MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by p0w3n3d | 2026-03-10 18:42:39+00:00
I'd say these times will be filled with a lot of tailored-to-you "self"-made software, but the question is, are we increasing amount of information in the world? I heard that claude and chatgpt are getting good at mathematical proofs which give really something to our knowledge, but all other things are neutral to entropy, if not decreasing. Strange time to live in, strange valuations and devaluations...
by mholm | 2026-03-10 18:43:20+00:00
This very much depends on the domain you work in. Small projects in well tread domains are incredible for AI. SaaS projects can essentially be one-shot. But large projects, projects with specific standards or idioms, projects with particular versions of languages, performance concerns, hardware concerns, all things the Debian project has to deal with, aren't 'solved' in the same way.
by neogodless | 2026-03-10 18:43:21+00:00
Certainly. I have dipped my toes in a few other Fediverse pools.

Of course, like email / domain names, there's no universal search for picking them. Big ones get network affects or advertise. Small players have to be found organically.

https://github.com/emilebosch/awesome-fediverse

That's a big flippin' list of Fediverse networks. But "a clear way to search" being layered on top of "decentralized" and "anyone could theoretically bring up a server at any time"... there's always going to be friction.

Whether you join any of them... well that's up to you to decide if you're curious enough, you suspect there's value there, etc.

The monetization and network affects of corporate social networks has always lent itself to incentivizing popularity contests and "emotional" content that pulls people in. If you want to escape the bad sides of those, there's also compromises on the independently funded networks.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-03-10 18:43:23+00:00
Thanks dang but can you please explain there being two accounts who wrote something very small comment and one account being completely new and the other being 7 months old only being invoked in this case.

Clearly I am not the only one here as john_strinlai here seems to have had somewhat of the same conclusion as me.

Dang I know you care about this community so can you please talk more what you think about this in particular as well.

I understand that YC companies get preferential treatment, Fine by me. But this feels something larger to me

I have written everything that I could find in this thread from the same post being shown here 3 days ago in anywhere.ai link to now changing to github to skirt off HN rule that same link can't be posted in short period of time and everything.

This feels somewhat intentional just like the spam issue, I hope you understand what I mean.

(If you also feel suspicious, Can you then do a basic analysis/investigiation with all of these suspicious points in mind and everything please as well and upload the results in an anonymous way if possible?)

I wish you to have a nice day and waiting for your thoughts on all of this.
by b450 | 2026-03-10 18:43:48+00:00
Reminds me of the blog post about Waymo's "World Model". Training on real-world data results in a sufficiently rich model to start simulating novel scenarios that aren't in the training data (like the elephant wandering into the street), which in turn can feed back into training. One could imagine scientific inquiry working the same way.

It strikes me that many of these complex systems have indeterminate boundaries, and a fair amount of distortion might be baked into the choice of training data. Poverty (to take an example from this post) probably has causes at economic, psychological, ecological, physiological, historical, and political levels of description (commenters please note I didn't think too hard about this list). What data we feed into our models, and how those data are understood as operationalizations of the qualitative phenomena we care about, might matter.
by mschuster91 | 2026-03-10 18:43:55+00:00
"open training" is something that won't ever happen for large scale models. For one, probably everyone's training datasets include large amount of questionable material: copyrighted media first and foremost (court cases have shown that AI models can regurgitate entire books almost verbatim), but also AI slop contaminating the dataset, or on the extreme end CSAM - for Grok to know how the intimate bits of children look like (which is what was shown during the time anyone could prompt it with "show her in a bikini") it obviously has to have ingested CSAM during training.

And then, a ton of training still depends on human labor - even at $2/h in exploitative bodyshops in Kenya [1], that still adds up to a significant financial investment in training datasets. And image training datasets are expensive to train as well - Google's reCAPTCHA used millions of hours of humans classifying which squares contained objects like cars or motorcycles.

