MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by adrian_b | 2026-03-10 12:49:30+00:00
I happen to not eat meat, but I still think that your bar is too high.

If those animals would not be grown by humans, it could still be said that in their natural conditions they are grown specifically to be killed at some time, since few animals die "of natural causes", instead of being killed either by predators or by parasites.

For examples, my grandparents grew chicken. There is no doubt that those chicken had a more pleasant life than any wild chicken. During the day, they roamed through a vast space with abundant vegetation, insects and worms, where they fed exactly like any wild chicken would do. They also received from time to time some grain supplement that was greatly appreciated. They were not permanently harassed and stressed by predators, as it would have happened in their natural environment.

From time to time, some chicken was caught and killed out of sight. This would shorten the lives of the chicken that were not left for egg laying, but in comparison with the lives of wild chicken, most of these domestic chicken would have still lived longer on average.

So I think that as long as domestic animals do not live worse than their wild ancestors, this can be called as a "humane way", even when they are grown with the purpose of eventually being killed. At least being grown by humans has ensured the survival of the species of domesticated animals, while all species of not very small non-domesticated terrestrial animals have been reduced to negligible numbers of individuals in comparison with humans and domestic animals and for most of them extinction is very likely.

Unfortunately, today it has become unlikely to see animals grown in such conditions, like at my grandparents. Most are grown in industrial farms in conditions that cannot be called anything else but continuous torture, and I despise the people who torture animals in order to increase their revenues.
by myrmidon | 2026-03-10 12:49:32+00:00
On the origin of OXCO (for oven controlled crystal oscillator):

The base abbreviation is "Xtal" (for crystal) and predates modern electronics by quite a bit (was already used before 1900 in geology etc). The author linking this to Xmas (indirectly, "Christ") via the the greek Chi (Χ) is very likely correct.

In electronics this weird abbreviation (X for crystal) is further helped by the fact that "C" is completely taken by "capacitor" (an even more important passive component).
by drob518 | 2026-03-10 12:50:19+00:00
Not specifically superior for text editing, but it has some specific capabilities that make it ideal for making an editing environment. Specifically, it’s great at incremental, dynamic loading of small code snippets. This allows development of Emacs code without having to recompile and restart all the time. In fact, the low-level core of Emacs (buffer manipulation code, regex execution, redisplay, etc.) is all in C. But then those C routines are strung together with Lisp to make up all the high level functionality. Having a dynamic, incremental language is really handy for that. Does it have to be Lisp? No, not necessarily. But Lisp is a great choice.
by nachocoll | 2026-03-10 12:50:37+00:00
The 300k line monorepo with 3-6 CLI agents running simultaneously across git worktrees is an interesting production deployment of multi-agent coding. Most discussions are about single-agent workflows; the coordination problems at multi-agent scale are different and less explored.

The key insight in your description is the worktree-per-agent isolation pattern. Without that isolation, agents would interfere with each other's changes unpredictably. With it, you get parallel throughput but the coordination overhead shifts to you — when do worktrees get merged? How do you handle when two agents modify overlapping code?

The Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto's concerns about accountability and traceability become especially important at multi-agent scale. "Every change has traceable intent" is harder to maintain when six agents are generating changes in parallel. The manifesto's argument would be that the investment in architectural constraints and explicit context for each agent is what prevents the throughput gains from creating an unmaintainable diff explosion.

Curious what your PR/merge workflow looks like — that seems like where the real complexity lives: https://agilevibecoding.org
by noisysilence | 2026-03-10 12:50:40+00:00
I'm a delivery manager with 18+ years in enterprise tech. I built SoWScanner to solve a problem I've had for years: vendor Statements of Work that look professional but contain vague deliverables, missing change control, and scope gaps that blow budgets.

The architecture separates two concerns:

1. AI extraction (Gemini 3 Flash) — reads the SOW and extracts structured factual observations: what's present, what's missing, what's vague. No scoring, no judgement.

