MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hrmtst93837 | 2026-03-06 06:32:10+00:00
I think claiming '100% positive' without explaining how you detect bitflips is a red flag, because credible evidence looks like ECC error counters and machine check events parsed by mcelog or rasdaemon, reproducible memtest86 failures, or software page checksums that mismatch at crash time.

Ask them to publish raw MCE and ECC dumps with timestamps correlated to crashes, or reproduce the failure with controlled fault injection or persistent checksums, because without that this reads like a hypothesis dressed up as a verdict.
by DoctorMckay101 | 2026-03-06 06:33:14+00:00
I was gifted my first computer, running Windows 95, at 11 years of age. By age 13 I was probably within the five people who better understood how to do stuff on a computer in my town. By age 16 I was making Pokemon hackroms, flash animations for newgrounds and translating manga for pirate sites in photoshop. By then I knew my entire life would be tied to computers somehow.

Now some 50-60yo politician who has never even created a folder in their desktop without help wants to dictate how I should have used my device?

Fuck'em
by ehnto | 2026-03-06 06:34:04+00:00
That was my insight also. As a manager, you already have the headcount approved, and your people just allegedly got some significant percentage more productive. The first thought shouldn't be, great let's cut costs, it should be great now we finally have the bandwidth to deliver faster.

On a macro level, if you were in a rising economic tide, you would still be hiring, and turning those productivity gains into more business.

I wonder what the parallels are to past automations. When part producing companies moved from manual mills to CNC mills, did they fire a bunch of people or did they make more parts?
by Cider9986 | 2026-03-06 06:34:27+00:00
The improvements in fruit over the years has improved my quality of life so much. If you have never tried a sumo citrus, I recommend it -- they are only in season till April iirc.

Benefits of sumo citrus:
Easy to peel
Pith does not remain attached to orange
Super juicy
Excellent taste and texture, balanced acid and sugar levels.

https://archive.is/wBogT
by arcfour | 2026-03-06 06:34:45+00:00
> In the government's view, by targeting this unique functional aspect of source code, rather than the content of the ideas that may be expressed therein, the export regulations manage to skirt entirely the concerns of the First Amendment. This argument is flawed for at least two reasons...

I think you should read it a bit more closely. The court threw out the "functional/expressive" argument for source code, like I said in my original comment.

Secondly, what are you talking about that source code is the most "convenient" way to implement this? It's the literal, only possible way to present an interface to a user, ask them a question, and "signal" to other applications if the user is a minor or not. You're being completely nonsensical there. There's no other way to do that: someone must write some code. The bill specifically says "an API"!
by tavavex | 2026-03-06 06:34:51+00:00
I feel like the F-91w is as much of a brand-driven symbol as the luxury watches. The F-91w has come to represent this scrappy, minimal, no-nonsense mentality - but it's not the cheapest watch you can get, and I don't think it's even the cheapest Casio anymore. It's more expensive than it used to be, so you need to go out of your way to pay more to get this specific model. Because customers know that people will recognize it, and that will better project the way they want to be seen.
by queenkjuul | 2026-03-06 06:35:21+00:00
Negotiations did halt it. Then Trump went back on the deal.

There's reports Iran agreed to limit themselves to only medical grade centrifuges as recently as last week.

And no, Iran does not have weapons capability to reach the US, period.

They fundamentally did not pose an imminent threat to the United States. A threat to American strategic goals is not an imminent threat to the American people.
by itisit | 2026-03-06 06:35:26+00:00
> How were they able to achieve such perfect recreation from monkey

Because the macaque study didn't decode faces from fMRI. They first used fMRI to locate the face patches, then used tungsten microelectrodes for single-unit electrophysiology to record spikes from individual face-selective neurons in ML/MF and AM. [0]

Single-unit recordings capture individual spike patterns at a resolution fMRI, which averages across hundreds of thousands of neurons per voxel, simply cannot provide.

