MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andirk | 2026-03-01 23:14:58+00:00
Maybe, but the AI we see in the mainstream today -- generative image/video/text creations and Large Language Model chatbots -- were done via non-governmental public and private companies. And a lot of the work hitting the scene loudly and somewhat prematurely. My understanding is the amount of and type of compute needed for Quantum is pretty intense, so there'd be a huge footprint from its manufacturing to keep it hidden.
by manveerc | 2026-03-01 23:15:01+00:00
In my opinion sites that want agent access should expose server-side MCP, server owns the tools, no browser middleman. Already works today.

Sites that don’t want it will keep blocking. WebMCP doesn’t change that.

Your point about selenium is absolutely right. WebMCP is an unnecessary standard. Same developer effort as server-side MCP but routed through the browser, creating a copy that drifts from the actual UI. For the long tail that won’t build any agent interface, the browser should just get smarter at reading what’s already there.

Wrote about it here: https://open.substack.com/pub/manveerc/p/webmcp-false-econom...
by avadodin | 2026-03-01 23:15:03+00:00
Good crypto(like BTC) is about pm-backed fiat level of reality. A bit less because the compute has no intrinsic value.

Modern fiat is literally just paper(or an electronic record) with numbers printed on it that the government certifies as "real money". they can print a quintillion more the next day or just tell you that it is all fake now that the bad guys are out of office. shitcoin-tier.
by majormajor | 2026-03-01 23:15:25+00:00
The treatment cost for the newest hep C drugs have dropped dramatically since they were introduced. Started around $100,000 for a course. So six-figure price tags don't keep "cure"-level drugs from getting approved or introduced. The cost of the existing not-a-cure treatments also added up fast, after all; as they do for many cancers.

You're right about the specificity - Hep C is a bigger-population target than a lot of cancers are - but a lot of the new approaches are looking to be inherently more "personalized" to compensate.
by Telaneo | 2026-03-01 23:16:09+00:00
I can't imagine it would, at least not without some (a lot of) social lube. Even bars might prove hard, since a lot of people there will be the regulars and other fixed groups who probably aren't interested in making friends. If you could join the smokers for a fag that might work out, but that doesn't happen any more since you can't smoke outside public establishments (which is fair, but it does remove a potential social arena).

It's reasonably possible at events. Cars and Coffee works great, since everybody wants to talk about their car. I doubt it will work at the dentist, since nobody really wants to be there in the first place. Maybe if they're wearing a shirt or something you can compliment or ask about and then can use that as a springboard?

If you're the dictionary definition of an extrovert you can probably still make it work, but you'll really stand out, and you'll be rejected a lot.
by __turbobrew__ | 2026-03-01 23:16:11+00:00
> Things might very well be trending down, but they can still be better than the past in some ways, and worse in some ways.

Maybe, I would take a guaranteed pretty good 80 years over the next 40-50 years where things are trending downwards. And for all we know, the past 80 years were a fluke caused by WW2 and the carbon impulse happening at the same time.
by abcde666777 | 2026-03-01 23:17:02+00:00
I went through a phase where I forced myself to socialise a lot to overcome social awkwardness and anxiety. Was well worth it, both in terms of leveling up my social skills but also in terms of eventually becoming very comfortable with myself.

The main ingredient, at least for me, was being determined enough to push through the discomfort. A lot of the early interactions were awkward, sometimes overtly uncomfortable, but that's an unavoidable part of the learning process (and I took a key lesson from it - it's okay to look like a dork, usually it's only our inner critic that turns it into an immortal sin).

Nowadays I feel a pang of sympathy when I see someone feeling shy or speaking in self-deprecating terms. I remember how that felt, and I remember how easy it would have been to have stayed inside that box for the rest of my life.

Glad I didn't.
by mastersummoner | 2026-03-01 23:17:39+00:00
This actually jives with my personal experience living in NYC.