2. Deterministic Python scoring engine — takes the extraction output and grades it across 8 categories using calibrated decision trees. No AI in the scoring loop at all.

Why the separation? Because LLMs are terrible at consistent scoring. They inflate scores, change their minds between runs, and can't explain their reasoning traceably. The deterministic engine solves all three problems — same input always produces the same score, and every score can be traced back to specific criteria.

Stack: React 19 frontend, FastAPI backend, Google Cloud Run, Cloudflare. Analysis takes about 30 seconds.

Free, no sign-up, documents are never stored: sowscanner.com

Happy to discuss the architecture, the scoring methodology, or the trade-offs involved.
by infecto | 2026-03-10 12:50:51+00:00
It depends how we are looking at the business. Absolutely at the end of the day a company is profitable or not but when thinking about inference, which is largely a commodity these days, you would first think about the marginal cost of it. That is your corner stone of the business. We have pretty clear indication that largely API tokens are being sold above the marginal cost. For especially a brand new business that’s critical and something that many unicorns never even hit.

Your right that all other costs are critical to measuring the profitability of the business but for such a young industry that’s the unknown. Does training get cheaper do we hit a theoretical limit on training. Are there further optimizations to be had.

You don’t have large capex in an industrial and then in year one argue that the business is doomed when your selling the product above the marginal cost but you have not recouped costs yet that have been capitalized.
by simedw | 2026-03-10 12:50:51+00:00
Agreed, it almost feels like we have a visual processing unit with special “opcodes” for operations like depth matching and pattern repetition.

The generator first needs a depth map, and then derives the repeating pattern from that.
A normal RGB image would be far too noisy; the fine texture variations would break the repetition needed for the brain to fuse the patterns correctly.
by blincoln | 2026-03-10 12:51:07+00:00
> Soldiers now can even see thermal figures through walls or solid materiales

I have a thermal imager. They can't see through walls in the sense you're imagining. If there's an electric heating element inside a wall or a ceiling, you could get an image of that. If there's a camera or other active electronics hidden in a wall or object, you can see the heat from that.

You wouldn't be able to see a person in an adjacent room through the wall between the two rooms, unless the wall was made specifically of thermally-transparent material.

I've heard rumours of "see through walls" equipment in the US military before. If they really have something like that, it would have to be using technology other than thermal imaging.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-03-10 12:51:10+00:00
Have you seen the quality of regular software though? And the failure rate of regular physical items? The only reason I trust aircraft is because of the process.

Consider if you will that if some guy were to fly a drone the size of a car that he knocked together in his garage over a residential area people would not accept that. Yet private pilots in cessnas fly over neighborhoods constantly.
by direwolf20 | 2026-03-10 12:51:11+00:00
Dependency tracking for security is like any other security work: the purpose is to create the perception of security, not actual security. You can sell the perception of security. You can't sell actual security. That's why every other corporation has a WAF now that doesn't block attacks but does block legitimate traffic, and how Cloudflare managed to create the world's biggest MITM without a single crime.
by lpcvoid | 2026-03-10 12:51:39+00:00
Because human errors are, well, human. And producing code that contains those errors is a human endeavor. It bases on years, decades of learning. Mistakes were made, experience was gained, skills were improved. Reasoning by humans is relatable.

Generating slop using LLMs takes seconds, has no human element, no work goes into it. Mistakes made by an LLM are excused without sincerity, without real learning, without consequence. I hate everything about that.
by simonw | 2026-03-10 12:52:17+00:00
> Well, there it is, the dumbest thing I'll read on the internet all week.

Rude.

In case you're open to learning, here's why I think this is useful.

The big lesson we've learned from Claude Code, Codex CLI et al over the past twelve months is that the most useful tool you can provide to an LLM is Bash.

Last year there was enormous buzz around MCP - Model Context Protocol. The idea was to provide a standard for wiring tools into LLMs, then thousands of such tools could bloom.