[0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8088389
by salawat | 2026-03-06 06:36:25+00:00
Cool, and you're doing it on top of the single largest IP hijacking in the history of the world, a massive uptick in infra spend and energy burn to "just throw more compute" at it instead of figuring out how to throw "the right compute at it", cannibalization of the onboarding graduates, and losing having enough friction to keep you from running off after what's probably a bad idea on further analysis, because you can crank this out in a weekend. Last time somewhat did that, we got fucking JS. We still haven't rid ourselves of it.

Let us not lose sight of how we got here.
Knuth Tests using Claude Sonnet 4.6 problem 1.1.4
by daly | 2026-03-06 06:36:36+00:00
Knuth Art Of Computer Programming V1 p2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Algorithm E (Euclid's algorithm). Given two positive integers m and n,
find their greatest common divisor, that is, the largest positive integer
that evenly divides both m and n.

E1 [Find remained] Divide m by n and r be the remainder. (We will
know that 0 <= r < n)

E2 [Is it zero?] If r = 0, the algorithm terminates, n is the answer

E3 [Reduce] Set m = n, then n = r, then go back to step E1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Knuth Art Of Computer Programming V1 p9 Problem 1.1.4

[4] Using Algorithm E compute the greatest common divisor of 2166 and 6099.
Label each step of the algorithm as it is used.

========================================================================
Claude Sonnet 4.6
========================================================================

Starting with m = 2166, n = 6099:
E1: 2166 ÷ 6099 = 0 remainder 2166 → r = 2166
E2: r ≠ 0, continue
E3: m = 6099, n = 2166

E1: 6099 ÷ 2166 = 2 remainder 1767 → r = 1767
E2: r ≠ 0, continue
E3: m = 2166, n = 1767

E1: 2166 ÷ 1767 = 1 remainder 399 → r = 399
E2: r ≠ 0, continue
E3: m = 1767, n = 399

E1: 1767 ÷ 399 = 4 remainder 171 → r = 171
E2: r ≠ 0, continue
E3: m = 399, n = 171

E1: 399 ÷ 171 = 2 remainder 57 → r = 57
E2: r ≠ 0, continue
E3: m = 171, n = 57

E1: 171 ÷ 57 = 3 remainder 0 → r = 0
E2: r = 0, algorithm terminates
GCD(2166, 6099) = 57
by vlovich123 | 2026-03-06 06:37:22+00:00
Protobufs definitely doesn’t solve the problems described. Capnproto may solve it but I’m not 100% sure. JSON/XML/ASN.1 definitely don’t.

It’s like you listed a bunch of serialization technologies without grokking the problem outlined in the post doesn’t have much to do with rkyv itself.
by wtallis | 2026-03-06 06:37:23+00:00
> if they have reason to believe users are underage

The law requires "clear and convincing information", not merely "reason to believe". And since the law requires developers to rely on the provide age signal as the primary indicator of the user's age, developers are not incentivized to create a system that uses sophisticated data mining to derive an estimated age. If someone posts a comment on a YouTube video saying "I'm twelve years old and what is this?", that would absolutely not require YouTube to immediately start treating that account as an under-13 account.
by oorza | 2026-03-06 06:37:49+00:00
There's a certain amount of variance in the way that people utilize these agents. Put five people in a room and ask them to compose the same prompt and you have five distinct prompts. Couple this with the fact that models respond better/worse to certain prompts depending on the stylistic composition of the prompt itself. And since people tend to write in the same style, you'd get people who have more luck with one model over another, where one model happens to align more readily with their prompt style.

To wit, I have noticed that I tend to prefer Codex's output for planning and review, but Opus for implementation; this is inverted from others at work.
by angelina200 | 2026-03-06 06:38:01+00:00
Recently I got a problem with spending too much hours writing docs that describe our workflows, whether it's a how-to guide for a product user or a process walkthrough for a teammate.

And, what made it worse was that starting itself felt like a barrier, you open a blank doc, can't find the words, screenshot one step, write a sentence, get distracted, come back and have to re-orient yourself. So I was looking for a tool that could capture a workflow and convert it into written documentation automatically. Nothing quite fit, so my friend and I built video2docs.

