MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by TeamDman | 2026-03-08 05:58:06+00:00
I use Rust for command line applications.

I find that CLI is a great way to model problems. When I find myself doing something that has graduated beyond a comfortable amount of PowerShell, Rust is there for me.

I have a template I've been evolving so it's super easy to get started with something new; I just copy the template and slam Copilot with some rough ideas on what I want and it works out.

https://github.com/teamdman/teamy-rust-cli

Just today used it to replace a GitHub stats readme svg generator thing that someone else made that was no longer working properly.

https://github.com/TeamDman/teamy-github-readme-stats

Decomposes the problem very nicely into incrementally achievable steps

1. `fetch <username>` to get info from github into a cache location
2. `generate <username> <output.svg>` to load stats and write an svg
3. `serve` to run a webserver to accept GET requests containing the username to do the above

Means that my stuff always has `--help` and `--version` behaviours too
by anonymous908213 | 2026-03-08 05:58:40+00:00
> wasting time reinventing the wheel

It's always funny to me that this metaphor is used to indicate a bad thing, but re-inventing the wheel is actually very valuable. Note that our vehicles do not run on stone wheels. Thank goodness we kept re-inventing wheels that were more suitable for our specific use cases! This metaphor is, therefore, exactly apt for describing off-the-shelf game engines. All of the big open-source game engines are heavy and make a ton of decisions for you that will not be optimal for your specific game, because they make generalized decisions necessary to support all kinds of games. This does save you time, and you can absolutely make games that are good enough with them, but it's ridiculous to me to describe making your own engine as wasting time. It's spending time to gain a benefit, which is a trade-off that is worth it for some and not necessary for others.
by hooch | 2026-03-08 05:58:48+00:00
Changed into a directory recently and fired up the qwen code CLI and gave it two prompts: "so what's this then?" - to which it had a good summary across stack and product, and then "think you can find something todo in the TODO?" - and while I was busy in Claude Code on another project, it neatly finished three HTML & CSS tasks - that I had been procrastinating on for weeks.

This was a qwen3-coder-next 35B model on M4 Max with 64GB which seems to be 51GB size according to ollama. Have not yet tried the variants from the TFA.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-03-08 05:59:19+00:00
> Iran did suspend the nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. What happened to that deal again?

It got torn up, which is a shame. That said, Tehran made the choices to (a) resume work on a nuclear weapon, (b) endorse Hamas and the October 7 attacks, (c) half ass their negotiations in Geneva and now (d) attack all of their neighbors.

Those were major miscalculations. Layered on top of lots of little ones, e.g. ordering Hezbollah to blow its armory on symbolic rocket attacks. The JCPoA was a good deal. That doesn't make the current regime in Iran a smart actor.
by gfody | 2026-03-08 06:01:14+00:00
> I wonder what the best way is to handle this disparity for international software. It seems like either you punish the Latin alphabets, or the others.

there are over a million codepoints in unicode, thousands for latin and other language agnostic symbols emojis etc. utf-8 is designed to be backwards compatible with ascii, not to efficiently encode all of unicode. utf-16 is the reasonably efficient compromise for native unicode applications hence it being the internal format of strings in C# and sql server and such.

the folks bleating about utf-8 being the best choice make the same mistake as the "utf-8 everywhere manifesto" guys: stats skewed by a web/american-centric bias - sure utf-8 is more efficient when your text is 99% markup and generally devoid of non-latin scripts, the rest of world can go fuck themselves optimize for that!
by bediger4000 | 2026-03-08 06:01:28+00:00
Interesting question. We also heard about how "apps" were going to disappear, and we'd have an "AI" driven slurry that configured itself intelligently to whatever the task at hand required. Or in the alternative, a flood of really great and helpful "apps" would flood app stores, all vibe coded by non-technical people who had really great ideas. I myself wonder why we still have compilers, VMs and interpreters. Shouldn't "AI" produce a kind of object oriented, strictly typed, functional, array language PHP, where a developer could write whatever kind of syntax(es) in whatever mode. "AI" would just figure it out on the fly.