Claude Code demonstrated that a single tool - Bash - is actually much more interesting than dozens of specialized tools.

Want to edit files without rewriting the whole thing every time? Tell the agent to use sed or perl -e or python -c.

Look at the whole Skills idea. The way Skills work is you tell the LLM "if you need to create an Excel spreadsheet, go read this markdown file first and it will tell you how to run some extra scripts for Excel generation in the same folder". Example here: https://github.com/anthropics/skills/tree/main/skills/xlsx

That only works if you have a filesystem and Bash style tools for navigating it and reading and executing the files.

This is why I want Linux in WebAssembly. I'd like to be able to build LLM systems that can edit files, execute skills and generally do useful things without needing an entire locked down VM in cloud hosting somewhere just to run that application.

Here's an alternative swipe at this problem: Vercel have been reimplementing Bash and dozens of other common Unix tools in TypeScript purely to have an environment agents know how to use: https://github.com/vercel-labs/just-bash

I'd rather run a 10MB WASM bundle with a full existing Linux build in then reimplement it all in TypeScript, personally.
by khambir | 2026-03-10 12:52:18+00:00
Last month, I shipped a feature in three hours that would have taken me two days before. Did I close my laptop early? No. I just picked up the next task from the backlog.

Everyone online is talking about productivity. A thousand prompts that will change your life. How AI rewrote someone's workflow. How what used to take two days now takes two hours. It's everywhere, and it's loud.

I want to ask one simple question: Are you actually working less?

Because I'm not, and I know why.
by samrus | 2026-03-10 12:52:45+00:00
Whats the first L stand for? Thats not just vestogial, their model of the world is formed almost exclusively from language rather than a range of things contributing significantly like for humans.

The biggest thing thats missing is actual feedback to their decisions. They have no "idea of that because transformers and embeddings dont model that yet. And langiage descriptions and image representations of feedback arent enough. They are too disjointed. It needs more
by itigges22 | 2026-03-10 12:52:48+00:00
I very much understand the pain of a broken homelab/ proxmox setup! Has made me want to do something similar for a while! I have dealt with old RAM crashing, PSUs going out, HDD's breaking, Proxmox Kernel Panic (idk how, but it happened for me). Having something that allows me to redeploy with a single command is amazing.
by ferd | 2026-03-10 12:54:04+00:00
yes! don't remember my number, Zone 4 for sure (Argentina).

Exchanging messages with people on the other side of the world felt like magic at the time (even though it took many hours/days for a msg to round-trip)

I also run "Sudaka's BBS" based on Maximus/2, with many interactive "apps" I'd developed using Maximus' proprietary C-like language. Great high-school times.

I can still hear my parents complaining about my monopolizing the phone line every night :-)
by robertandrewp | 2026-03-10 12:54:16+00:00
Working as an accountant in a services industry, inventory has been the thorn in my side. The ERP package that I manage and work on daily has some limitations on inventory control, possibly a signal to change packages, but other than the inventory issue, it serves 100% of my needs. Currently working with various AI platforms to see what functionality can be built to intergrate or at least make the month-end figures worthwhile. it's been challenging, but it's doable.
by abustamam | 2026-03-10 12:54:16+00:00
Insults aside, you chose a very expensive way to solve the attribution problem. But my rebuttal is simple: we are literally commenting in a thread about an AI image generator that paid people. It didn't work, but if a company I've never heard of can try an experiment like this, I'm sure our billion dollar AI overlords could if they wanted to.
by lejalv | 2026-03-10 12:54:26+00:00
A simple back of the envelope calculation shows that Felix causes between 70 and 110 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year just from flying.

Paris accord says 1.5t per person per year, from all activities, Felix's flying alonre is ~10-15x current European yearly per person emissions and ~50-75x those compatible with +1.5C.
by palata | 2026-03-10 12:54:31+00:00
You talk as if you had scientific proof that literate programming is objectively better, and I was the weirdo contradicting it without bringing any scientific proof.

