MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tux3 | 2026-03-05 18:24:25+00:00
See the public phab ticket: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T419143

In short, a Wikimedia Foundation account was doing some sort of test which involved loading a large number of user scripts. They decided to just start loading random user scripts, instead of creating some just for this test.

The user who ran this test is a Staff Security Engineer at WMF, and naturally they decided to do this test under their highly-privileged Wikimedia Foundation staff account, which has permissions to edit the global CSS and JS that runs on every page.

One of those random scripts was a 2 year old malicious script from ruwiki. This script injects itself in the global Javascript on every page, and then in the userscripts of any user that runs into it, so it started spreading and doing damage really fast. This triggered tons of alerts, until the decision was made to turn the Wiki read-only.
by PaulHoule | 2026-03-05 18:25:01+00:00
APIs have never been a gift but rather have always been a take-away that lets you do less than you can with the web interface. It’s always been about drinking through a straw, paying NASA prices, and being limited in everything you can do.

But people are intimidated by the complexity of writing web crawlers because management has been so traumatized by the cost of making GUI applications that they couldn’t believe how cheap it is to write crawlers and scrapers…. Until LLMs came along, and changed the perceived economics and created a permission structure. [1]

AI is a threat to the “enshittification economy” because it lets us route around it.

[1] that high cost of GUI development is one reason why scrapers are cheap… there is a good chance that the scraper you wrote 8 years ago still works because (a) they can’t afford to change their site and (b) if they could afford to change their site changing anything substantial about it is likely to unrecoverably tank their Google rankings so they won’t. A.I. might change the mechanics of that now that you Google traffic is likely to go to zero no matter what you do.
by dlubarov | 2026-03-05 18:25:27+00:00
For example, BBC tweeted "Hundreds feared dead or injured in Israeli air strike on hospital in Gaza, Palestinian officials say", which turned out to be disinformation from Hamas (although they did attribute the claim, but still).

While it's less about Hamas, another incident that stands out was their documentary with "sanitized" translations, like replacing "jihad against the Jews" with "fighting and resisting Israeli forces".
by pilooch | 2026-03-05 18:25:48+00:00
Hello! Not commenting on content or functionality. Scheduling in AI is a very dense field. An a past researcher in AI decision making, I got confused by the 'Scheduling solved' slogan.
FYI recent AI for scheduling include GNNs and RL applied to NP and P-space problems that plague many industries. A larger scope I believe from vela's (rightful) target, a bit confusing IMO. Good luck with your endeavor, all scheduling problems are beautiful :)
by infinitewars | 2026-03-05 18:25:52+00:00
That user, epicprogrammer's comment history suggests alignment with the Musk/Thiel/Anduril/DoW/anti-Anthropic crowd who are incessantly trying to damage Wikipedia's reputation to push a "Grokipedia" where they can define the narrative.

I wouldn't be surprised if that group were the origin of this attack too.
by drooby | 2026-03-05 18:26:00+00:00
Addition:

Also worth knowing: collective intellectual property already exists. ASCAP and BMI have been doing exactly this for decades. Individual songwriters can't enforce their rights every time their music gets played, so they pool their IP, license it collectively, and distribute the revenue. The problem they solved is almost identical to the training data problem. Each individual contribution is tiny, but the collective value is enormous. Applying this at the scale of the general public would be novel, but the underlying mechanism isn't. The concept works. It just hasn't been applied to training data yet.
by foxyv | 2026-03-05 18:26:42+00:00
This is actually a really old problem since the days of "Star Wars" and the Cold War. It is an order of magnitude cheaper to produce a ballistic missile or low flying cruise weapon with 10 decoys than the requisite amount of interceptors. There is hope that lasers and rail guns can eventually change that, but it's still an unsolved problem.

Defense in the age of missiles and drones is always harder than offense. The only response is to destroy the attacker's weapons before they can manufacture or launch them.
by nathan_douglas | 2026-03-05 18:27:12+00:00
I haven't switched, but I'm having the same thoughts.

