved. But instead, computer devs will suggest crypto/public/private keys/blahblahblah. This is one of those where the best answer will be to boot up the bio computer running the latest software
by nerdsniper | 2026-03-01 23:55:56+00:00
Integration in calculus often required me to "guess" a strategy ahead of time. It was more similar to searching for moves in chess than solving long division. Some moves would make it easier vs. harder and some would seemingly be a dead end.

WolframAlpha usually got to the correct answer, but often used a non-human strategy for integration. Generally, the best way to do it was simpler than what WolframAlpha's "step-by-step" showed, which was rather "brute force" and inelegant.

So, again, I agree. But again, it's a matter of degree and encompassing more domains vs. a binary change.
by idopmstuff | 2026-03-01 23:56:22+00:00
I use Claude code in a number of different parts of my business - coding internal applications, acting as a direct interface to SaaS via APIs and just general internal use.

I find there is a virtuous cycle here where the more I use it, the more helpful it is. I fired my bookkeeper and have been using Claude with a QBO API key instead, and because it already had that context (along with other related business context), when I gave it the tax docs I gave to my CPA for 2024's taxes plus my return, and asked it to find mistakes, it determined that he did not depreciate goodwill from an acquisition. CPA confirmed this was his error and is amending my return.

Then I thought it'd be fun to see how it would do on constructing my 2024 return just from the same source docs my CPA had. First time I did it, it worked for an hour then said it had generated the return, checked it against the 2024 numbers and found they're the same. I had removed the 2024 before having it do this to avoid poisoning the context with the answers, but it turns out it had a worksheet .md file that it was using on prior questions that I had not erased (and then it admitted that it had started from the correct numbers).

In order to make sure I wouldn't have that issue again, I tried the 2024 return again, completely devoid of any historical context in a folder totally outside of my usual Claude Code folder tree. It actually got my return almost entirely correct, but it missed the very same deduction that it had caught my CPA missing earlier.

So for me, the buildup of context over time is fantastic and really leads to better results.
by Maxatar | 2026-03-01 23:56:35+00:00
In science randomness is usually used to abstract over a large number of possible paths that result in some outcome without having to reason individually about any specific path or all such paths.

It does not have to mean something inherently non-deterministic or something that can't be modelled, although it certainly is the case that if something is inherently non-deterministic then it would necessarily have to be modelled randomly. Modelling things as a random process is very useful even in cases where the underlying phenomenon has a fully understood and deterministic model; a simple example of this would be chess.
by fennecbutt | 2026-03-01 23:57:04+00:00
Eh I've seen more SUV/big car drivers act like this than small car drivers, but then I live in the UK.

A friend who lived in New York for a bit would never live there again and says driving there was an absolute nightmare; everyone's out for themselves.

And you can see it in multiple "drivers react to an ambulance in different countries videos", with America the ambulance is always blocked and going slowly. Compare to Germany where they open up the entire middle of the road by moving to either side.
by freetime2 | 2026-03-01 23:57:34+00:00
I live in Japan, so it's not just an American phenomenon.

I think most schools provide transportation to away games. But in my city official school sports clubs don't start until high school - before that it's all private club teams.

In my kids' club, the team will provide transportation to far away games in other prefectures, or sometimes for games on school holidays when parents may be working. But it's very common for parents to have to drive their kids an hour or more to other cities within our prefecture. Carpooling is very common to alleviate the burden on parents.

But most parents want to watch their kids' games as much as possible. Even when the team provides transportation to a game, there are a handful of parents who will make the drive separately to support the team. My son asked me to drive 3 hours to watch an upcoming big game and support the team, and of course I'm not going to say no. To be able to see how far he has progressed, and to know that he wants me there to support him, is special.
by smelendez | 2026-03-01 23:57:49+00:00
I’ve found it can be helpful to shift your own attention after someone answers you, but not to a phone (which just makes you look like you’re communicating with someone else).

Look at a flyer on the wall, or your beverage if you’re in a bar, and they’ll follow up if they want to talk and appreciate the reduced pressure either way.

And yeah, never open a conversation with something like “can I ask you a question?” which is usually a trick of a salesperson or beggar to make you acknowledge them and start saying yes.
by jauntywundrkind | 2026-03-01 23:58:02+00:00
> for WebMCP you have to expose and maintain internal APIs

Perhaps. I think an API for the session is probably the root concern.

You say it like it's a bad thing. But ideally this also brings clarity & purpose to your own API design too.

> This opens the site up to abuse/scraping/etc.