The answer to all of this not happening is that "AI" isn't that good, of course, and we're being sold a bill of goods.
We professional C-suites, lost the battle against vibe-leadership?
by Bridged7756 | 2026-03-08 06:02:14+00:00
I'm a Chief Operating Officer with 18 years of P&L ownership across four verticals. Eight months ago I was separated when shareholders made the decision that two agent driven autonomous systems could absorb our entire executive layer. Since then I've submitted over a hundred applications. I'm currently working at McDonald's as a Chief Food Readiness Officer (burger flipper) to maintain baseline personal operational overhead while I do it.

Every interview I land follows the same script. They ask how I approach ambiguity and organizational transformation. I walk them through my framework. You can see it on their faces, they're not looking for that skill set anymore. I don't advance. One agentic based talent acquisition lead told me directly: "The executive function is a legacy role. Your MBA is a liability at this point."

I know over 200 senior executives in the same position; Chief Revenue Officers, Chief People Officers, people with decade-long track records and full P&L accountability, all grinding through the same pipeline stall. Some are doing what I'm doing. Others have stopped looking.

Two physically-deployed agent nodes with verticalized agent stacks, absorbed the scope of twelve executive functions. Companies have fully committed to that architecture.

What bothers me most is that nobody in a technical position is absorbing the consequences of this decision. The engineers implementing those new features from the bottom-up aren't the ones flipping burgers. We're not ready for what's coming and what's visible right now is just the beginning.
by pcloadlett3r | 2026-03-08 06:03:04+00:00
Will the TLA+ spec Claude spits out do what the users actually desire? Will there be human oversight of the spec? If not, I don't see how it really helps if the future human machine interface is supposed to be loosey goosey natural language. The best thing I can conceive is some human observers of the system saying "Claude, the behavior as it stands now is perfect! Set it in stone with TLA+." But this whimsical idea has many problems.
by redhanuman | 2026-03-08 06:03:06+00:00
built my first Go project last month. never wrote a line of Go before that the agent just picked it because it compiled fast and shipped clean and Python kept slowing things down.
Wes is right that the ergonomics argument fades when you're not the one typing. but the ecosystem moat cuts both ways now all that Python tooling was built for humans to navigate not agents iterating at 100x the moat might become the trap.
by moqizhengz | 2026-03-08 06:03:21+00:00
Running 3.5 9B on my ASUS 5070ti 16G with lm studio gives a stable ~100 tok/s.
This outperforms the majority of online llm services and the actual quality of output matches the benchmark.
This model is really something, first time ever having usable model on consumer-grade hardware.
by darth_avocado | 2026-03-08 06:03:37+00:00
> AI-based job displacement will do wonders for raising class consciousness when it's too late.

You can’t raise class awareness in other professions that have been undergoing job displacement for decades. Good luck trying to do it among software engineers where self worth rides high and empathy is non existent. They will still be arguing on HN that unionization is a bad idea.
by iFire | 2026-03-08 06:03:51+00:00
Agree.

I don't write for sentimentality. I write so that my code designs can survive longer than my work on it.

No documentation is worse than deceit.

The emptiness and vastness of the void (entropy) is much deeper than humans or machines.

Google search says this philosphy is called https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/content-externalism/
by redhanuman | 2026-03-08 06:05:09+00:00
the three questions he describes where did this output come from, what did it cost was it any good are the exact questions that kill you in week two of production nd the demo never surfaces them because demos dont hve billing alerts or angry users.
the part most people skip is evaluation tracing and cost metering feel urgent because they show up as incidents bad outputs just look like user error until they dont.
by inkyoto | 2026-03-08 06:05:29+00:00
> In Linux the default swap behaviour is to also swap out the memory mapped to the executable file, not just memory allocated by the process […] I believe both Windows and macOS don't swap out code pages, so the applications remain responsive, at the of (potentially) lower swap efficiency

Linux does not page out code pages into the swap. You might be conflating page reclamation with swapping instead.