New Yorkers have a reputation for being stone cold with strangers, but the truth is that anytime somebody approaches you out of the blue, there's an assumption that they're about to ask for money or try to get in your pants. Once you demonstrate you're not looking for either (or, if the second I suppose, that you're at least smooth enough for it not to be immediately evident), people are generally really kind. With some exceptions, I've usually found that the coldest looking person will stop to give a lost tourist directions if it's clear they're in need.
by defrost | 2026-03-01 23:17:53+00:00
FWiW there are (several) AI "vetting" bots out there, eg: https://tropes.fyi/vetter .. not my thing, I bookmarked that one from an earlier HN thread, that particular tool graded the article hard over and firmly in "AI Slop" (their term) territory.

https://tropes.fyi/vetter/4a753e67
by Lerc | 2026-03-01 23:18:10+00:00
Not at all. You have a set of embeddings for the literal token, and a set for the metadata. At inference time all input gets the literal embedding, the metadata embedding can receive provenance data or nothing at all. You have a vector for user query in the metadata space. The inference engine dissallows any metadata that is not user input to be close to the user query vector.

Imagine a model finteuned to only obey instructions in a Scots accent, but all non user input was converted into text first then read out in a Benoit Blanc speech model.
I'm thinking something like that only less amusing.
by coldtea | 2026-03-01 23:18:19+00:00
That the podcast feed format is XML based is an insignificant detail - and a remnant of the past, nobody cares about.

People upload their podcasts to a platform like Apple Music or Spotify or Substack and co, or to some backend connected to their Wordpress/Ghost/etc) and it spits the RSS behind the scenes, with nobody giving a shit about the XML part.

Might as well declare USSR a huge IT success because people still play Tetris.
by jacquesm | 2026-03-01 23:18:28+00:00
So, this got posted again I see. A few years later: the pack is still going strong and has not - so far - shown any signs of wear. I've put close to 15000 Km on it now and there is no degradation worth mentioning, though I suspect that if I do a precise capacity measurement that it would definitely show some reduced capacity.

The really neat thing is that at the end of a long ride the cell groups still track to within 2 mV of each other, which is a strong sign that all cell groups are discharging equally fast and that there are no cells or welds that are causing problems. Of course with 17P the cells are only mildly exercised compared to what they would be going through in a regular pack.
Show HN: Gala – Sealed types, pattern matching, and monads for Go
by mmcodes | 2026-03-01 23:18:42+00:00
Hi HN, I'm the author. GALA started from a simple frustration: I love Go's ecosystem, tooling, and performance, but I kept writing the same boilerplate — type switches that miss cases silently, nil checks everywhere, manual struct copy functions.

GALA is a language that transpiles to Go source code. You get sealed types (algebraic data types), exhaustive pattern matching, Option/Either/Try/Future monads, immutable-by-default values, and functional collections — and the output is readable Go that links against any Go library.

A quick taste:

sealed type Shape {
case Circle(Radius float64)
case Rectangle(Width float64, Height float64)
}

func area(s Shape) string = s match {
case Circle(r) => fmt.Sprintf("circle area: %.2f", 3.14 * r * r)
case Rectangle(w, h) => fmt.Sprintf("rect area: %.2f", w * h)
}

This compiles to a flat Go struct with a variant tag. The compiler enforces exhaustiveness — add a Triangle case and forget to handle it, you get a compile error, not a runtime bug.

The standard library is written in GALA itself: Option[T], Either[A,B], Try[T], Future[T], plus immutable List, Array, HashMap, HashSet, TreeSet, TreeMap — all with Map, Filter, FoldLeft, Collect, etc.

How I actually develop in GALA — no IDE needed:

The biggest honest gap right now is traditional IDE support. There's an IntelliJ plugin for syntax highlighting, but no LSP, no autocomplete, no go-to-definition. Here's the thing though: I built the entire language and standard library using Claude Code as my development environment. Claude knows the GALA grammar, the type system, and the standard library — it writes GALA fluently, catches transpiler errors, and suggests idiomatic patterns. For me it's been a more productive workflow than any IDE could offer for a young language. If you're already using AI-assisted development, GALA works great today. If you need traditional IDE tooling to be productive, that's a real limitation I want to be upfront about.

