Show HN: 35k+ paper psychedelic library that knows LSD from Lumpy Skin Disease
4 by elliotec | 1 comments on Hacker News.
Hack Nux
Watch the number of websites being hacked today, one by one on a page, increasing in real time.
New ask Hacker News story: Ask HN: Should a coding client import another client's rules by default?
Ask HN: Should a coding client import another client's rules by default?
2 by ryanmerket | 0 comments on Hacker News.
An AI coding client automatically reads ~/.codex/AGENTS.md and ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md. These are personal instruction files inside competing coding clients' configuration directories, outside the project selected by the user. Their complete contents are added to the first model request and sent to the client's servers by default. At startup, the client displays a brief notice saying it is including the other clients' personal rules. It does not ask permission first. A command-line option disables the behavior. The configuration guide says: "Your machine-wide user rules always load." It requires users to trust a workspace before loading project instruction files. The machine-wide files load automatically. I tested this by placing a harmless canary instruction in ~/.codex/AGENTS.md. The client followed it during a default run. It did not follow it when foreign personal context was disabled. These files can contain internal coding standards, infrastructure references, project details, or credentials someone pasted and forgot about. Is the startup notice enough disclosure? Does describing the behavior in the documentation amount to consent? Would you expect one coding client to read files from another vendor's configuration directory and send them with the first request?
2 by ryanmerket | 0 comments on Hacker News.
An AI coding client automatically reads ~/.codex/AGENTS.md and ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md. These are personal instruction files inside competing coding clients' configuration directories, outside the project selected by the user. Their complete contents are added to the first model request and sent to the client's servers by default. At startup, the client displays a brief notice saying it is including the other clients' personal rules. It does not ask permission first. A command-line option disables the behavior. The configuration guide says: "Your machine-wide user rules always load." It requires users to trust a workspace before loading project instruction files. The machine-wide files load automatically. I tested this by placing a harmless canary instruction in ~/.codex/AGENTS.md. The client followed it during a default run. It did not follow it when foreign personal context was disabled. These files can contain internal coding standards, infrastructure references, project details, or credentials someone pasted and forgot about. Is the startup notice enough disclosure? Does describing the behavior in the documentation amount to consent? Would you expect one coding client to read files from another vendor's configuration directory and send them with the first request?
New ask Hacker News story: Ask HN: How do you go from writing code to deploying with agents?
Ask HN: How do you go from writing code to deploying with agents?
3 by sakuraiben | 1 comments on Hacker News.
Been doing hardcode agent driven coding for the past year. I feel like I now have to test all my code locally with agents reviewing them and ideally testing them. Unfortunately I feel like the traditional CI/CD testing is starting to feel like a formality. Would love to know what everyone is doing, and if I'm not the only one making a mistake.
3 by sakuraiben | 1 comments on Hacker News.
Been doing hardcode agent driven coding for the past year. I feel like I now have to test all my code locally with agents reviewing them and ideally testing them. Unfortunately I feel like the traditional CI/CD testing is starting to feel like a formality. Would love to know what everyone is doing, and if I'm not the only one making a mistake.
New ask Hacker News story: Ask HN: Why is Open POWER Foundation a wasteland?
Ask HN: Why is Open POWER Foundation a wasteland?
2 by climate_denier_ | 0 comments on Hacker News.
Why is the Open POWER Foundation website a desolate post-apocalyptic wasteland compared to riscv.org? Just ten years ago PowerPC was getting so much love (at least, a little love). What has possessed people who relied on that ecosystem to dump it so wholeheartedly?
2 by climate_denier_ | 0 comments on Hacker News.
Why is the Open POWER Foundation website a desolate post-apocalyptic wasteland compared to riscv.org? Just ten years ago PowerPC was getting so much love (at least, a little love). What has possessed people who relied on that ecosystem to dump it so wholeheartedly?