[1] https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/
by jaredcwhite | 2026-03-10 18:44:45+00:00
LLM-generated code is incompatible with libre software. It's extremely frustrating to see such a lack of conviction to argue this point forcefully and repeatedly. It's certainly bad enough to see such a widespread embrace of this dangerous and anti-libre technology within proprietary software teams, but when it comes to FLOSS, it should be a no-brainer to formalize an emphatic anti-slop contributor policy.
by ikkun | 2026-03-10 18:44:46+00:00
my NAS needs are pretty simple, I basically just need HDDs on LAN. I have like a dozen arch linux machines and my old HDDs were already using ZFS from trueNAS, so I want with arch + ZFS, using zfs-dkms and linux-lts.

I don't know that I can recommend arch+zfs to someone not familiar with arch linux though. zfs isn't in the standard repository so you have to either add the archzfs repo or add an AUR package. most people probably expect a NAS to auto update, arch linux sometimes needs manual intervention for updates, which I only tolerate because I update multiple arch linux systems at the same time. and with zfs being out-of-tree, sometimes kernel updates can theoretically break it, though with linux-lts that seems to be very rare.

I have a remote system for security footage with debian+btrfs, which has basically none of these issues. installation is easier, btrfs is built into the kernel, I've had no trouble with automatic updates, it's been rock solid. btrfs still does the important stuff like software RAID, snapshots and scrubbing, and it's much easier to add more drives compared to ZFS. just note that I think btrfs has a bit worse performance. totally adequate for a 2.5 gigabit NAS, but a little slower for random access if you do work directly on the NAS like I do. it's also historically not been as reliable as ZFS, but that reputation seems years old at this point.
by atoav | 2026-03-10 18:44:48+00:00
This also made me wonder, is it:

1. That those in power believe they are so beyond consequences that literally nothing will happen to them, ever

or

2. That the time wasn't there to build the narrative since someone else forced their hand (e.g. Israel going in solo and either relying on the allies or having some Kompromat on specific actors)
by LexiCoAS | 2026-03-10 18:45:19+00:00
I built an API proxy that reduces what you pay on OpenAI/Anthropic/Google API calls.

The setup is one URL change:
- base_url: api.openai.com/v1 → api.lexisaas.com/v1
- apiKey: "lx_yourkey:sk-your-openai-key"

Your existing code, prompts, streaming, tool calls — all unchanged.

Billing: Lexi charges 40% of whatever it saves you per request. If a request doesn't get cheaper, no Lexi fee. You pay your provider directly (your key, your account) and the bill is simply lower.

Every response has headers showing exact cost breakdown so you can audit every cent.

Side benefit: longer AI conversations stay coherent where they'd normally degrade.

28 models, 6 providers. $10 free credit. Solo dev, based in Norway.

https://lexisaas.com
by epistasis | 2026-03-10 18:45:31+00:00
The article doesn't mention tracking, why would you say it's not working?

Slide 25 here shows that 99% of new utility installs in 2024 were single-axis trackers, because costs have fallen so far

https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/2025-10/Utility%20Sc...

What's different about 2025?
by baetylus | 2026-03-10 18:45:53+00:00
Hey HN,

This tool creates non-technical summaries of git pushes for engineers to share with their team.

Hopefully that makes status updates less cumbersome when you get pinged.

Usage — just run this in a repo you want to track (you'll need to login):

npx @trydebrief/cli@latest init

Features:

- Local git hook (no GitHub auth)

- Option to run fully local (run your own AI script and send us results)

- ZDR: we discard code once summarized; only using models with ZDR policy

- Open source CLI

Would love your thoughts. Thanks!
by calvinmorrison | 2026-03-10 18:46:24+00:00
> If an AI can replace you at your job, you are not a very good programmer.

Me and millions of other local yokel programmers who work in regional cities at small shops, in house at businesses, etc are absolutely COOKED. No I cant leet code, no I didnt go to MIT, no I dont know how O(n) is calculated when reading a function. I can scrap together a lot of useful business stuff but no I am not a very good programmer.
by rapnie | 2026-03-10 18:46:32+00:00
I find that I never have a reason to use a semicolon. Every time I typed one, it looked off, and I reformulated into 2 sentences to express things more clearly. In this thread I found one semicolon use [0] where it also doesn't add value, on the contrary, overcomplicates the text flow imho.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47326504
by bs7280 | 2026-03-10 18:46:55+00:00
The business leaders do not care about this yet. I think a lot of people think we already have more Seniors than we will need in the next 5-10 years.