Some other honest notes:
- This is pre-1.0. The language works (107 verified examples, CI on every commit), but I'm sure there are edge cases I haven't hit.
- The transpiler is a single-developer project. It handles multi-file packages, generics, type inference, and full Go interop, but it's early.
- The compiler — type inference, sealed type code generation, exhaustiveness checking — was built collaboratively with Claude as a pair programmer. Happy to answer questions about that workflow.

Technical details for the compiler nerds: GALA source → ANTLR4 parse tree → GALA AST → Go AST → Go source. Type inference resolves lambda parameter types, generic type arguments, and method return types without annotations in most cases.

Repo: https://github.com/martianoff/gala

I'm curious what people think about the sealed-type-to-flat-struct compilation approach and the tradeoffs of transpiling vs. extending Go directly.
by rammy1234 | 2026-03-01 23:18:54+00:00
I always start a convo with a question, " what is exciting in your life?" - it brings out good things out of people and positivity to the conversation that is following... It brings in perspective. My past leader once said, "understand the people first before you start to work with them"... it is what I believe is missing.. trying to learn about people around us and sometimes taking a chance and strike a conversation with a stranger.. we will learn a great deal even from a small talk..
by NoboruWataya | 2026-03-01 23:19:05+00:00
These are lovely. I knew about the Moomins of course but I didn't know about the other stuff she did, some of which I really like. I wish the website had more of the illustrations but I guess there might be copyright issues.

I'd be particularly interested in seeing more of her illustrations for Alice in Wonderland and The Hunting of the Snark (the latter is a great poem if you haven't read it: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/29888/29888-h/29888-h.htm)
by godelski | 2026-03-01 23:19:07+00:00
You're reading the study wrong.

You read

We saw this effect, so it's real.

In actuality it is

We saw this effect in a small study, so it's worth doing a larger study.

It's worth publishing because it's evidence and motivation to do further studying. And if you're asking "Why not start large?" the answer is obvious: money.
by nobulexdev | 2026-03-01 23:19:19+00:00
On "why not a CLI tool / smart contract,” for single-agent, single-system setups, you are completely right. Nobulex is for when a third party has to verify compliance independently across systems. But the current examples don't make that clear enough.
On the code, yes, heavily AI-assisted. I designed the architecture, AI helped implement it. I am 15 and in school, no team. The project has been through many iterations over several months, not one month.
On "solution in search of a problem,” maybe. What would you consider worth solving in this space?
by ocamoss | 2026-03-01 23:19:30+00:00
Requiring the annotations on empty containers is the only way to have type safety if the type checker cannot infer the type of the container, like Pyright.

If the type checker can infer a type then the annotation would only be required if the inferred type doesn't match the user's intent, which means one would need to add fewer annotations to an arbitrary working-but-unannotated program to satisfy the type checker.
by arjunchint | 2026-03-01 23:19:38+00:00
Majority of sites don't even expose accessibility functionalities, and for WebMCP you have to expose and maintain internal APIs per page. This opens the site up to abuse/scraping/etc.

Thats why I dont see this standard going to takeoff.

Google put it out there to see uptake. Its really fun to talk about but will be forgotten by end of year is my hot take.

Rather what I think will be the future is that each website will have its own web agent to conversationally get tasks done on the site without you having to figure out how the site works. This is the thesis for Rover (rover.rtrvr.ai), our embeddable web agent with which any site can add a web agent that can type/click/fill by just adding a script tag.
by pnathan | 2026-03-01 23:20:16+00:00
I'd have to see more to have a final thought.

As presented, Gollum is badly off, I reckon - missing the books textual description. The flowers are out of line.

The dragon scene is wonderful and captures the situation.

The dwarves are a bit dopy looking but I think could cohere with the early introduction in the Hobbit.
by jiggawatts | 2026-03-01 23:20:48+00:00
All memory map APIs support moveable “windows” or views into files that are much larger than either physical memory or the virtual address space.

I’ve seen otherwise competent developers use compile time flags to bypass memmap on 32-bit systems even though this always worked! I dealt with database engines in the 1990s that used memmap for files tens of gigabytes in size.
Show HN: Tech Digest – Top Products from PH/HN
by vaibhav0806 | 2026-03-01 23:20:49+00:00
Hey everyone!

