MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CM30 | 2026-03-13 10:01:15+00:00
Sure. And I'd say the culture of the country and expectations there probably play a part even between places with similar income levels.

For example, someone with a very entrepreneurial mindset is probably going to want to be born in the US, and ideally close to a city like New York or San Francisco. You can certainly make it as a founder in Europe or Asia or Australia or what not, but it's a lot easier to get the funding needed to become a household name in the former, since (at least for a while) there were companies and investors willing to throw a ton of cash at crazy ideas rather than a moderate amount at proven businesses.

Similarly, if you're particularly interested in a certain industry, you'll ideally want to be born in a country where said industry has a decent foothold. Video game developers are all over the world, but it's hard to deny your odds are probably better in that industry if you're American or Japanese.
by Robelkidin | 2026-03-13 10:02:05+00:00
LogClaw algorithm is the moat here that flags logs first. Those only flagged usually less than 10% of the logs are analyzed by LLM. LLM is great at finding root cause if the logs are clear and detailed. So the LLM heavily depends on the quality of your logs. So if your logs are rich with info, it will have a better insights at understanding it.
by juleiie | 2026-03-13 10:02:41+00:00
What has potential AGI teached me is that no matter what I write, as long as I do it manually, it has value. Not because it is good but because it is genuine.

Before LLMs I would never think that what I have to say is valuable in any way. Now I realize my every comment, my every human input to the global internet and society is infinitely more valuable than ai slop.

This has really given me a jolt I needed and confidence to freely voice anything anywhere knowing that I make a difference against the flood of auto generated soulless garbage.

Flaws in human writing aren’t an issue, they are the very feature I look for. These exaggerations, hyperboles, emotions. It’s all unmistakably human.

Even 4chan is an oasis of humanity in that way. Indeed it is bristling with genuine creativity despite its sole ingredient is 100% human flaws. No preservatives, no artificial sweeteners.

Holy shit I really wrote it quite fun, I encourage everyone to do the same have some fun writing because each one of us is now highly valued artist in a flood of ai slop literally no matter what you type I want to read your flawed shit.
by h4ch1 | 2026-03-13 10:04:01+00:00
I've been using rolldown-vite for the past 3-4 months with absolutely no issues on a very large monorepo with SvelteKit, multiple TS services and custom packages.

Just upgraded to 8 with some version bumping. Dev server time reduced to 1.5s from 8s and build reduced to 35s from 2m30. Really really impressed.
by vb7132 | 2026-03-13 10:04:25+00:00
Having managed developers for over five years, I have seen two categories of devs (to simplify the argument, let's focus just on the smart ones):

- one group loves to work independently and gets you the results, they are fast and they figure things out

- second group needs direction, they can be creative in their space but check-ins and course corrections are needed.

AI feels like group1 but it's actually group2. In essence, it doesn't fully fit in either group. I am still figuring out this third group.
by wzdd | 2026-03-13 10:04:30+00:00
I'm just annoyed I lost points for specifying both "Open the peanut butter jar" and "unscrew the lid of the peanut butter jar". The first one's context! The second "more precise" version doesn't specify what you should do with the now-unscrewed lid and the obvious solution, for a robot that takes things literally, is to leave it sitting on top of the jar.
by mesahm | 2026-03-13 10:06:04+00:00
Hi HN,

I'm the maintainer of Niquests.

For years, Python's Requests library was the gold standard, but it has been under feature freeze. As the web moved on, the Python ecosystem fractured: we got aiohttp (async only) and httpx (great, but currently struggles in high throughput scenarii for years with no visible solution merged so far).

I wanted the beautiful, ergonomic API of requests, but I wanted it to speak the modern web and solve most seen struggles around HTTP consumption. So I built Niquests as a drop-in replacement, you can literally do import niquests as requests. I didn't want to reinvent the wheel, I wanted to start on solid ground. Requests and urllib3 are both rock solid, so this was the starting point, learning from them and extend them for the modern web.