In Linux, executable «.text» pages are mapped[0] as file-backed pages, not anonymous memory, so when the kernel needs to reclaim RAM it normally drops those pages and reloads them from the executable file on the next page fault once they are accessed again (i.e. on demand) rather than writing them to swap.

In this particular regard, Linux is no different from any other modern UNIX[1] kernel (*BSD, Solaris, AIX and may others).

[0] Via mmap(2) in argv[0], essentially.

[1] Modern UNIX is mid-1990's and onwards.
by tipoffdosage904 | 2026-03-08 06:06:18+00:00
My workflow for building side projects and work tools with AI coding agents that actually survive past the first month. Covers model choices (Claude Opus, Codex, Qwen), a docs-first approach (PITCH/ARCHITECTURE/IMPLEMENTATION), guardrails, context management via slash commands, and what I stopped using (MCP servers, multi-agent teams, instruction files). Includes dogfooding results — what shipped and what broke.
by kalkin | 2026-03-08 06:06:24+00:00
I'm willing to believe this but the explanation given in the article doesn't make sense to me:

> When Random House was a tiny independent company, it could make a tidy profit by publishing books that sold just ten thousand copies. But when you’re part of a billion dollar corporation, those books don’t move the needle—you need something bigger and splashier.

What? There's no rule that every item sold by a megacorp has to "move the needle." If I order some unscented shampoo from Amazon that doesn't move the needle for Bezos, and neither do all the orders for that particular brand put together.
by shermantanktop | 2026-03-08 06:06:57+00:00
Wherever you work, are there embarrassing experiences that your organization ships?

If so, why didn’t you personally fix them so that nobody could associate you as an individual with a broken CX?

If not, please let me know where to apply, because that sounds like a unicorn organization.

Humans in large groups do amazing and crappy things at the same time. Playing gotcha with someone’s resume is a shitty thing to do.
by ofrzeta | 2026-03-08 06:07:29+00:00
It depends on what we define as progress. At times nuclear power was considered progress while it's no longer now (at least to that extent). Why couldn't we consider a society with less technology as progressive? Learning that less reliance on technology makes us more resilient as individuals and as a society. Obviously there are areas where we didn't want to downscale such as medical care. But there's a lot of technological progress that does not contribute much value to society in general but to concentrate wealth in the hand of a few people.

EDIT: also so-called "breaking your back" has the same effect as going to the gym. Sure I am aware that there are really back-breaking jobs and they should be helped by machines. But there's no rule to say that the helping machines need to to all of the work. A moderate amount of physical work is just beneficial to everyone.
by tehlike | 2026-03-08 06:07:49+00:00
Building is half the battle. Knowing what to build is the other half.

Most IC6/7+ would not code anyways - in fact a friend of mine said "we had our own agents we just called them IC4/5" - which was ironic but funny.

I am curious if we would ever get a new programming language like rust or go, without this creativity.

In a way, we have different products that does more or less same things (postgres vs mysql for example). The reason is there's difference of thought in the process. I doubt this will go away.
by redhanuman | 2026-03-08 06:10:51+00:00
the docs-first approach is the part most people skip everyone wants to jump straight to prompting but without a PITCH.md or equivalent, the agent has no north star and you spend half your time correcting drift instead of building
the context save/restore slash commands are underrated too losing context mid-session and having to re-explain the whole codebase is where most of my time used to go.
by names_are_hard | 2026-03-08 06:10:58+00:00
It really wasn't rocket science. Even I packed my go bag and loaded up the car on Friday night, and I have no information they don't share on the news. (I live in Israel, and when the first siren woke me at ~8 on Saturday morning I jumped in the car and evacuated to a family member who lives in a building with a bomb shelter)

I could've been wrong, but it was a reasonable guess. The local Israeli news anchors were in the newsroom broadcasting within minutes of the attack going public, I guess they slept in the office with their clothes on too.
by rkuodys | 2026-03-08 06:12:05+00:00
I think its somewhat comparable to cutting grass in the cities.