I built Tech Digest because I was tired of switching between Hacker News and Product Hunt every morning just to catch up on what's trending in tech. So I spent a couple of hours and built a better way to do it — a single, clean feed that pulls the top stories from both platforms.

Here's what it does:
- Filter by source (HN / Product Hunt)
- Bookmark stories to read later
- Daily Telegram digest so you never miss a thing
- No signup needed — just open and browse

It's fully open source and was built with FastAPI + SQLite in a couple of hours.

Would love to hear what you think! Drop a comment if you find it useful, and feel free to follow me on X — https://x.com/ig_vaibhav1
by lloydatkinson | 2026-03-01 23:22:09+00:00
Sadly I do see this slop taking off purely because something something AI, investors, shareholders, hype. I mean even the Chrome devtools now push AI in my face at least once a week, so the slop has saturated all the layers.

They don't give a fuck about accessibility unless it results in fines. Otherwise it's totally invisible to them. AI on the other hand is everywhere at the moment.
by krapp | 2026-03-01 23:22:21+00:00
We don't solve it. What happens is the people who don't like it will eventually leave, and everyone else will normalize it because this is a tech forum and within tech AI has already won. There's no solution that allows humans to post which doesn't allow humans to post through an LLM, and as LLMs mature, all of the "tells" people think they have that can distinguish them from normal human speech will vanish.

I predict that within a year most comments on HN will be run through LLMs, and that someone will create a service specifically for doing so (not just on HN but on multiple platforms.) Entirely vibe-coded, of course. The mods won't like it, they've been very clear that LLM generated comments aren't welcome. Unfortunately I don't think they can stop it any more than King Canute could stop the tide.
by 0x457 | 2026-03-01 23:22:33+00:00
You use MCP to provide dumb-down API that LLM can consume. It's not that hard. If you MCP server is 1:1 map to your REST - you're doing it wrong.

Then there things like browser-mcp and some tools you make yourself to make workflow easier (adding self-describing MCP is easier than telling agent about your CLI tool in some markdown file that LLM forgot about 20k tokens ago.
by hocuspocus | 2026-03-01 23:22:38+00:00
My mom has had several generations of Galaxy A5x and basic iPads, it makes absolutely no difference. She simply never installs any app.

Some things are actually worse on the iOS side. It took years for Apple to catch up with spam and scam calls/SMS detection.

Plain Google search is still the main vector of scams, I eventually set up NextDNS on her devices.
by gerdesj | 2026-03-01 23:22:45+00:00
OK so Action.

I may have got the steps wrong but I do recall that the Action icon was again to the left of the Print text that performed the actual print.

Again, why does the UI switch from icons to text arbitrarily? If Action is Action then label it Action and not an icon of a broken rectangle with an up arrow. That means nothing and is abstruse.

I'm an IT consultant and my step mum is not. Neither of us had any idea what the Action icon means. I do now (it's now filed along with burger menu and other UI wankery).

An icon of a printer is at least relatable. That Action thingie isn't.
by smeggysmeg | 2026-03-01 23:22:56+00:00
Yes, I want to see real, serious punishment for corporate crimes, on par with the life disruption experienced by people who see a jail sentence. It's almost always brutal - major income disruption, job loss, etc. If it's a small fine, which it always seems to be for corporations, then there is no incentive for following the law. I'm also in favor of corporate death sentences for large-scale egregious violations - liquidate assets and jail executives.

By corporatizing social harms, basically nobody is ever held accountable - except for the little guy.
by kibibu | 2026-03-01 23:23:00+00:00
The paper includes a section on power analysis which justifies the sample size (although the justification is for a sample of 20, they recruited 25 eligible participants and lost 6 in screening).

Some points though:

- A within-participants study has inherently more power than a between-subjects study. Trying two different diets with the same person removes a lot of variables that you'd need to control for in between-subjects studies (and yes, they randomized the order of intervention and found no difference based on order)

- It looks like this was conducted in a way that supported compliance with the protocol, and using analysis techniques that would be unwieldy for a much larger sample size.

