PashaGo
Re:Show HN: Chess-Inspired Roguelike
on Friday June 26, 2026 @09:43AM (#48686579)
You should add a timer. Bullet chess is fun
Re:Google hallucinated that I am sponsored by Ground News
on Friday June 26, 2026 @09:30AM (#48686428)
Wait until LLMs is used for medical diagnoses or court decisions.
Re:Record Type Inference for Dummies
on Friday June 26, 2026 @09:27AM (#48686391)
Anonymous records feel like one of those features that are obviously useful once you work with JSON-heavy systems, but surprisingly uncommon in statically typed languages
Frontend benchmarks need workload context
Re:Printing Gaussian Splats
on Wednesday June 24, 2026 @10:53AM (#48660900)
Why it's called Gaussian?
Re:Stealing Is a Skill
on Wednesday June 24, 2026 @10:48AM (#48660808)
Most great products are nothing, but well-timed and well-executed stolen ideas.
Re:Statistics that live in your SQL
on Wednesday June 24, 2026 @08:56AM (#48659026)
Interesting, but I think it works only for quick ad-hoc analysis. For dashboards or deeper research, you still need other tools
Re:Europeans should learn to love the air-conditioner … green electricity
on Wednesday June 24, 2026 @08:46AM (#48658901)
If you live by the sea or on a boat, you don't need AC
Re:Why eval startups fail (2025)
on Wednesday June 24, 2026 @08:40AM (#48658811)
Unfortunately, model quality is not the only criterion for users, and often not even the most important one. Adoption is also driven by marketing, UX, integrations, pricing, ecosystem, and a lot of other non-benchmark factors.
Also, model providers are not interested to have their models compared head-to-head under identical conditions. And “Model A is better than Model B” is almost meaningless by itself. Better for what task? With what prompt? What inputs? What budget? What failure tolerance?
It would be nice to have a place where users could run their own benchmarks, define evaluation criteria for their actual use cases, and make those runs verifiable by others.
Re:Git is forever. I'm building Oak anyways
on Tuesday June 23, 2026 @10:16AM (#48645347)
Totally agree. I used to work with a team that built a project for creating ontologies of Git repositories. The goal was to help LLMs onboard faster and navigate the repo better.
In the end, it became heavy overengineering: people no longer understood not only the repo itself, but also the extra layer describing it. Meanwhile, coding assistants are already quite good at reading codebases directly.
Re:Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
on Tuesday June 23, 2026 @08:12AM (#48643761)
It would be nice to see some metrics. I think the missing layer here is evaluation. If agents are going to produce applications, the platform needs not only guardrails, but public-ish evidence that those guardrails actually catch failures