It was manual labour first. Then there were teactors. Now robots join in - does that mean that personel cutting grass is obsolete? No , you need all of them. That means that city becomes nicer.

With software and AI I somehow feel the same will happen. How many features have you skipped just because it would help some niche set of users and PM or Management would not approve the spending. It is low priority. Or bugs that were annoying but financially not bringing much value.

I hope switching some work to AI , some companies will capture opportunity to make software better while others will make the same software cheaper
by petre | 2026-03-08 06:12:23+00:00
That's exactly what the Iranian fireign minister said.

"The fact is that we don’t have any positive experience of negotiating with the United States. You know, especially with this administration. We negotiated twice last year and this year, and then in the middle of negotiations, they attacked us," Araghchi said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/iran-foreign-minister-int...

To add insult to injury, the US also sent two clowns, Witkoff and Kushner, to negotiate, so it was quite obvious the negotiations would fail.
by alex_dev42 | 2026-03-08 06:12:57+00:00
Excellent points about the initialization order fiasco. I've been bitten by this in embedded systems where startup timing is critical.

One thing I'd add: the guard overhead can actually matter in high-frequency scenarios. I once profiled a logging singleton that was called millions of times per second in a real-time system - the atomic check was showing up as ~3% CPU. But your point stands: if you're hitting that bottleneck, you probably want to reconsider the architecture entirely.

The lazy initialization guarantee is usually worth more than the performance gain, especially since most singletons aren't accessed in tight loops. The static member approach feels like premature optimization unless you've actually measured the guard overhead in your specific use case.
by Retric | 2026-03-08 06:15:19+00:00
501(c)(3) is just one of 29 types of non profits defined by the IRS. Many non-profits aren’t charities and some of them can even distribute profits.

501(c)(7) IE non profit social club for example could be just about anything from knitting circle to a S&M sex club. Have that club buy property and then at some point in the future sell that property at a profit which is then distributed to those members.
by jsLavaGoat | 2026-03-08 06:16:14+00:00
Yes, it is US-centric. You all act like that many commercial websites are just like automatically doing international business. I am not even allowed to do business out of my state. I don't even need that filled in. You can see my website anywhere, but you can't be my client unless you're in my state. So I don't care.

Any company able to do business in multiple jurisdictions, well, that's just the kind of extra thing they can handle.

For an enormous amount of sites and for an enormous amount of users this is an improvement and the general reaction here is nitpicking and this self-evident charge that it's US-centric. So what. The principle would apply in most places.

In Costa Rica, there are no addresses but there are (now) post codes. You would have to take that into account to do business there. If this doesn't apply to you then it doesn't apply to you.

It's not like the internal US market is small. This solves a problem for a lot of people in a lot of cases.
by roywiggins | 2026-03-08 06:16:15+00:00
It was on the BBC front page by March 2nd, two days after it happened, probably less than 48 hours.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260302041747/https://www.bbc.c...

The NYT had coverage the day of.

https://archive.ph/CdT2X

You can see it on the front page in their "Live" coverage at the time:

https://archive.ph/sYqKl
by inder1 | 2026-03-08 06:16:22+00:00
The "K-shaped workforce" framing is real and probably underappreciated. Senior engineers get more out of AI because they can evaluate the output, catch the architectural mistakes, and debug the edge cases. Juniors using AI to write code they can't read aren't building the debugging instinct that makes senior engineers valuable. That gap compounds over 2-3 years. The question isn't whether to use AI. It's whether you're actually understanding what it produces.
by deaux | 2026-03-08 06:16:22+00:00
Not from people using that same phrasing twice within a few sentences.

"""
No warning. No traffic spike. Just… more money gone.

That’s when I finally looked at Hetzner.

I’ve seen too many backend systems fail for the same reasons — and too many teams learn the hard way.

So I turned those incidents into a practical field manual:
real failures, root causes, fixes, and prevention systems.