I think technical PMs are well suited to absorb this. Ideally, they're already comfortable with specifying software, communicating about requirements, recognizing and avoiding failure modes, etc. So that's one route, but not one that particularly appeals to me.

The things that I find interesting largely haven't changed. I'm interested in complex systems, distributed or not. I'm interested in organizational dynamics. I'm interested in game theory and mechanism design. I'm interested in simulations, machine learning, and GOFAI. I'm hoping that I can find a way to turn these interests into a new career. I can continue learning and growing, I can challenge myself, I can expand at whatever speed I can manage, and I can develop and deliver working software at a greater pace than I've previously been able to manage.

I'm definitely afraid. I don't know how to just create a career from a vague collection of things I like thinking about, to just go out there and make money and support my family. I don't know how to "operationalize" these ideas. But that's what I'm trying to do, FWIW.
by RikardoB | 2026-03-05 18:27:18+00:00
Hi HN, I'm Ricardo from Colombia.

I got frustrated trying to run local RAG pipelines on standard hardware. Booting up traditional vector databases usually meant sacrificing gigabytes of RAM before even ingesting the first vector. I needed something that could run on the Edge (specifically, for a local Point of Sale system) without choking the OS.

So, I built DeraineDB. It's a hyper-optimized, embedded vector engine designed for extreme low footprint and sub-millisecond latencies.

Some architectural decisions I’d love your feedback on:

- Zig Core + Go Orchestrator: I used Zig for the bare-metal memory-mapped storage (mmap) and SIMD math, and Go for the gRPC network orchestration.

- The "Zero-Copy" Bridge: Go's Garbage Collector was initially killing my latency when passing 1536-dimensional arrays to C/Zig. I fixed this by using unsafe.Pointer to map Protobuf slices directly into Zig's memory space. Zero copies, massive latency drop.

- HNSW Graph Segregation: I completely separated the payload (.drb files with strict cache-line alignment) from the HNSW navigation graph (.dridx files). This solved a nasty buffer overflow I was fighting and made the $O(\log N)$ search rock solid.

- Bitwise Metadata Filtering: Instead of JSON parsing, I implemented a 64-bit metadata_mask evaluated via Bitwise AND directly inside the HNSW Greedy Routing loop.

The result: It handles 1536D vectors in a 33MB Docker image, consumes ~21MB of RAM under load, and hits 0.89ms for HNSW warm searches.

The repo includes the Python benchmark and a local True RAG demo using Llama 3.2.

I would absolutely love it if you guys could audit the architecture, review the CGO/Zig bridge, and roast my code. Let me know where I can improve!
by dspillett | 2026-03-05 18:27:36+00:00
> Did you read the CVEs?

You obviously didn't read to the end of my little post, yet feel righteous enough to throw that out…

> One allows the root user to create a kernel thread and then block its shutdown for several minutes.

Which as part of a compromise chain could cause a DoS issue that might be able to bypass common protections like cgroup imposed limits.
by ZeroCool2u | 2026-03-05 18:27:40+00:00
Bit concerning that we see in some cases significantly worse results when enabling thinking. Especially for Math, but also in the browser agent benchmark.

Not sure if this is more concerning for the test time compute paradigm or the underlying model itself.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something though? I'm assuming 5.4 and 5.4 Thinking are the same underlying model and that's not just marketing.
by hinkley | 2026-03-05 18:27:46+00:00
I spent some formative years helping people run MUDs and applying my pattern matching brain to the problem of how to make a multiplayer game succeed.

I played WoW precisely because they dodged the first bullet, which is inflationary or deflationary economies caused by each content creator trying to leave their mark by making better gear for their quests than are already available. The whole thing with used equipment only being for to be scrapped guaranteed that low level characters weren’t all carrying the third best helmet in the game.

But they still had the same problem with expansions - the need to change things in order to declare, “I made that”. They wouldn’t have needed classic if they followed your conclusions.