Under the hood, it's a different beast. I've added:

* HTTP/2 & HTTP/3 over QUIC out of the box
* Multiplexing and full thread/task safety (fixed the old concurrency bottlenecks over thousands of TCP connections)
* OS trust store support by default (no more certifi issues)
* Both sync and async support (in one library)
* Deep DNS control (DoH, DoQ, DoT, DNSSEC), "Happy Eyeballs" for fast connects
* Integrated WebSocket extension over HTTP/1, HTTP/2, and HTTP/3
* Works in WASM (Pyodide), and compatible with ASGI/WSGI apps
* And much more(...)

Here’s a real-world benchmark: Niquests completes a 1000-request multiplexed workload in 0.55s, compared to httpx (2.08s) and aiohttp (1.35s). See https://gist.github.com/Ousret/9e99b07e66eec48ccea5811775ec1... to verify yourself. And yes it does scale as long as your server can take it.

I've worked hard to make this the most advanced Python HTTP client. without losing the simplicity and readability we love from requests.

Would love feedback, technical questions (especially around HTTP/2+ and multiplexing!), or discussion about the state of Python HTTP clients.
by leoedin | 2026-03-13 10:06:16+00:00
This matches my experience too. The models write code that would never pass a review normally. Mega functions, "copy and pasted" code with small changes, deep nested conditionals and loops. All the stuff we've spent a lot of time trying to minimise!

You could argue it's OK because a model can always fix it later. But the problem comes when there's subtle logic bugs and its basically impossible to understand. Or fixing the bug in one place doesn't fix it in the 10 other places almost the same code exists.

I strongly suspect that LLMs, like all technologies, are going to follow an S curve of capability. The question is where in that S curve we are right now.
by shiomiru | 2026-03-13 10:06:17+00:00
> Plenty of internal-only systems are not locked down securely and only thing preventing mass exploitation is browsers CORS settings.

CORS has no relation to this issue. Cross-origin means there are at least two origins, but in this case there is only one (where you're trying to navigate).

> But if request is originating from inside the network (as it would from a terminal emulator)

Why would the terminal make requests? Obviously it will dispatch the link to another program specialized in making requests to a protocol, like... a browser?

> Granted, on its own, this should be safe. But attacks are usually composed from multiple bugs and/or weaknesses in design. Hence why security folk keep talking about “defence in depth”

Every feature can be part of an exploit chain, but the "clicking a URL will always lead to the text it is under" ship has sailed 30+ years ago. If your system cannot safely handle this operation then you're in deep trouble, and I don't see how crippling every program in existence is the right solution to that.

> I actually voiced some concerns with this original hyperlink proposal several years back. In fact lots of developers and security researchers did.

Based on what you've written: you and other self-claimed "security researchers" started spamming this spec with concern trolling about hypothetical (non-existent) "security issues", then the author finally got tired and locked down comments, which were obviously intended for people interested in the feature, not those trying to sabotage it.

> Just one persons mission to dictate how everyone else’s terminal, and security model, should operate.

Nowhere does the proposal say that your terminal has to implement this. Indeed, if you have a working ANSI parser the escape sequence is ignored automatically (as the spec also explains).

Have you considered that the person trying to dictate how others' terminals should operate might be you?
by pjmlp | 2026-03-13 10:08:10+00:00
I agree with your remark, only that Rust's current problem is tooling, not the language itself.

See OCaml or Haskell, they also have interpreters and REPLs as part of their tooling.

Also there should be no need to always compile crates from scratch when starting a new project.

Which ironically circles back to your remark of having a similar problem.
by def13 | 2026-03-13 10:08:23+00:00
Part of the point here is that the systems are fundamentally broken, more broken than they were before when we already thought they were broken.
Some people look at that and think "I suppose we should keep propping this system up as much as possible; the less propping the more immediate harm is caused to people/infrastructure/society".