In general it bothers me that this is regarded as a problem at all. In principle, sites that try to clickjack & prevent people from downloading images or whatever have been with us for decades. Trying to keep users from seeing what data they want is, generally, not something I favor.

I'd like to see some positive reward cycles begin, where sites let users do more, enable them to get what they want more quickly, in ways that work better for them.

The web is so unique in that users often can reject being corralled and cajoled. That they have some choice. A lot of businesses being the old app-centric "we determine the user experience" ego to the web when they work, but, imo, there's such a symbiosis to be won by both parties by actually enhancing user agency, rather than this war against your most engaged users.

> Rather what I think will be the future is that each website will have its own web agent to conversationally get tasks done on the site without you having to figure out how the site works

For someone who just was talking about abuse, this seems like a surprising idea. Your site running its own agent is going to take a lot of resources!!

It also, imo, misses the idea of what MCP is. MCP is a tool calling system, and usually, it's not just one tool involved! If an agent is using webmcp to send contacts from one system into a party planning webmcp, that whole flow is interesting and compelling because the agent can orchestrate across multiple systems.

Trying to build your own agent is, broadly, a terrible idea, that will never allow the user to wield the connected agency they would want to be bringing.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2026-03-01 23:58:35+00:00
The problem with Many Worlds is that it doesn't place a bound on the number of worlds, so you can't derive the Born Rule from it.

That's quite a serious issues. And arguments against that - like Self-Locating Uncertainty, or Zurek's Envariance - look suspiciously circular if you pull them apart.

There's also the issue that if you don't have a mechanism that constrains probability, you can't say anything about the common mechanism of any of the worlds you're in. Your world may be some kind of lottery-winning statistical freak world which happens to have very unusual properties, and generalising from them is absolutely misleading.

There's no way of testing that, so you end up with something unfalsifiable.
by array_key_first | 2026-03-01 23:58:48+00:00
The main problem with having only seniors is that seniors have many many blindspots. Just by the nature of being there a while, they've built up hundreds of automatic processes that allow them to ignore or work around bad things at the company. In terms of code, tech, relationships, product vision, etc. It's the same reason why telling engineers to QA their own shit is a recipe for disaster. You need fresh perspective.
by akersten | 2026-03-01 23:59:13+00:00
I'm old enough to remember discussions around the meaning of `User-Agent` and why it was important that we include it in HTTP headers. Back before it was locked to `Chromium (Gecko; Mozilla 4.0/NetScape; 147.01 ...)`. We talked about a magical future where your PDA, car, or autonomous toaster could be browsing the web on your behalf, and consuming (or not consuming) the delivered HTML as necessary. Back when we named it "user agent" on purpose. AI tooling can finally realize this for the Web, but it's a shame that so many companies who built their empires on the shoulders of those visionaries think the only valid way to browse is with a human-eyeball-to-server chain of trust.
by a-dub | 2026-03-01 23:59:43+00:00
makes sense. the core modules that i looked at look pretty good. (action-log, verifier, composability, dsl and parser).

all the kitchen sink stuff makes it pretty intense though. have you considered separating out just the core execution, logging and verification components? stuff like c2pa seems super cool, but maybe a second layer for application type things like that so that the core consensus stuff can be inspected easily?
by jlongo78 | 2026-03-02 00:00:14+00:00
Gala looks interesting. The sealed types approach in Go reminds me of how Rust handles enums for exhaustive matching. One practical tip when using this with AI coding agents: have them generate the type hierarchies first, then pattern match logic separately. Agents tend to hallucinate less when the type contracts are explicit upfront. The monad abstractions here could also make agent-generated error handling chains much more predictable and testable.
by jlongo78 | 2026-03-02 00:00:18+00:00
Interesting approach. One thing worth considering with autopilot agents: session persistence and context recovery become critical when agents run long tasks and hit failures mid-stream. The ability to resume exactly where a conversation left off, rather than restarting from scratch, saves significant time and cost. Also worth thinking about multi-agent observability in a single view - context switching between isolated agent outputs is a real friction point teams underestimate until they're running several concurrent tasks.
by Blackthorn | 2026-03-02 00:00:25+00:00
Design a concurrency implementation? I sure hope they would spend more than 3 minutes on it! Concurrency lends itself to subtle bugs even when experts write it.

I'd gladly take a junior dev to do any of that work there, because they can think for themself and not hang onto any bias you unknowingly build into the prompt like it's a religion.
by gbin | 2026-03-02 00:00:31+00:00
I'd LoVE to look into it but the news website is pure cancer ads before the video, no sound clock on sound that triggers another ad to you clock back, it restart an ad and you scroll a little bit and a top ad pops up while the bottom one is still there with like 3 words of the article readable.