Also - the definition of Senior will change, and a lot of current Seniors will not transition, while plenty of Juniors that put in a lot of time using code agents will transition.
by throw310822 | 2026-03-10 18:46:57+00:00
Ok, so to see this in the most favourable and futuristic light: there will be an intelligence explosion, of which OpenClaw and Moltbook are just the first hint. Agents will work on behalf of "their humans" creating and maintaining social connections, organising activities, and finally spending real money. This is what social networks have always been about, and the only thing Facebook cares about is that its users can be targeted by ads. Humans or agents, they don't care, and they're right. If each of us will be helped and coached and prodded around by a team of agents, these agents will need to coordinate with other people's agents, and will ultimately be susceptible to ads and marketing, and they will either spend money directly or tell us where and how to do it. It would be stupid for Facebook to miss this social network opportunity because, heh, "that's just a gimmick with autocompletes running in a loop".
by swaits | 2026-03-10 18:47:05+00:00
> especially when it was once suggested that frequent use could imply neurodivergence

When you think folks have come up with every inventive way to pathologize a personality trait, they start gatekeeping punctuation. It’s the ultimate reach—turning a standard grammar tool into a "symptom" just to fuel the modern obsession with finding new ways to be a unique victim.

Suggesting that a horizontal line is a diagnostic "tell" for neurodivergence is peak internet brain-rot. It’s not a condition; it’s middle-school English. We’ve officially hit a level of performative absurdity where people are trying to claim clout through a keyboard stroke. It’s not a disability; it’s a stylistic choice.
by phn | 2026-03-10 18:47:09+00:00
A fascinating thing for me after reading this is: how can it be that the "circuit input" is compatible with its output to the point where the performance improves? The training process never saw this particular connection just like it didn't see layer 60 output into layer 3 or whatever.

Great read, makes you wonder what else is encoded in these models that might be useful!
by menaerus | 2026-03-10 18:47:10+00:00
Pi runs Linux. That's software. Not bare metal. Bare metal is when you're running without OS, or at light abstraction such as RTOS. Bare metal is normally associated with chips without MMU. Pi runs SoC.

I didn't say that GCC version is relevant to bare metal definition, I said it's 15 years old. And when you try to draw conclusions, and derive strong opinion, based on the codegen output but you're using 15 year old toolchain, and btw pretty shitty CPU core, something isn't quite right. This article is just a good display of never ending cargo-cult programming myths.
by Nevermark | 2026-03-10 18:47:32+00:00
It is very high value.

I would be happy to pay even more for an experience without AI slop masquerading as something else, and obviously fake or misleading news sources.

If Youtube or Meta spent a fraction of the effort identifying credibility as they do predicting user likes, they could do a passable job. I would especially like credible sources that express coherent viewpoints less correlated with mine.

Perhaps even a quality setting or settings so i could set my own thresholds of credible information and non-trivial entertainment.

Premium Quality Tier. Ad and Shit Free.

Like a beautiful statue in a simple block of marble, it is in there.
by davnicwil | 2026-03-10 18:47:54+00:00
I agree with most of what you're saying in this reply but I also think we're now talking about a different thing, like how well does any of it prepare you for real world jobs.

That's separate from the question of being taught, self teaching, and the combo of the two, I think. That's more to do with just the material itself and the goals you're set.

I do think though, all else being equal, in a business you're going to want to prefer people who have demonstrated the kind of higher order skill and agency to be able to adapt and self teach.

I get that in a lot of businesses the difference might not be material, stuff turnover is high, focus is practical and short term and not about how this or that graduate will develop within the business over a long period of time and so on.