The people behind this site/talk clearly don't buy into that. The way they see it, a reckoning must come. We might as well get it over with as soon as possible. Rip off the band-aid so to speak. So maybe we should shake the system and show that its falling apart.
by 1dom | 2026-03-13 10:08:31+00:00
This feels like a ridiculous thread that captures everything wrong with modern Javascript ecosystem.

It's grown into a product of cults and attempted zingers rather than pragmatic or sensible technical discussions about what we should and shouldn't expect to be able to do with an individual programming language.

edit: to clarify, I assume there needs to be a basical level of comprehension of programming languages to debate the nuance of one, and if you can't think of a single reason as to why someone would want types removed, that's a possible indicator you don't have that necessary level yet, and I think the most effective way for you to learn that is to Google it. Sorry for coming across as rude if you genuinely don't know this stuff.

If you already know many reasons as to why types would be removed, then it seems disingenuous to ask that question, other than to make the point that you feel types shouldn't be stripped. If you think that, say it, and explain why you think they shouldn't be stripped.
by lesam | 2026-03-13 10:08:33+00:00
This is interesting, but doesn't have to be correct.

If Blockbuster had kept pouring money into the new service, maybe it would have lost it all - I see no reason to think Blockbuster's movie rental franchise business would have 'transferrable skills' to allow it to succeed at streaming.

If it had been trying to pivot into a pizza delivery business (perhaps more transferable, in terms of locating franchises etc) would Icahn still have been 'killing' it?

My point is, maybe it was already dead and Icahn just prevented it from wasting a lot of money on the way down the drain.
by throwup238 | 2026-03-13 10:08:51+00:00
> I’m trying to pack on some extra muscle with weight lifting right now and it’s not easy to get enough clean calories short of eating spoonfuls of (happy, pastured) bacon grease.

I thought I was the only one with that issue! I'm not paleo but my diet is heavy on whole foods, salads, and I don't eat much in carbs so once I started weight lifting, getting enough calories during the bulking phase has always been a struggle.

Protein is pretty easy by just chugging a few protein shakes a day, but calories? I had to start drowning my salads in olive oil and trying to sneak it or avacado oil or butter into every dish I cooked. A stick of butter only has like 800 calories!
by famouswaffles | 2026-03-13 10:09:28+00:00
>"This shows the downside of using AI to write up your project."

I just find phrases like this a bit obnoxious at times.

>You would not have had a problem with calling out a badly composed rambling article 5 years ago.

Then why not just say that? It's rambling bla bla bla. What's so hard about that? Why invent a reason for issues, as if rambling articles didn't get written 5 years ago.

Like No, being written by an LLM or not is not the reason the article has no benchmarks or interpretability results. Those things would be there regardless if the author was interested in that, so again, it just seems there's little point in making such assertions.
by duskdozer | 2026-03-13 10:10:03+00:00
Yeah, I didn't mean they weren't wrong or aren't odd, just that they'll be understood. My point was around the fact that I've been told before by people that certain errors in their native language that seem relatively small to me actually make it impossible to understand. So I wondered if the urge to use LLMs could be explained by a difference in expectation around the seriousness of errors.
by polyterative | 2026-03-13 10:10:17+00:00
I have a similar experience. My hobby project was put on hold after a burnout and lack of motivation. I got a big burst of energy back when I started implementing some long desired features quickly with these new models. I was able to get the project to the point of what I consider is maturity. I did in a month during free time the kind of work that would have burned me up in a good six months fulltime.
by bambax | 2026-03-13 10:10:22+00:00
My mom, who's a lawyer, always told us that laws don't matter, what matter is how hard they're enforced, and we can simply ignore laws that exist but we know for a fact they're not enforced (or not enforceable).

I once had small talk with Lawrence Lessig after a conference of his, and when I told him that he was visibly shocked, as if I had told him I was raised to be a criminal.

Now I'm not sure what to think anymore.
Show HN: Privacy Mask – prevent secrets leaking to AI agents
by fullstackcrew | 2026-03-13 10:11:12+00:00
Hi HN,

I built a small open-source tool called Privacy Mask.