I am sorry I am out.
by geor9e | 2026-03-02 00:02:18+00:00
It doesn't sound difficult to solve. The sensors can classify firetruck, ambulance, red&blues, uniformed police, badge, siren, etc. At a certain criteria, they can unlock the driver door for normal human driving, perhaps for a very limited speed and distance. The officer can move it to the side, and if they crash it's not waymo crashing it. This override should send the an alert to the remote command center, so a human can watch the video and also decide how much further they can drive it. Since passenger safety is a concern, if there is a passenger inside who chooses to remain inside, the car should remain locked and not allow any driver in. The human can decide to follow police orders to exit the car, or remain inside, but at that point a human becomes responsible for obstructing. The whole freezing waymo trend seems driven by legal liability - not engineering. They know if they always freeze, their million miles with no accidents stats are safe.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2026-03-02 00:02:59+00:00
Depending on how severe the error is, it could be professional negligence. In other professions, including engineering, this can result in a loss of the professional's license and their inability to continue to work in that field. Also, for negligent drivers, a suspension of their driving license can apply. So there is precedent for severe punishment even if nobody gets a jail sentence.
by array_key_first | 2026-03-02 00:04:38+00:00
We have no frame of reference if it's working because basically everyone is doing it. And business only measure on extremely short timelines. Meaning, it could be good right now, and catastrophic on the 10+ year timeline.

I definitely think this is the case. Almost all software is unbelievably bad. Almost all software gets worse the longer it exists. And almost all software does not meet its business purpose - it's merely contorted by the customers to just barely meet their needs.
by bahmboo | 2026-03-02 00:04:47+00:00
Glad to see this here. Age-wise I'm in the oldest 10% of users here, maybe 5%. I have noticed over the years the eroding of the ability of young people (20s basically) to interact in what I consider normal social situations.

Talking to your fellow humans in all sorts of situations is how you can form actual knowledge within yourself derived from direct observation. Everything else is a filter and synthesis. How can you know "reality" if you don't interact with it directly?
ProofGateway – Collect and publish customer testimonials in minutes
by elufadeju | 2026-03-02 00:04:53+00:00
I’ve been using a messy spreadsheet and manual copy-paste to get testimonials onto my site. Existing tools either charged too much or buried the useful parts behind enterprise plans.

So I built ProofGateway. It’s built around one idea: *share a link → customers submit → you approve → display on your site.*

No back-and-forth, no chasing people. You send a collection link (in email, social, or on your site). Submitters don’t need an account. You approve in a dashboard, then embed widgets wherever you want: grid, slider, badge, or single quote.

Pain points it addresses:
- Manual collection and chasing
- Approval and moderation
- Publishing on multiple pages and sites

Tiers:

Free ($0/mo):* Collect testimonials, moderate in a dashboard, public wall page. No card required.

Pro ($19/mo): Everything in Free, plus:
- Website embeds (grid, slider, badge, quote)
- Bulk import from spreadsheets
- Custom appearance (themes, density, avatars)
- White-Label add-on ($10/mo) — remove all ProofGateway branding for agencies and consultants

Unlimited testimonials. Unlimited embeds. No usage tiers. Most tools charge more for more widgets — we don't.

Early supporter offer (first 100 customers):
$59 for your first year, then 10% off the monthly price forever. Limited spots. [proofgateway.com/early-supporters](https://proofgateway.com/early-supporters)

Launch date: March 2nd, 2026.

Tech: Next.js, Supabase, Stripe, Vercel. Built for founders who want something that works without sales calls.

[https://proofgateway.com]
by guerython | 2026-03-02 00:04:54+00:00
Solid move on the entropy gate. We log the softmax H for every tool call and keep a tiny EMA+stddev per tool (`H_new=(1-α)H_old+αH_now`). The gate then lets calls through only when `H < max(base, mean+2σ)` and resets the mean when we see two consecutive confirmed failures, so the threshold drifts with the workload instead of hardcoding 1.5 bits.

On the sandbox side, we blocked not just `rm -rf`/fork bombs but also `os.execve('/proc/self/exe')`, `chmod`/`chown` on symlinks under `/tmp`, and we intercept raw `socket/connect` via ptrace so no new outbound channels spawn even if a regex slips. These traps stopped most of the pivoting tricks we saw in the first week.
by skyresearch | 2026-03-02 00:05:33+00:00
This "study" and the actors arround it are extremely suspicious, especially when taking into account how its "credibility" was manufactured and how it was laundered through media headlines without any critical checks, i summarized a detailled analysis of the study and what surrounds it here today:
https://skyresearch.substack.com/p/did-kenneth-paynes-nuclea...
by grayhatter | 2026-03-02 00:05:40+00:00
> Do you really need someone sitting in jail to satisfy your justice boner?