But still, of two people with the requisite hard skills to get going quickly you're probably always going to favour the one who seems better able to also adapt to changes and learn new skills in a totally self directed way, right?

Particularly in today's environment - I can hardly imagine a point in history where this has broadly been more important.
by johnnyanmac | 2026-03-10 18:48:31+00:00
> I'm significantly faster while guiding an LLM using this methodology.

https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...

>When developers are allowed to use AI tools, they take 19% longer to complete issues—a significant slowdown that goes against developer beliefs and expert forecasts. This gap between perception and reality is striking: developers expected AI to speed them up by 24%, and even after experiencing the slowdown, they still believed AI had sped them up by 20%.

If we're being honest with ourselves, it's not making devs work faster. It at best frees their time up so they feel more productive.
by rayiner | 2026-03-10 18:48:48+00:00
> claimed that the Iran war is the first war that the US is waging without first politically appealing to its public

This is only true if you define this to be a “war” and don’t define other similar actions to be a “war.” Obama announced the air strikes on Libya in 2011 after they had already begun: https://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/19/libya.us.missile...

> U.S. President Barack Obama confirmed that he had authorized "limited military action in Libya" and that "that action has now begun." He is planning for the U.S. portion of the military action in Libya to last just a few days, according to a senior administration official.

You’re correct that U.S. Presidents haven’t sought to persuade the public when the engagement involves air strikes instead of boots on the ground. But that’s been true for a long time.
by jaredcwhite | 2026-03-10 18:49:21+00:00
I've been saying this for a while now. Agentic network activity is indistinguishable from malware. This ruling is merely the opening salvo in a torrent of impending litigation which will tear the Internet apart.

Didn't have to be this way, and I'm hardly an Amazon sympathizer (in fact I boycott the company)…but they are definitely setting a worthy precedent here against the incredible myopic greed of AI vendors.
by estimator7292 | 2026-03-10 18:49:59+00:00
It's just the fascism. Fascist governments don't need or want the approval of their populace so long as they have a way to keep the people in line, like keeping the mass of your population uneducated, underemployed, and on the verge of poverty.

Or, if your fascist government is so incompetent that it thinks it has this kind of control.

I really, really don't think there's anything deeper here than just the fascism.
by AuthAuth | 2026-03-10 18:49:59+00:00
China has not had a 3rd party verified emission report published in over 3 years. You can only go based on their word and very low quality articles reporting all this success. Every year I hear their emission are peaking and every time the emission report comes out it turns out they've increased. People say "oh China reduced emissions by 1% this year" but it turns out they only reduced the rate of emission growth by 1%. So I'll believe they are reducing emissions when I see it.

Also its fair to bring them up, they are responsible for 36% of the worlds pollution and hold the lowest environmental standards in the 1st world. Without them working to combat this issue its pointless for anyone else to try.
by b450 | 2026-03-10 18:50:11+00:00
This kind of view tends to logically conclude in the idea of a noumenal, unknowable reality. I think it's more reasonable to say that truth itself is gold star we award to descriptions that suit our purposes. After all, descriptions are necessarily approximations (or reductive or "compressions"), since the only model of a thing with 100% fidelity is... the thing itself.
by j45 | 2026-03-10 18:50:12+00:00
"Apple M3 or later required. MetalRT uses Metal 3.1 GPU features available on M3, M3 Pro, M3 Max, M4, and later chips. M1/M2 support is coming soon. On M1/M2, RCLI automatically falls back to the open-source llama.cpp engine."
by red-iron-pine | 2026-03-10 18:50:14+00:00
> We’ve gotten used to aiming for great, even if we often only hit functional.

bro how long have you been a dev or in IT? there is so much crap out there already. AI is only gonna make it worse.

Amazon having these problems is especially bad since so much of their own, as well as other's, infra lives on those systems.
by hkonte | 2026-03-10 18:50:28+00:00
Schema validation + retries is a solid defensive layer. Worth also looking at the prompt side.