Fact is, you don't have any proof at all, you just have your intuition and experience. And I have mine.

> It also says nothing about the clearly demonstrated value of redundancy.

Clearly demonstrated, as in your example of "Calculate the sum of one and one"? I wouldn't call that a clear demonstration.

> This is gatekeeping code by making it less understandable

I don't feel like I am making it less understandable. My opinion is that a professional worker should have the required level of competence (otherwise they are not a professional in that field). In software engineering, we feed code to a compiler, and we trust that the compiler makes sure that the machine executes the code we write. The role of the software engineer is to understand that code.

Literate programming essentially says "I am incapable of writing code that is understandable, ever, so I always need to explain it in a natural language". Or "I am incapable of reading code, so I need it explained in a natural language". My experience is that good code is readable by competent software engineers without explaining everything. But not only that: code is more readable when it is more concise and not littered with comments.

> and essentially an admission that code with comments is easier to understand.

I disagree again. Code with comment is easier to understand for the people who cannot understand it without the comments. Now the question is, again: are those people competent to handle code professionally? Because if they don't understand the code without comments, many times they will just have to trust the comments. If they used the comments to actually understand the code, pretty quickly they would be competent enough to not require the comments. Which means that at the point where they need it, they are not yet professionals, but rather apprentices.
by wartywhoa23 | 2026-03-10 12:54:52+00:00
Greetings from a Russian, still friendly despite all the political shitshow :)

We've spent so many nights with my friend (15 yo in 1996, the peak FidoNet) connecting to BBSes over phone modem, soaking up all the Fido lore, humour and lingo, dreaming of obtaining us a .point for ourselves somehow. To that end, we visited a number of local "sysopkas" and "pointovkas" (sysop/point parties), making friends with actual point owners who gathered in a local park to booze some and have fun.

What a blessed time it was! The future seemed spotless and bright...
by nachocoll | 2026-03-10 12:55:04+00:00
The commit-to-conversation linkage in Agentlore is the feature that matters most. Every review of AI-assisted code has the same problem: the diff shows what changed, but not why, and not what the agent was doing when it generated that specific change. Without the conversation log linked to the commit, you're reviewing output without context.

"Context stops disappearing" is exactly the right framing. Right now, the tacit knowledge about how a piece of code was generated — what the developer was trying to accomplish, what alternatives the agent suggested, what the developer rejected and why — evaporates when the session ends. It's a systematic loss of institutional knowledge.

The Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto makes "traceable intent over opaque implementation" a core value precisely because this is the critical accountability gap in most AI coding workflows. Agentlore is filling that gap at the session level. The aspirational version of this is every AI-generated change in a PR having a linked, reviewable conversation that explains the intent.

The "people can learn from each other" use case might end up being as valuable as the review use case: https://agilevibecoding.org
by felipemayamuniz | 2026-03-10 12:55:06+00:00
I trained a 354M decoder-only LLM called AletheionLLM-v2 on 1 billion tokens using a geometric cognitive architecture called ATIC (Adaptive Turing Intelligence Cognition), which adds per-token uncertainty quantification via a 5D Riemannian manifold and 14 loss functions including epistemic tomography.
Evaluated on WikiText-103 (OOD, not seen during training):
ECE: 0.0176 vs 0.0236 (GPT-2 Medium) and 0.0241 (OPT-350M)
Brier Score: 0.1528 vs 0.1618 (GPT-2 Medium) and 0.1595 (OPT-350M)
The perplexity is higher, which is expected on OOD data. The calibration improvement is the point.
Trained solo on 5x H200 via RunPod. AGPL-3.0.
Repo: github.com/gnai-creator/aletheion-llm-v2
Paper: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11471.14241
by NikolaNovak | 2026-03-10 12:55:06+00:00
Yes, and, op's point stands.

I am one of those people: 1. Absolutely despise the lightroom being subscription and 2. Haven't switched yet.