It intercepts screenshots locally and automatically redacts sensitive
patterns (API keys, phone numbers, IDs, etc.) before screenshots are
sent to AI tools or agents like OpenClaw.

The goal is to prevent accidental data leaks when sharing screenshots
during debugging or development.

Everything runs locally.

Would love feedback.
by furyofantares | 2026-03-13 10:12:28+00:00
I'm glad they shared too! Wish they shared without letting the LLM process it so heavily, it makes it too hard to read, it gives monotone importance to every piece of text. Mostly it does this by bringing everything up to a slight over-importance with tone and fluff language, and by turning everything into dry statements of fact.

As to why people call this out without going into great detail about the problems with the actual text, it's because this is happening all over the place and it's very disrespectful to readers, who dig into an article that looks very well written on the surface, only to discover it's a lot of labor to decode and often (but not always) a total waste of time. Asking for a critical report of the text is asking even more of a reader who already feels duped.
by eitland | 2026-03-13 10:12:37+00:00
> That's a big flaw of LLMs, not limited to RAGs: it lacks the fundamental understanding of "good and bad", like Richard Sutton said in that Dwarkesh podcast.

After paticipating in social media since the beginning I think this problem is not limited to LLMs.

There are certain things we can debunk all day every day and the only outcome isit happens again next day and this has been a problem since long before AI - and I personally think it started before social media as well.
by ninalanyon | 2026-03-13 10:12:39+00:00
What makes it "impractical in this day and age". My wife and her mother knitted sweaters, cardigans, scarves, hats. My wife also sewed skirts, blouses, and full length winter coats. I don't have any hand knitted skirts but I do have several that were commercially machine knitted. I'm quite sure that had my wife wanted to she could have knitted and sewn many complete suits of clothes.
by Jonathanfishner | 2026-03-13 10:13:17+00:00
Re IronClaw is probably the most hardened open-source implementation I've seen for this, but a sufficiently clever prompt injection against the built-in tools (especially shell) could still reach secrets.

Re TLS: OneCLI itself runs in a separate container, acting as an HTTPS proxy. The SDK auto-configures agent containers with proxy env vars + a local CA cert. When the agent hits an intercepted domain, OneCLI terminates TLS, swaps placeholder tokens for real creds, and forwards upstream. Containers never touch actual keys.

More here: https://www.onecli.sh/docs/sdks/node#how-it-works

Re 1Password adapters: not yet, but on the roadmap.
by lxgr | 2026-03-13 10:13:36+00:00
> That's not what I said. I said that having a globally-routable IPv4 address assigned to a LAN's edge router will stop being a thing. Things like CGN (or some other sort of translation system) will be the norm for all residential users.

That's still what I would call a v6-only (with translation mechanisms) client deployment. Sorry for being imprecise on the "with translation mechanisms" part.

> Some absolutely will.

Very few, in my prediction. We're already seeing massive v6 + CG-NAT-only deployments these days, and the NAT part is starting to have worse performance characteristics: Higher latency because the NATs aren't as geographically distributed as the v6 gateway routers, shorter-lived TCP connections because IP/port tuples are adding a tighter resource constraint than connection tracking memory alone etc.

This, and top-down mandates like Apple's "all apps must work on v6 only phones", is pushing most big services to become v6 reachable.

At some point, some ISP is going to decide that v6 only (i.e. without translation mechanisms) Internet is "enough" for their users. Hackers will complain, call it "not real Internet" (and have a point, just like I don't consider NATted v4 "real Internet"!), but most profit-oriented companies will react by quickly providing rudimentary v6 connectivity via assigning a v6 address to their load balancer and setting an AAAA record.

I agree that v4 only servers will stick around for decades, just like there are still many non-Internet networks out there, but v4 only reachability will become a non-starter for anything that humans/eyeballs will want to access. And at some point, the fraction of v4-only eyeballs will become so small that it'll start becoming feasible to serve content on v6 only. At that point, v4 will be finally considered "not the real Internet" too.
by CM30 | 2026-03-13 10:13:48+00:00
Gonna be a bit controversial here, and say that sometimes the opposite can happen. That someone becoming successful can give them the confidence to share ideas they wouldn't have shared otherwise, and give ideas that people would have otherwise written off as 'ridiculous' a level of extra credibility in the process.