When output format is specified as a sentence inside a larger system prompt, the model treats it as one constraint among many. When it is an isolated, tagged block, compliance goes up. Most shape drift in production traces back to ambiguous or buried format instructions, not model inconsistency per se.

I built flompt (github.com/Nyrok/flompt) partly for this reason. It decomposes prompts into named semantic blocks including a dedicated output_format block. Cleaner prompt structure reduces the surface that needs validation in the first place.
by jjmarr | 2026-03-10 18:50:29+00:00
I coded a level 8 orchestration layer in CI for code review, two months before Claude launched theirs.

It's very powerful and agents can create dynamic microbenchmarks and evaluate what data structure to use for optimal performance, among other things.

I also have validation layers that trim hallucinations with handwritten linters.

I'd love to find people to network with. Right now this is a side project at work on top of writing test coverage for a factory. I don't have anyone to talk about this stuff with so it's sad when I see blog posts talking about "hype".
by txrx0000 | 2026-03-10 18:50:30+00:00
Don't give them an inch. The US defense budget is $1T. They can't spend it all on surveillance, but let's say the tech companies and the government spends that much every year combined. Our victory condition is to increase the cost of surveillance and deanonymization to >$10K per person per year, which is very doable. Every little habit and precaution you take against online tracking will raise the cost, probably a lot more than you think. Spreading the word multiplies that. Every open-source program and protocol spec that aims to decentralize and anonymize is like an incinerator for the surveillance dollars. And if you're more competent than that, you may consider following in the footsteps of Daniel Bernstein or Edward Snowden and make some trillion-dollar dents.

Anonymous and uncensored information exchange can prevent the vast majority of violent conflicts and shorten the necessary ones. Most violence in human history could have been prevented if every human being had 1) the ability to telepathically communicate with anyone else in the world without being eavesdropped, and 2) the ability to broadcast information anonymously to all of humanity in real-time. I will leave the details of why for you to deduce. These things are within reach right now for the first time in history. So we can and should build the decentralized web, and democratize the entire computing supply chain all the way down to chip fabbing and electricity generation. It is the greatest unrealized potential of the Internet, and we mustn't cede ground to ensure the path to that future remains open.
by SilverElfin | 2026-03-10 18:50:45+00:00
I don’t understand how this can be legal. Why can’t a shopping agent go act on my behalf? What right does Amazon have to block this, especially when it is well known that they scrape everyone else’s website to run their anti competitive pricing scheme?

> Amazon wrote in its original complaint that Perplexity’s agents posed security risks to customer data because they “can act within protected computer systems, including private customer accounts requiring a password.”

Is Amazon arguing that all agents are dangerous, when they are pushing agents all over the place in AWS?
by VLM | 2026-03-10 18:50:54+00:00
The purpose of a LLM ban is to encourage use of LLMs to submit PRs, not discourage. The longer term effect is to eliminate FOSS competency from the hiring process.

It takes some human effort to set up a slop generator. Have the slop generator make 100 buckets of slop, humans will work hard accepting or rejecting the buckets, somewhat less than 100 buckets will be approved, the payoff for the owner of the slop generator is now they have "verified FOSS developer contribution" on their resume which translates directly into job offers and salary. Its a profitable grift, profitable enough that the remaining humans are being flooded out. The ban makes successful submission to Redox even MORE valuable than before. They can expect infinite floods of PRs now that a successful PR "proves" that Redox thinks the human owner of the slop generator did the work and should therefore be offered more jobs, paid more, etc. Technically, they're hiring and paying based on ability to set up a slop generator which is not zero value, but not as valuable as being an Official Redox Contributor.

In the long run, this eliminates FOSS competency from the hiring process. Currently FOSS competency and coding experience indicates a certain amount, however minimal, of human skill and ability to work with others. Soon, it'll mean the person claiming to be a contributor has no problem violating orders and rules, such as the ones forbidding AI submissions, and it'll be a strong signal they actively work to subvert teams for their own financial reward and benefit. Which might actually be a hiring bullet point for corporate management in more dysfunctional orgs, but probably not help individual contributors get hired.