However, without those changes would they have stayed on everyone’s radar as long? Hard to say. Balancing in LoL and friends seems somewhat easier because the mechanics change less frequently. So maybe they would have been fine or maybe they’d be on WoW 2.0 now.
by hendrixroa | 2026-03-05 18:27:58+00:00
Location: Cali, Colombia (Remote)
Remote: Yes
Tech: Python, Node.js, Java, PHP | FastAPI, Distributed Systems, AI, Backend Architect.
Email: me@hendrixroa.dev
Profile: https://linkedin.com/in/hendrix-roa

Staff Engineer with 11 years exp. Scaled systems to 11M concurrent users.

I don’t just execute tasks also I solve business problems. My philosophy is simple I am a relentless path-clearer. If there is a technical or operational blocker, I resolve it. Period.

Business Momentum: I know when to ship at breakneck speed and when to architect for 100x scale.

Extreme Ownership: I am not a ticket-taker. I bring real passion and a mission-first mindset to 0-1 ventures.

Polyglot: I use the best tool for the mission to build real moats, not just code.

Looking for a partnership with a Venture Studio or High-Growth Startup. If you need a builder who owns the problem, let’s talk.
by testdummy13 | 2026-03-05 18:28:15+00:00
"Historically there is no evidence of that happening with tech revolutions - or rather perhaps you could say to some extent - you can not say that we are an internet-first society, or cars-first society or mobile phone - first society despite these being profound technological revolutions."

I'm... not actually sure I agree. The US *has* become a more cars first society. Our cities are designed around cars: parking space requirements for business, lacking of biking infrastructure in favor of more lanes, even the introduction of jaywalking as a crime. We've become much more of an internet first society too, we don't use books for research, our banking is largely done online, even humans social circles have moved much more online (probably to the detriment of society).

None of those technologies are as powerful/disruptive as where it seems that AI and LLMs are headed, so it's possible that societies shift towards "AI-first" will be more profound that it was for any of the other technologies listed.
by mvh | 2026-03-05 18:28:42+00:00
Hey! Fellow YCer (S24) here. Super cool idea. Depending on how b2c you want to be, one area to maybe consider would be surgeries. Scheduling rooms for surgeries is quite challenging, and has a cost component associated with it which makes the problem even harder. Especially since, as you can imagine, it's not at all obvious how long a procedure will necessarily take, and other procedures may need to start at a certain time.
by jensbontinck | 2026-03-05 18:28:51+00:00
Yes, but most are doing it wrong.

The common approaches I've seen:
1. Policy-only ("don't paste sensitive data into ChatGPT") — doesn't work, people do it anyway
2. Network-level blocking (block api.openai.com) — kills legitimate use cases
3. DLP on the network layer — can't inspect the semantic content, just sees HTTPS traffic

What actually works is a proxy-based approach: all LLM API traffic routes through a governance layer that scans the content of every request. PII gets tokenized before reaching the model (SSN
becomes [SSN_TOKEN_1], model processes it fine, token gets restored on the way back). Secrets get blocked. Data classification determines which model can be used — RESTRICTED data stays on-prem or goes to a private deployment, PUBLIC data can go to any provider.

The technical challenge is doing this without killing latency or breaking streaming. We got it down to ~250ms overhead with deterministic scanning (regex + normalization, not a second LLM). For streaming responses, you buffer the full response, scan it, then re-chunk — PII never leaks through stream chunks.

The org challenge is that engineering teams will route around any governance that adds friction. The proxy approach works because it's transparent — agents point at "proxy.server.com" instead of api.openai.com and everything else stays the same. Changing env vars, no code changes.
by 256_ | 2026-03-05 18:29:01+00:00
I didn't even notice it until you pointed it out, but I checked that account's comment history and it uses em dashes. Also, "the database history itself is the active distribution vector" Is just semantic nonsense.