You record your screen - just walk through the workflow like you'd show a colleague, and it breaks the screen recording into structured documentation automatically. Step titles, descriptions, screenshots pulled from the right moments.

The output is pretty accurate itself to use as a solid base, and if you need minor adjustments there's a built-in markdown editor to tweak wording or formatting. Reviewing and refining is much easier then starting from the scratch.

It's free to try, and we're actively looking for feedback, we'd love to hear what you think.
by vasco | 2026-03-06 06:38:16+00:00
This is the one thing that truly scares me. I've decided I'm not going to verify my age anywhere or use facial recognition apps to login anywhere. And this is a much bigger fear for my job than AI.

At the moment only some countries banning porn, social media and gambling. But how soon will I have to do it for a work app? And will I lose my job then if I refuse?
by justin66 | 2026-03-06 06:39:02+00:00
> ECC should have become standard around the time memories passed 1GB.

Ironically, that's around the time Intel started making it difficult to get ECC on desktop machines using their CPUs. The Pentium 3 and 440BX chipset, maxing out at 1GB, were probably the last combo where it pretty commonly worked with a normal desktop board and normal desktop processor.
by stopbulying | 2026-03-06 06:40:29+00:00
Accusation in a mirror https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusation_in_a_mirror

> The United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention (OSAPG) defines mirror politics as a "common strategy to create divisions by fabricating events whereby a person accuses others of what he or she does or wants to do", and includes it as a factor in their Analysis Framework
by krautburglar | 2026-03-06 06:41:18+00:00
The prostitutes pushing for this do not deserve words. They deserve ridicule, public humiliation, and worse. The computer is a tool. Whoever would encumber it is an obvious shill for the corporations (google/apple/microsoft) who would like to attach an identity (i.e. tolls and controls) to actions prior generations could do freely and without surcharge. It is a modern-day enclosure movement. Its proponents should be juicily spat upon.
by dragonwriter | 2026-03-06 06:41:41+00:00
> Given that LLMs were trained on the repository directly, it's not just the case that anything made by the LLM is a derivative work, the LLM ITSELF is a derivative work.

That’s not how “derivative works”, well, work.

First of all, a thing can only be a derivative work if it is itself an original work of authorship.

Otherwise, it might be (or contain) a complete copy or a partial copy of one or more source works (which, if it doesn't fall into a copyright exception, would still be a at least a potential violation), but its not a derivative work.
by idle_zealot | 2026-03-06 06:41:48+00:00
> No one should have to provide any personal details to use any general computing device

I agree. I also agree with S76 that some laws regarding how an operating system intended for wide use should function are acceptable. How would you react to this law if the requirement was only that the operating system had to ask the user what age bracket it should report to sites? You get to pick it, it isn't mandatory that it be checked, and it doesn't need to be a date, just the bucket. Is that still too onerous?

I ask because I feel like if we don't do something, the trajectory is that ~every website and app is going to either voluntarily or compulsorily do face scans, AI behavior analysis, and ID checks for their users, and I really don't want to live in that world.
by YZF | 2026-03-06 06:43:01+00:00
You're arguing semantics. The west refuses to recognize Taiwan as the legitimate government of China and refuses to recognize it as an independent country.

Whatever they claim, the west (and most of the world) due to Chinese leverage/power refuses to recognize.

Taiwan meets all the criteria for being a state. It controls land, population, it has a military, it has a government, currency, passports etc. etc. It's a de-facto country/state.
by QuercusMax | 2026-03-06 06:43:10+00:00
It feels very much like leading a team of junior engineers or even interns who are very fast but have no idea about why we're doing anything. You have to understand the problems you're trying to solve and describe the solutions in a way they can be implemented.

It's not going to be written exactly like you would do it, but that's ok - because you care about the results of the solution and not its precise implementation. At some point you have to make an engineering decision whether to write it yourself for critical bits or allow the agent/junior to get a good enough result.

You're reviewing the code and hand editing anyway, right? You understand the specs even if your agent/junior doesn't, so you can take credit even if you didn't physically write the code. It's the same thing.
by jacyro | 2026-03-06 06:43:22+00:00
Not exactly the best article. Proton complied with a lawful Swiss request. Their ToS clearly state what they can provide if requests are lawful.