There are moats and capabilities and friction. Not every vote with your wallet is a ringing endorsement. I have 15 years of lightroom databases over 100k photos so switching is hard. At the same time those are from the time I did a photography side gig, now I don't so monthly cost for no monthly gains really peeves me.

So it absolutely is a successful business decision and it absolutely is widely despised by customer base. Both are true :-)
by nachocoll | 2026-03-10 12:55:11+00:00
The "archivist agent that never writes code, just indexes the entire repo on every push" is the most interesting part of this system. It solves the context-grepping problem — agents burning tokens trying to understand codebase structure before they can do useful work — by making structural knowledge a queryable service rather than a repeated scanning task.

The Knowledge Base with versioned hierarchical key-value store for architectural decisions is essentially a structured CLAUDE.md on steroids. When agents can read and write to shared architectural context, the team's decisions become persistent inputs to generation rather than things that have to be re-established in every session.

The Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto's principle that "context is explicit and versioned" directly addresses the problem you're solving. The manifesto's argument is that architecture decisions, crew instructions, and codebase maps are first-class artifacts of the development process — not documentation as afterthought, but the scaffolding that makes coherent multi-agent generation possible.

The cross-machine P2P coordination is fascinating — what happens when two agents on different machines make conflicting architectural decisions and try to write them back: https://agilevibecoding.org
by somat | 2026-03-10 12:55:19+00:00
I am less sure about the others (capsicum, seccomp) but the threat model for opebsd's pledge is not that you don't trust the process, you do trust the process, otherwise you would not be running it. The threat pledge is trying to solve is where if the process gets corrupted by a malicious agent while it is running the fallout is minimal. Under this threat model the process notifies the kernel to shed capabilities as soon as it no longer needs them. something that can only be done in process.

Openbsd had a neat external syscall sandboxing system at one point (systrace ) it was removed for reasons I don't fully understand. But I think it boils down to "optional security isn't". hard to maintain, problematic, external policies, the first thing you do is disable them (cough selinux cough)
by danabramov | 2026-03-10 12:55:47+00:00
This isn’t Mastodon so a “Bluesky server” isn’t a thing.

Mastodon is shaped like email so you have “servers” sending messages to each other.

Atproto is shaped more like RSS with aggregation. Everyone posts data to their hosting (which anyone could move at any time), and apps like Bluesky aggregate data from everyone’s hosting.

So a concept like “Bluesky server” is nonsensical. What you have is “atproto hosting” (which can be provided by Bluesky, by other communities, by other companies, or can be self-hosted — it’s all open source and you can even implement your own) and “Bluesky app” (of which there’s only one — but there are forks like Blacksky which fork the entire stack including the server). There also “other atproto apps” like https://leaflet.pub, https://tangled.org, etc, which have nothing to do with Bluesky.
by b112 | 2026-03-10 12:55:53+00:00
PunterNet, the C64 BBS by Steve Punter, was far more popular for a time. The C64 was the most sold computer of all time, and may still be.

It wasn't until later that clones existed and became popular, and then FidoNet dwarfed PunterNet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_64

It has been listed in the Guinness World Records as the best-selling desktop computer model of all time.

I used to run a board. Was beyond fun.
by znpy | 2026-03-10 12:55:56+00:00
> EMACS' GC and 'real time ATC' concepts are absolutely anthagonic

it might not be the case.

"real time" is often a very misunderstood concept. most things can be "real time" depending on the context.

"real time" really just means that the timeframe the control system takes to react is shorter than the time frame the controlled system takes to change state (for any sufficiently vague definition of "change").

so even if a GC cycle in emacs took, say, 200 msec, it could have still been completely fine as long as the "stuff" more less than, say, every 500 msec (the numbers here are completely bogus).

not to mention, many programming environments where memory is usually managed and garbage-collected also do offer some way to do varying degrees of manual memory management, if you want to. that might have been the case.

and as of last resort... you could always manage memory outside of the programming language runtime.