And that can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, a lot of ideas put forward by successful companies and business people (like many from Apple or Google or Nintendo or whatever else) would never get off the ground if put forward by a random individual or company, and that risk taking gets us results that make the world better off.

At the same time though, there are a lot of successful people and companies that get hung up on 'bad' ideas that should have been shot down earlier. Like ex Nobel Prize winners that get into psudeoscience or grand overarching theories of everything, popular artists and creators that get away with shaky writing and uninteresting story concepts (George Lucas and the Star Wars prequels, JK Rowling after Harry Potter, etc) or any number of celebrities and politicians completely detached from reality.

So, there is a flipside to the article. Yeah, success can make you less likely to try stupid things because of your ego, but it can equally make you more likely to try them since your status gives you extra credibility and there's often no one there to tell you no.
by bonoboTP | 2026-03-13 10:13:56+00:00
It's very hard to discuss this. To some people it's obvious, to some it isn't. To me, every single paragraphs is obvious fluff AI writing. One problem with it is the repetitiveness and the schmoozing salesman feel. The other is the lack of benchmarks and stuff. It's both. The two are connected because the AI has to lean in to its bullshitter persona when it's not given enough raw material to write up something strong. But whenever an AI writes in its default voice like this, it also indicates that the context was not well curated.

But anyway, yes, I can also just move on to the next article. Most of the time I indeed do that.
by bambax | 2026-03-13 10:14:37+00:00
Very true but not in all cases. In case of speed limit intent does not matter; "I didn't know I was speeding" is no excuse. Same with DUI.

In fact DUI should be a mitigating circumstance, because when you're drunk your ability to make decisions is impaired -- but the opposite happens, DUI is an aggravating circumstance.
by avabuildsdata | 2026-03-13 10:14:38+00:00
The unfair scheduling point resonates. I run a lot of concurrent HTTP workloads in Go (scraping, data pipelines) and the scheduler is honestly fine for throughput-oriented work where you don't care about tail latency. But the moment you need consistent response times under load it becomes a real problem. GOMAXPROCS tuning and runtime.LockOSThread help in narrow cases but they're band-aids. The lack of priority or fairness knobs is a deliberate design choice but it does push certain workloads toward other runtimes.
by graemep | 2026-03-13 10:15:08+00:00
I am not convinced about the Nazi mindset. They hated Jews who were (perceived as, anyway) more successful on average. Can you explain further or cite sources that do? Racism is very often directed at groups that are relatively successful.

Claims of racial superiority are very fringe these days (even racists avoid explicitly making the claim and talk about things like culture) which is a significant improvement.

Which politicians make the claim that the poor are inferior and not full human beings? The idea is certainly out there, but mostly popular with a certain type of rich person, rather than people in governments, and is usually implicit rather than made explicitly.

Its possible this happens in countries I do not know about, but if so i would like to know which and who.
by forgetfreeman | 2026-03-13 10:15:42+00:00
"The craft-lovers and the make-it-go people sat next to each other, shipped the same products, looked indistinguishable."

Definitely not. Based on my observations from a career as an open source and agency developer it was obvious at a glance which of these camps any given developer lived in by their code quality. With few exceptions make-it-go types tended to produce brittle, hacky, short-sighted work that had a tendency to produce as many or more problems than it solved, and on more than one occasion I've seen developers of this stripe lose commit access to FOSS projects as a result of the low quality of their contributions.

"nobody got into it because programming in Perl was somehow aesthetically delightful."

Compared to trying to get stuff accomplished in C Perl was an absolute dream to work with and many devs I knew gravitated to web development specifically for their love of the added flexibility and expressiveness that Perl gave them compared to other commonly used languages at the time. Fortunately for us all language design and tooling progressed.