The Proton user had bad opsec by using a credit card to pay for the account.

Had Proton just turned data over to an out of jurisdiction LEA, then it's more of a complaint. But they followed their policy and law here.

Proton offers a Tor address for accounts requiring anonymity rather than just privacy. The crux of this is on the account user
by tzs | 2026-03-06 06:43:30+00:00
The original sweeping plan that was blocked by the Supreme Court was blocked before it had forgiven any loans. They ruled it exceeded Presidential authority.

That was replaced by several programs. Lower courts issued an injunction to halt one of those, and the Supreme Court declined to lift those injunctions. There never was a ruling on the merits, and in late 2025 there was a settlement between the Department of Education and one of the states that has sued with DoE agreeing to end the program and move current borrowers from it to other programs.
by hananova | 2026-03-06 06:43:45+00:00
I can't fathom all the rage and confusion here about these laws. It's been a well-known effect since forever that when a government deems that something needs to be done, they'll go for the first "something-shaped" solution.

This all could've been avoided. Governments all over the world have been ringing the alarm bells about lack of self-regulation in tech and social media. And instead of doing even a minimum of regulation, anything to calm or assuage the governments, the entire industry went balls-to-the-wall "line go up" mode. We, collectively, only have ourselves to blame, and now it's too late.

If you look back, it didn't have to be this way:
- Governments told game publishers to find a system to handle age rating or else. The industry developed the ESRB (and other local systems), and no "or else" happened.
- Governments told phone and smart device manufacturers to collectively standardize on a charging standard, almost everyone agreed on USB-C and only many years later did the government step in and force the lone outlier to play ball. If that one hadn't been stubborn, there wouldn't have been a law.

The industry had a chance to do something practical, the industry chose not to, and now something impractical (but you better find a way anyway, or else) will be forced upon them. And I won't shed a tear for the poor companies finally having to do something.
by shevy-java | 2026-03-06 06:43:47+00:00
So this has recently also affected Ubuntu.

One developer began a discussion:

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2026-March/04...

Their attempts of a "solution" are quite interesting. One other user
suggested that GUI tools ask for the age of the user.

Well ... I have a very strong opinion here. I have been using Linux
since over 20 years and I will not ever give any information about
my personal data to the computer devices I own and control. So any
GUI asking for this specifically would betray me - and I will remove
it. (Granted, it is easier to patch out the offending betrayal code
and recompile the thing; I do this with KDE where Nate added the
pester-donation daemon. Don't complain about this on reddit #kde, he
will ban you. KDE needs more money! That's the new KDE. I prefer
oldschool KDE but I digress so back to the topic of age "verification").

The whole discussion about age "verification" appears to be to force
everyone into giving data to the government. I don't buy for a moment
that this is about "protecting children". And, even IF it were, I could
not care any less about the government's strategy. Even more so as I am
not in the country that decided this in the first place, so why would I
be forced to comply with it when it ends up with GUI tools wanting to
sniff my information and then give it to others? For similar reasons,
one reason I use ublock origin is to give as few information to outside
entities when I browse the web (I am not 100% consistent here, because
I mostly use ublock origin to re-define the user interface, which includes
blocking annoying popups and what not; that is the primary use case, but
to lessen the information my browser gives to anyone else, is also a good
thing. I fail to see why I would want to surrender my private data, unless
there is really no alternative, e. g. online financial transactions.)

I also don't think we should call this age "verification" law. This is very
clearly written by a lobbiyst or several lobbyists who want to sniff more
data off of people. The very underlying idea here is wrong - I would not
accept Linux to become a spy-tool for the government. I am not interested
in how a government tries to reason about this betrayal - none of those
attempts of "explanation" apply in my case. It is simply not the job of the
government to sniff after all people at all times. This would normally
require a warrant/reasonable suspicion of a crime. Why would people surrender
their rights here? Why is a government sniffing after people suddenly? These
are important questions. That law suddenly emerging but not in the last +25
years is super-suspicious.
by shevy-java | 2026-03-06 06:45:14+00:00
> We, collectively, only have ourselves to blame, and now it's too late.

