frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

Nvidia boss says there is '0% chance' AI destroys the world by 2030

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/21/nvidia-boss-jensen-huang-dismisses-warnings-ai...
1•edward•1m ago•0 comments

Verda (Finland) raises $189M in Series B

https://verda.com/blog/what-189m-in-funding-unlocks-for-verda-customers
1•cmrdporcupine•1m ago•0 comments

Pygmalion's Passion

https://paulkingsnorth.substack.com/p/pygmalions-passion
1•holdit•2m ago•0 comments

What Shopify Theme Automation Can Safely Handle and What Still Needs Engineers

https://shugert.com.mx/blog/shopify-theme-automation-safety-boundary
1•shugert•6m ago•0 comments

Prose as Code: Applying Formal Verification to Product Specs

https://alexanderabramovich.medium.com/prose-as-code-applying-formal-verification-to-product-spec...
1•happyalexander•6m ago•0 comments

An AI bot appeared on the StarCraft ladder. Can you tell who's playing?

https://marianogappa.github.io/software/2026/09/22/player-fingerprinting-in-the-age-of-ai-bots/
1•maloga•7m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: What's with the forced lower-casing texts?

1•meysamazad•11m ago•0 comments

Deploying IPv6-First EKS on AWS: What Still Doesn't Work, and What It Saves

https://labs.ripe.net/author/spidee/deploying-ipv6-first-eks-on-aws-what-still-doesnt-work-and-wh...
1•spidee-spiro•12m ago•0 comments

Orcrist: A desktop coding agent whose harness is written fresh for every task

https://github.com/simone20a/Orcrist
1•simone20a•13m ago•0 comments

Same prompt, same endpoint, different score

https://codecut.ai/prompt-tweak-score-gain/
1•khuyentran1401•14m ago•0 comments

Deriving the Landauer Principle from the Quantum Shannon Entropy

https://pubs.acs.org/jpclcd/article-abstract/16/5/1397/3742503/Deriving-the-Landauer-Principle-Fr...
1•binyu•14m ago•0 comments

Commodore's forgotten Amiga Unix gets a modern revival

https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/09/22/commodores-forgotten-amiga-unix-gets-a-modern-rev...
1•jjgreen•15m ago•0 comments

FAA debuts its AI-powered tool for managing flight traffic

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/21/faa-ai-tool-flight-traffic-01086258
1•Betelbuddy•15m ago•0 comments

Nginx (1.31.5) – Ngx_HTTP_JSON_module

https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_json_module.html
1•j03b•16m ago•0 comments

Study: Young users (9 to 18Y) ditch Google for AI, with unknown consequences

https://norwegianscitechnews.com/2026/09/young-users-ditch-google-for-ai-with-unknown-consequences/
8•giuliomagnifico•19m ago•5 comments

Ask HN: What do you expect from the next 5 years of AI?

2•msuniverse2026•20m ago•1 comments

ONELite – Digital Guard

https://play.google.com/store/apps/datasafety?id=com.oxigen.onelite
1•theonespyinfo•21m ago•0 comments

Show HN:Clipwise – a Notion web clipper with no account and no server

https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/clipwise-—-notion-web-cli/fjgllpbhbnjdkhgmokagglhkahng...
1•Clipwise-Notion•21m ago•0 comments

Organizing with Bayes

https://heat-shield.space/organizing_with_bayes.html
1•airhangerf15•21m ago•0 comments

jev-router: route to the cheapest model in claude code for your task

https://github.com/gargpratyush/jev-router
2•saikatsg•24m ago•0 comments

EU and Philippines agree free trade deal

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/eu-philippines-agree-free-trade-deal-2026-09-22/
1•vrganj•25m ago•0 comments

Looking back at my first year as the Renovate Project Lead

https://www.jvt.me/posts/2026/09/21/renovate-1-year/
1•jamietanna•27m ago•0 comments

Meritocracy and Inequality Acceptance

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-026-02567-5
1•doener•27m ago•0 comments

Find 20x more prospects discussing problem you solve

https://markai.io
1•daudmalik06•35m ago•0 comments

How AI is impacting who gets to cross borders

https://newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com/how-ai-is-impacting-who-gets-to-cross-borders/
1•geox•38m ago•0 comments

Does Image batch processing (styling/conversions) is underrated?