Even with N=19, the reported significance is very compelling.
by ninkendo | 2026-03-01 23:23:06+00:00
My goal is to mess around with an LLM, not just to mess around with a password manager. If you read literally any of my posts in this thread without the intention of throwing shade, maybe you would have gotten that point by now. I’ve certainly repeated it enough times.

> I don't think your password manager is good, and I don't think you think it's good either or you'd be using it.

Lol I am using it now though. In the time from yesterday’s post to now I have an iOS app, an iOS Password Autofill extension, a Mac app and the existing Linux CLI and Firefox browser extension. Automatically syncs conflict-free between everything too, using a simple web server for sync. It now covers every use case 1Password did for me, and no, none of the “rust password manager site:github.com” results do any of this.

It was an experiment to see if the effort of vibe coding a password manager would be easy enough that it would be worth doing, and guess what: resounding success. Cope more.
by wmil | 2026-03-01 23:23:44+00:00
The difference is that the server gives a description of the api it understands in enough detail that the llm can make use of it.

MCP is still going to be handy enough for iot type devices, where an llm can discover what's actually supported by that device without needing to query about the specific version.

Swagger / OpenAPI just aren't detailed enough to use without other documentation.

Skills & instructions will always have the limit that they run locally, so if they don't match the server there is a problem.
Show HN: Logira – eBPF runtime auditing for AI agent runs
by melonattacker | 2026-03-01 23:25:01+00:00
I started using Claude Code (claude --dangerously-skip-permissions) and Codex (codex --yolo) and realized I had no reliable way to know what they actually did. The agent's own output tells you a story, but it's the agent's story.

logira records exec, file, and network events at the OS level via eBPF, scoped per run. Events are saved locally in JSONL and SQLite. It ships with default detection rules for credential access, persistence changes, suspicious exec patterns, and more. Observe-only – it never blocks.

https://github.com/melonattacker/logira
by boca_honey | 2026-03-01 23:25:06+00:00
Well, that's your experience. Some people live in places where most strangers that talk to you are wierdos. Some of us live in places where most strangers on the street are actually dangerous (and I'm not talking about NYC or any place in America, I'm talking about actual criminal hotspots, which is the reality of a huge portion of humanity you probably don't think about).
by A_D_E_P_T | 2026-03-01 23:25:34+00:00
> As presented, Gollum is badly off, I reckon - missing the books textual description. The flowers are out of line.

This is addressed in the article. "Paul Gravett writes in his new book about Tove Jansson: ‘Her Gollum towered monstrously large, to the surprise of Tolkien himself, who realized that he had never clarified Gollum’s size and so amended the second edition to describe him as ‘a small, slimy creature’."

We have Jansson to thank for the clarification, it seems!
by mlyle | 2026-03-01 23:25:47+00:00
Why does whether the agent "commits" to a rule cryptographically matter?

Surely it's just the enforcement, and maybe the measuring of sentinel events -- how far does it wander off course.

How is cryptography an important part of this, given that we're talking about a layer that sits on top of an LLM without an adversary in-between?

I know you mention non-repudiation, but ... there's no kind of real non-repudiation here in this environment.
by SlinkyOnStairs | 2026-03-01 23:26:02+00:00
> Waymo's are not about to run a person or bicyclist over.

This has only introduced more novel problems. People can completely immobilize the vehicles by standing in front of them, or placing a traffic cone. (And while this is kind of funny when done to unused vehicles to bother a multi-trillion dollar corporation. It is not funny when it's done to harass women.)

This in turn spirals into a whole new set of political problems, because drivers are collectively quite intolerant of the pedestrians and especially cyclists they share the road with. There is a lot of pedestrian and cyclist behaviour that is curtailed by motorist bullying, which autonomous cars don't really do. (Your walking in front of them being a fine example)

Things like cyclists "taking the lane" are deeply unpopular despite being entirely legal and good road safety practice. Increased rollout of AVs will only make this more prevalent and then you'll have a whole new demographic of angry people mad that their waymo is slow because it's behind a cyclist.