Literally, and intentionally avoiding any attempt to examine the implications? No probably not.

But reasonable punishment discourages bad behavior. And software engineers have a habit of ignoring the implications of a defective design. I think apocalyptic fines applied to the companies creating the systems for automated cars would also create the correct incentives, but I find that to be less likely than imprisonment.

What I want is software and systems to not suck ass. I don't want to deal with defective... everything, because it was faster to deliver. That's especially true when it contributes to the death or injury of a person that didn't do anything wrong.

I don't care what works, but people being afraid of going to jail for hurting someone absolutely does work. And 'administrative fines' don't work.
by hristov | 2026-03-02 00:05:40+00:00
I don't think they used crossover design. There is no evidence in the abstract that they used crossover design.

If they used crossover design they should have all participants go through a second trial period where they consume the same diet but with light breakfast and more caloric lunch and dinner. Then they could actually have more insight on the main thesis of their study, i.e. whether bug breakfast alters appetite.
by nobulexdev | 2026-03-02 00:06:12+00:00
That is exactly the direction I'm heading based on feedback from this thread. The core primitives (action-log, verifier, covenant DSL, parser) as a small, auditable package. Everything else — c2pa, otel, langchain, compliance adapters as a separate layer that builds on top.

You are right that auditability of the system itself is the goal. Its very hard to trust a trust layer you can't easily inspect. Appreciate you digging deep into the code.
by crazygringo | 2026-03-02 00:06:22+00:00
There are plenty of politicians who get into politics precisely because they love interacting with everyone.

It doesn't take the pleasure out of it, it doesn't make it transactional. It just gives them incredible job fulfillment, at least in that part of it.

Bill Clinton was famous for this. It was incredibly frustrating to his staff because he was constantly late for his next event, because he always wanted to keep talking to the people he'd just met. They'd have to build in buffer time to plan around it, because otherwise it wound up disrupting his schedule and logistics too much.
by heisenzombie | 2026-03-02 00:06:31+00:00
In Australia it's the board of directors who are liable. They can be liable if they personally direct the company to do something illegal (obviously?) but there is also a positive obligation to exercise due diligence. This covers (but is not limited to) workplace safety and safety of customers and the public. Directors can be personally liable for breaches of this duty and the penalties extend to possible imprisonment and very substantial fines.

For example:
https://www.owhsp.qld.gov.au/court-report/fines-imposed-fail...
by mrspence | 2026-03-02 00:06:43+00:00
If you've ever stored JSON locally and had the schema change over time, you know the pain of trying to keep it up-to-date as your application changes. You end up with defensive checks everywhere, or data that silently breaks when the shape changes underneath you.

I've faced this problem a few times lately, so I built json-up to handle this with a migration chain. Define versioned steps with Zod schemas, and the library walks your data forward from whatever version it's at, validating at each step with full TypeScript inference.

Zero runtime deps, works with Zod v3 and v4, and three distinct error types for precise failure handling.

Have a poke around!
by arwhatever | 2026-03-02 00:06:54+00:00
I mean really most companies have a backlog of feature ideas a mile long, and some tool comes along making your employees 40% more efficient, and the best thing you can think to do is the exact same thing at the exact same tempo but with fewer employees?

The CEO who thinks that way should be replaced due to incompetence, or at least due to lack of vision and imagination.
by tim-tday | 2026-03-02 00:07:14+00:00
Those don’t work. Test it by generating some ai slop (get a 100% fake score) and remove the top five tells. And it’ll get a 100% human score.

Repeat with your own writing. Insert a few mdashes and a few of their favorite turns of phrase. To go from 100% human rating to 100% ai.
by leprechaun1066 | 2026-03-02 00:07:19+00:00
The aj function at its heart is a bin (https://code.kx.com/q/ref/bin/) search between the two tables, on the requested columns, to find the indices of the right table to zip onto the left table.

aj[`sym`time;t;q]

becomes

t,'(`sym`time _q)(`sym`time#q)bin`sym`time#t

The rest of the aj function internals are there to handle edge cases, handling missing columns and options for filling nulls.

A lot of the joins can be distilled to the core operators/functions in a similar manner. For example the plus-join is

x+0i^y(cols key y)#x