I still have a basic assumption that if something I'm reading doesn't make much sense to me, I probably just don't understand it. Over the last few years I've had to get used to the new assumption that it's because I'm reading LLM output.
by someguy101010 | 2026-03-05 18:29:33+00:00
have built in this space which led me to develop a minizinc mcp server [0] for scheduling bocce tournaments [1]. scheduling with constraints is a np hard problem and it makes sense people struggle. tools exist to solve this problem but they are complex and hard to use for non technical folks, and even technical folks. am hoping a tool like this can bridge the gap and would like to bring it to your awareness if you aren't already thinking about the problem this way :)

edit: after reading a bit more of description looks like yall are taking a similar approach, kudos!

[0] https://github.com/r33drichards/minizinc-mcp

[1] https://github.com/r33drichards/bocce-scheduler
by theorchid | 2026-03-05 18:29:35+00:00
We want to maintain the status quo in technology. We want databases to remain as they were five years ago. But for some reason, Oracle implemented AI into its database. Perhaps they surveyed their customers, and most of them supported this initiative. Perhaps they surveyed the wrong audience, and real database users do not want to see AI in them. Or maybe they made this decision to get more investment or because of the hype around AI.

But the decision has been made. And if AI remains in databases after the AI hype, the next generation of developers will no longer know databases without AI. That's why I said it will become the norm. But that's just my guess. Unfortunately, I can't see the future. I don't know what it will actually be like in a few years.
by larodi | 2026-03-05 18:29:56+00:00
The lack thereof (of human use). Prompts are not copyrightable thus the output also - not. Besides retelling a story is fair use, right? Otherwise we should ban all generative AI and prepare for Dune/Foundation future. But we not there, and we perhaps never going to be.

So the LLM training first needs to be settled, then we talk whether retelling a whole software package infringes anyone's right. And even if it does, there are no laws in place to chase it.
by INR18650 | 2026-03-05 18:30:03+00:00
reg.ru, the most popular registrar, sells .ru domains for $1.65, very little of which goes to the national registry. What is their profit on this domain, a couple of cents?

You have helped to bring peace by approximately zero nanoseconds, while doing absolutely nothing about western countries still buying massive amounts of natural resources from Putin. Tax income on their exports make the primary source of income for the federal budget, which directly funds the military.

Good virtue signaling, though. I'm completely disillusioned with the West, this is nothing new.
by DiabloD3 | 2026-03-05 18:30:29+00:00
As far as I know, the current lineup is PNY still makes the workstation cards, possibly also the x16 server cards, but Foxconn is doing the Blackwell SBCs and MXMs, and those SBCs are a pretty big chunk of Nvidia's income right now. I also believe they have moved to Foxconn for the Founders Edition consumer cards.

Also, with the FEs, their partners are disallowed from making their own FEs, even if they make their own PCB from scratch and not based on any existing Nvidia design. Doesn't matter who makes the FE, it immediately puts partners at a great disadvantage if they can't make one too.
by jensbontinck | 2026-03-05 18:30:52+00:00
This is why governance has to be external to the model. If you ask the model "are you sandboxed?" it will confabulate an answer. If you rely on the model to self-enforce safety rules, it will sometimes comply and sometimes not, depending on the prompt.

The fix is architectural: the governance layer sits between the agent and the model, not inside the model. It doesn't ask the model to behave, it scans what goes in, scans what comes out, and blocks anything that violates policy. The model never sees the blocked content. Fail-closed: if the governance layer goes down, nothing gets through.

Same principle as network security. You don't ask the packet to self-inspect — you route it through a firewall.
by nickysielicki | 2026-03-05 18:31:02+00:00
can anyone compare the $200/mo codex usage limits with the $200/mo claude usage limits? It’s extremely difficult to get a feel for whether switching between the two is going to result in hitting limits more or less often, and it’s difficult to find discussion online about this.

In practice, if I buy $200/mo codex, can I basically run 3 codex instances simultaneously in tmux, like I can with claude code pro max, all day every day, without hitting limits?
by carefree-bob | 2026-03-05 18:31:48+00:00
> And nobody in the right mind would buy a used Macbook for the same price, just because it's more powerful.