Why would we have to be blamed for a law written by some lobbyists? That makes no sense at all. There are of course some folks that are in favour of this because "of the children" but their rationale does not apply to me nor to many other people. Why should they be able to force people to surrender their data, with the operating system becoming a sniffer giving out private data to everyone else? That makes no sense.
by synelabs | 2026-03-06 06:45:19+00:00
I'm an SDE with 1 YOE using AI tools heavily (doing "day's work" in ~2 hrs, perfect reviews). Spending most time on specs/review vs. raw coding. Worried I'm optimising short-term output over long-term skill development. Should I consider pivoting to AI/ML roles? Would love advice from anyone who's hired juniors in the current era.
by ssivark | 2026-03-06 06:45:36+00:00
To elaborate on @jeswin's point above (IDK why it got downvoted)... a data structure is basically like a cache for the processing algorithm. The business logic and algorithm needs will dictate what details can be computed on-the-fly -vs- pre-generated and stored (be it RAM or disk). Eg: if you're going to be searching a lot then it makes sense to augment the database with some kind of "index" for fast lookup. Or if you are repeatedly going to be pllotting some derived quantity then maybe it makes sense to derive that once and store with the struct.

It's not enough for a data structure to represent the "fundamental" degrees of freedom needed to model the situation; the algorithmic needs (vis-a-vis the available resources) most definitely matter a lot.
by rmast | 2026-03-06 06:45:47+00:00
I would imagine there must also be some aspect of uniqueness to it as well for even recognizing where a line of code came from… otherwise almost every Python script might have copied this line from a GPL licensed program:

`if __name__ == "__main__":`

I have no idea where that line first appeared, so figuring out what license it was originally written under would be difficult to track down, and most software only has license info at the file rather than line level.
by wtallis | 2026-03-06 06:46:21+00:00
It would be at least as valid a strategy to avoid collecting any unnecessary personal information about your users, so that you don't have to worry about whether the information you've amassed adds up to "internal clear and convincing information".

Remember, only the state AG can bring a suit under this law, and the penalty is limited to $2500 per child for negligent violations. It's probably cheaper to get insurance against such a judgement than to implement an invasive ID-scanning age verification system (and assume the risks of handling such highly-sensitive personal information).
by shevy-java | 2026-03-06 06:47:03+00:00
> Accessibility features for ADA

The problem is that the comparison falls flat. ADA does not sniff for birth date and surrender that data to others. One has to look at things at a cohesive unit, e. g. insecure bootloaders by Microsoft surrendering data to others. It seems as if they try to make computers spy-devices. That in itself is suspicious. Why should we support any such move? Some laws are clearly written by lobbyists.
by HerbManic | 2026-03-06 06:47:12+00:00
Everytime I hear 'Department of War', it just saddens me. Warfighter is the same.

"When the way prevails in the empire, fleet-footed horses are relegated to
ploughing the fields; when the way does not prevail in the empire, war-horses
breed on the border." Tao Te Ching chapter 46.
by logdahl | 2026-03-06 06:47:18+00:00
Strictly speaking, Isn't there still a way to express at least one Illegal string in ArchivedString? I'm not sure how to hint to the Rust compiler which values are illegal, but if the inline length (at most 15 characers) is aliased to the pointer string length (assume little-endian), wouldnt {ptr: null, len: 16} and {inline_data: {0...}, len: 16} both technically be an illegal value?

I'm not saying this is better than your solution, just curious :^)
by dragonwriter | 2026-03-06 06:47:29+00:00
Writing an API is not required by AB1043.

Providing an API is required if you do some other thing, but you are not required to do that other thing. Requirements that are triggered by engaging in some other activity are not compulsions if the activity they are triggered by is not compulsory. (Now, whether restricting the thing that triggers the requirement by adding the requirement is permissible is a legitimate question, but that is not the question that is addressed when you ignore the thing triggering the requirement and treat the requirement as a free-standing mandate.)