No theory. No fluff. Just production.
"""

It's clearly slop, they immediately use effectively the same one again:

"""
That last line isn’t a joke. There were charges I genuinely couldn’t explain. Elastic IPs we forgot to release. Snapshots from instances that no longer existed. CloudFront distributions someone set up for testing.
"""

No, human writers don't repeat this pattern every single paragraph. They use it at most across in a whole article.
by georgemcbay | 2026-03-08 06:16:51+00:00
> I know a lot of people working across portfolio management and tax accounting. Nobody I know of is using LLMs much and frankly their management has started to back-off pushing it more in the workplace.

I could say the same thing for software engineers I know as recently as the middle of last year, things can change very quickly.

Up until about December 2025 the fact that LLMs would replace us all (SWEs) was the punchline to a joke for most working developers I know. But most of the ones I know aren't laughing anymore, unless its a nervous laugh.

LLMs may (likely will) disrupt software developers first, but I don't think we are particularly unique and I don't see any reason why the same risks won't spread to virtually all knowledge work, especially if executives in those fields see a significant amount of SWEs being replaced by LLMs as an initial test case.
by alex_dev42 | 2026-03-08 06:16:54+00:00
Good point about compile time. Template metaprogramming can definitely impact build performance, especially with recursive template instantiation.

From what I've seen in the repo, this approach might actually help with compile times in the long run. The Lisp-style syntax could enable better template caching and memoization strategies compared to the nested template<template<...>> patterns we usually see. Plus, cleaner metaprogramming code means developers are less likely to write deeply nested recursive templates that blow up compile times.

Would be interesting to see some benchmarks comparing compile times for equivalent functionality written in traditional C++ template style vs this approach.
by charcircuit | 2026-03-08 06:17:16+00:00
>he world has come to agreement

No, it hasn't. I commonly use PT myself which doesn't fit that format. It's the timezone that the west coast of America uses which makes it very convenient if you live there instead of having to remember if the day your meeting on is with or without daylight savings. The three timezones we use here are:

PT: The time of the day that all of our clocks are going to be set to.

PST: The time when daylight savings is not active.

PDT: The time when daylight savings is active.
by slopinthebag | 2026-03-08 06:17:58+00:00
Maybe, but I still think it's an odd moral boundary to cross. You might feel as though it's fine to spy on Chinese citizens because of the relationship the US and China have, but what about Canadians or Australians or the Brits or any other NATO country? I get it might feel different, but is that really a hard moral line in the sand you refuse to crosss? Idk.
by ritlo | 2026-03-08 06:18:13+00:00
Writing against libretro, I think you’d basically just draw on whatever surface libretro provided you. In retroarch booting on the Lakka distro (for example) this would ultimately draw using Linux Direct Rendering Modules (no X or Wayland). Last I checked that distro could cold-boot into Retorarch ready to accept input, on an RPi2, faster than most modern TVs wake from sleep, which is nice (I wanna say it was under 3 seconds). But you wouldn’t have a windowing system, you’d need something that could draw buttons or menus or something on a surface. Libretro’d also take care of mapping input, but you’d still have to handle it. Not sure if it provides a network interface or if you have to reach outside it for that.

Aside from most emulators of note having been released as a libretro “core”, the sole non-game core I’m aware of is some kind of ffmpeg video player. If things like 3d console emulators and ffmpeg can draw to the surface that libretro provides, doesn’t seem like it should be insurmountable to get something like WebKit rendering content there (I briefly looked into doing this with Firefox years ago but found it’s hellish to embed—chrome’s a little better, but it’s chrome and heavy as hell. WebKit seems to me like the most promising engine for such a project, lighter than the other two and relatively embedding-friendly). Get that working, and the main remaining hurdle would be getting an overlay modal menu or something like that working to allow interaction and drive the engine.
by Gud | 2026-03-08 06:18:20+00:00
1. Thanks for the kind words!

2. The original version had a toggle for this, I dropped it to simplify development. Will return the feature for sure

3. I just trying to keep a record of sorts what the fuck is going on in the world. Originally it was more of a long form blog with original content. My plan is to have a mix with short news updates and long form opinion pieces.

4. good suggestion

5. good suggestion