Feed aggregator

Article URL: https://www.chronohq.com/blog/rethinking-saas-architecture

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823798

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

No sign-up required to try around 10 articles.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823781

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://breakingthefreewillillusion.com/ontic-probability-doesnt-exist/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823771

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Hey HN,

I'm Namanyay and I've been using Cursor since 2 years, but it seems to make mistakes as the project size grows.

This caused me to have to repeat myself a lot and it used to break my flow.

I realized it's because Cursor (and other AI tools) are not able to keep an overview of the project. Plus, Cursor does not have a "memory" layer to remember important things that the user has already mentioned.

I solved this by building an open-source MCP which maintains project and memory information within the user's file system.

It's simple and installation takes 30 seconds.

Github: https://github.com/namanyayg/giga-mcp

Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWMHCwg7Pwo

Would love feedback! Are you using AI already? Do you encounter issues like this?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823765

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf-_bRjZ38U

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823736

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://github.com/gojiplus/rmcp

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823721

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://pluralistic.net/2025/04/27/some-animals/#are-more-equal-than-others

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823717

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-28/23andme-bankruptcy-bid-deadline-extended-as-dna-privacy-woes-linger

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823710

Points: 2

# Comments: 1

Once again, the Texas legislature is coming after the most common method of safe and effective abortion today—medication abortion.

Senate Bill (S.B.) 2880* seeks to prevent the sale and distribution of abortion pills—but it doesn’t stop there. By restricting access to certain information online, the bill tries to keep people from learning about abortion drugs, or even knowing that they exist.

If passed, S.B. 2880 would make it illegal to “provide information” on how to obtain an abortion-inducing drug. If you exchange e-mails or have an online chat about seeking an abortion, you could violate the bill. If you create a website that shares information about legal abortion services in other states, you could violate the bill. Even your social media posts could put you at risk.

On top of going after online speakers who create and post content themselves, the bill also targets social media platforms, websites, email services, messaging apps, and any other “interactive computer service” simply for hosting or making that content available.

In other words, Texas legislators not only want to make sure no one can start a discussion on these topics, they also want to make sure no one can find one. The goal is to wipe this information from the internet altogether. That creates glaring free-speech issues with this bill and, if passed, the consequences would be dire.

The bill is carefully designed to scare people into silence.

First, S.B. 2880 empowers average citizens to sue anyone that violates the law. An “interactive computer service” can also be sued if it “allows residents of [Texas] to access information or material that aids, abets, assists or facilitates efforts to obtain elective abortions or abortion-inducing drugs.”

So, similar to Texas Senate Bill 8, the bill encourages anyone to file lawsuits against those who merely speak about or provide access to certain information. This is intended to, and will, chill free speech. The looming threat of litigation can be used to silence those who seek to give women truthful information about their reproductive options—potentially putting their health or lives in danger.

Second, S.B. 2880 encourages online intermediaries to take down abortion-related content. For example, if sued under the law, a defendant platform can escape liability by showing that, once discovered, they promptly “block[ed] access to any information . . . that assists or facilitates efforts to obtain elective abortions or abortion-inducing drugs.”

The bill also grants them “absolute and nonwaivable immunity” against claims arising from takedowns, denials of service, or any other “action taken to restrict access to or availability of [this] information.” In other words, if someone sues a social media platform or internet service provider for censorship, they are well-shielded from facing consequences. This further tips the scales in favor of blocking more websites, posts, and users.

In three different provisions of the 43-page bill, the drafters go out of their way to assure us that S.B. 2880 should not be construed to prohibit speech or conduct that’s protected by the First Amendment. But simply stating that the law does not restrict free speech does not make it so. The obvious goal of this bill is to restrict access to information about abortion medications online. It’s hard to imagine what claims could be brought under such a bill that don’t implicate our free speech rights.

The bill’s imposition of civil and criminal liability also conflicts with a federal law that protects online intermediaries’ ability to host user-generated speech, 47 U.S.C. § 230 (“Section 230”), including speech about abortion medication. Although the bill explicitly states that it does not conflict with Section 230, that assurance remains meaningful only so long as Section 230’s protections remain robust. But Congress is currently considering revisions—or even a full repeal of Section 230. Any weakening of Section 230 will create more space for those empowered by this bill to use the courts to pressure intermediaries/platforms to remove information about abortion medication.

Whenever the government tries to restrict our ability to access information, our First Amendment rights are threatened. This is exactly what Texas lawmakers are trying to do with S.B. 2880. Anyone who cares about free speech—regardless of how they feel about reproductive care—should urge lawmakers to oppose this bill and others like it.

*H.B. 5510 is the identical House version of S.B. 2880.

Article URL: https://paulcapewell.com/blog/250428_0909/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823674

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/papers/dtal/OGI-CSE-99-008.pdf

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823667

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Check out 'About' in the app settings for details...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823661

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.bome.com/products/miditranslator

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823656

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://technicalwriting.dev/analytics/sheets.html

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823639

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://blog.jacobstechtavern.com/p/the-side-hustle-from-hell

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823620

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Has anyone successfully used Apple's Self Service Repair Store recently? I've tried ordering a battery replacement kit and toolkit for an iPhone 13 mini this week. Despite multiple attempts using different credit cards (Visa and Amex), browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari), and accounts (mine and my spouse's), each transaction was declined due to an "information mismatch" at the bank's end.

I confirmed with both banks that all entered information is correct, and they have no issues processing the transaction if submitted properly. They even ran test transactions using the exact information I provided, confirming that they would approve the transaction if submitted correctly. This suggests the issue lies with the repair store's payment processing.

Has anyone else faced similar issues? Is this program still functional for consumers? I reached out to their support and was told that I can pay for just the battery via PayPal, but I am not able to rent a toolkit via PayPal. And they refused to help me any further.

Is it me or them? I'm just trying to figure this out because I have no clue what to do next. I even tried a friend's credit card and that didn't go through either. I'm beginning to think that this is a fake program.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823593

Points: 5

# Comments: 2

Palo Alto Networks is acquiring AI security company Protect AI in a deal previously estimated at $650-700 million.

The post Palo Alto Networks to Acquire AI Security Firm Protect AI appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Some tasks cannot be solved easily on classical computers. Quantum mechanics offers one approach, but an Ising machine tackles the problem differently

Article URL: https://www.ft.com/content/967a0c1a-6ae5-4d72-bd78-b7a8bdabccea

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43823250

Points: 3

# Comments: 0