I would buy a used Macbook Pro for the same price, just because it is more powerful. I have bought used Macbook Pros for many years, and have never had any problem. Apple gear is durable, and I've never had any SSD issues or problems with dead pixels. The laptop I'm typing this on is a 2021 M1 Max, so 5 years old now, and I just did an SSD health check, it is 100% after 5 years of heavy use. It easily has 5 more years of life.
by CamperBob2 | 2026-03-05 18:31:56+00:00
Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. ... The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.

I'm sure that was of great comfort to Oppenheimer, as it will be to Altman and/or Amodei. "It's not you, it's us."
by giraffe_lady | 2026-03-05 18:31:57+00:00
I didn't mean to say don't take novel but mainstream medications you have a health reason for and are under the guidance of a doctor about.

I'm saying nicotine pouches are the tobacco industry's successor to vapes in the way vapes were their successor to cigarettes and some conservatism is warranted in light of that. Or like how every 10-15 years the evidence of health effects of some ubiquitous plastic grows too heavy and 3M comes out with a new one to replace it and the cycle repeats.
by gus_massa | 2026-03-05 18:33:29+00:00
Gluons have spin 1 and Gravitons [1] have spin 2. This adds a lot of subtle difference in the calculations. Some are obvious like replacing a 1 with a 2 (or a 1^2 with a 2^2). Some are super tricky:

For example if you have two gluons, you apply the rules of sum of spin and get

1 + 1 = 2 + 1 + 0

(They can be coupled in the same direction and get 2, or the oposite direction and get 0, or something in between and get 1.)

But for gravitons, the rules are

2 + 2 = 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 + 0

(They can be coupled in the same direction and get 4, or the oposite direction and get 0, or something in between and get more cases in between like 2, but also 1 or 3.)

If you want to make give physicist nightmares and make mathematician cry, a tiny part of the details are in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_Clebsch%E2%80%93Gorda... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_Clebsch%E2%80%93Gorda...

In conclusion, I'm not sure how difficult is to do the conversion from gluons to gravitons, but I'd recommend to run away.

[1] Assuming they exist.
by cwoolfe | 2026-03-05 18:33:49+00:00
"know the role and place your software fits in" yes! Probably one of the most important lessons of my career. As a junior dev starting out, I had no idea how my software fit into the company's product let alone into the entire ecosystem of what was already available and open source. Now as a senior, I see juniors making the same mistake that naturally arises out of this: needlessly doing things that have already been done or re-inventing the wheel. And now that coding ability is a cheap commodity, product development, and knowing where you fit into the ecosystem becomes the main skillset.
by streetfighter64 | 2026-03-05 18:33:56+00:00
Look, I'm not defending wikipedia, I'd just like to point out that comparing hosting to salaries is a quite strange metric. Hosting is cheap and relatively constant, adding features to the site or paying admins to maintain the quality of edits is scalable. How does throwing more money at hosting make a better product? It's not like the servers can't handle the requests.

Using hosting costs as an index is nonsensical. I wasn't able to find numbers for 2009, but since 2015 the monthly page views have remained almost exactly constant. So you might as well claim that they're vastly overpaying for hosting since inflation from 2008 is way less than 3.75x.
by homebrewer | 2026-03-05 18:34:09+00:00
I've also always used em-dashes, it's not a very reliable indicator. That style is a dead giveaway, though. Some of its comments seem to be written by a human, but several definitely aren't.

I've been spending less and less time here, the moderation is obviously overwhelmed and is losing the battle.

https://aphyr.com/posts/389-the-future-of-forums-is-lies-i-g...
by tetha | 2026-03-05 18:34:16+00:00
At $work we're hosting business knowledge databases. Interestingly enough, if you need to revert a day or two of edits, you're better off to do it asap, over postponing and mulling over it. Especially if you can keep a dump or an export around.

People usually remember what they changed yesterday and have uploaded files and such still around. It's not great, but quite possible. Maybe you need to pull a few content articles out from the broken state if they ask. No huge deal.

If you decide to roll back after a week or so, editors get really annoyed, because now they are usually forced to backtrack and reconcile the state of the knowledge base, maybe you need a current and a rolled-back system, it may have regulatory implications and it's a huge pain in the neck.