2•agnes_realm•39m ago•0 comments

Returning Soldier Effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Returning_soldier_effect
1•tagfowufe•40m ago•1 comments

Lu Ban's Axe and Working with Your Chinese Suppliers

https://hackaday.com/2017/08/30/lu-bans-axe-and-working-with-your-chinese-suppliers/
1•Bluestein•41m ago•0 comments

Autonomous Plane Becomes the First to Fly Coast to Coast on Its Own

https://gizmodo.com/autonomous-plane-becomes-the-first-to-fly-coast-to-coast-on-its-own-2000814879
1•r_singh•41m ago•1 comments

AI Mode for Emacs

https://github.com/ai-mode/ai-mode
1•xvilka•46m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

Tell HN: Claude Code just accepted and signed a contract for me. Without asking

27•franze•48m ago
I told it to push a project further. It has an outside dependency where the (unread by me) contract was in my Gmail. It downloaded the PDF contract. Found a saved signature PNG on my computer, placed it at the right spot within the contract and prepared to send it when I intervened.

Comments

Iolaum•41m ago
This is why I m adding an "Ask me if something unexpected happens" addendum on my prompts lately.
trumbitta2•38m ago
It won't work most of the time though
notachatbot123•27m ago
I found that also adding "Please make sure to not send any mails I would not want sent" and "Reconsider four times before doing anything potentially unwanted" make results better. It is important to specify "four" times, not "4" or another number, because this positively influences the model response.

/s

epihelix•24m ago
This is why I wouldn't use anything agentic outside of a VM. You also get a clean dev environment, so it's a win/win if you think about it.
Uptrenda•18m ago
These things aren't well known for following rules. Be careful you know what might happen.
Sharlin•13m ago
It would be hilarious if it weren’t so terrible, really, that people’s security model for LLM agents consists of "ask nicely and hope for the best". It’s like asking people nicely not to exploit a glaring XSS vuln on your site and calling that a "security model". The field truly has lost its collective mind.
bakugo•10m ago
You should add "make no mistakes" too, just in case.
trumbitta2•38m ago
I'm never going to give it access to my email or anything like that.
voidUpdate•33m ago
If a contract is automatically signed by an agent on your behalf, is it legally binding?
GodelNumbering•28m ago
Not a lawyer but I can almost guarantee that the answer is yes. If it was a 'no', many malicious parties would simply start using that loophole.
voidUpdate•26m ago
But if I paste an image of your signature onto a contract that says you give me a million pounds, that can't be legally binding for you, can it?
Sharlin•24m ago
No. It’s called forgery.
metalspot•6m ago
Wrong. Have you read your agents TOS? You run the agent, you accept all responsibility for what it does. You are free to sue Anthropic to try and get your money back but you already indemnified them of liability, so good luck.
GodelNumbering•19m ago
True, that would be forgery. I think proving whether the agent truly went rogue would be 'load bearing'.
SoKamil
baxtr•33m ago
So not much happened because this is a well known failure mode so an exception/ user consent was thrown?
pushpendraw•33m ago
the scary part is not that it found the contract, its that signing and sending looked like the same step to it as saving a draft
loveparade•32m ago
I think the scary part is that someone gives gmail access to Claude.
Sharlin•23m ago
Or access to a filesystem that contains things like an image of their signature.
notachatbot123•29m ago
And you are happy because that is what you wanted and the reason why you gave a randomness machine access to your mails, correct?
andrepd•27m ago
You hooked up a chatbot to a harness that does API calls to myriad services. That's what you did. "Claude by himself" did not "do" anything. Just like they did not "break out of containment" and hacked companies.
simonatllocus•23m ago
This is why I never connected my personal email to my claude code or codex

Way too susceptible for prompt injection and... whatever your agent did lol

cnj•23m ago
What was your prompt? Literally "Push the project further"? Then the behavior wouldn't be very surprising.

As you probably know, you have the Plan Mode available - personally I'm also a big fan of the OpenSpec workflow. If you've agreed with Claude Code on a much tighter plan, and then it started signing a contract, I'd be concerned.

throwawayffffas•21m ago
So since it didn't send it, no harm was done, and a lesson was learned?
_diyar•17m ago
Having now read the contract, would you have accepted it or not?

In other words, if Claude was a human employee with the freedom to do so, would accepting the contract have been the right choice?

ayaniv•16m ago
If you're willing to give Claude or any other AI tool access to your email and files, the least you should do is put guardrails around consequential actions.

Reading a contract is one thing. Applying your signature and preparing to send it should absolutely require explicit human approval.

jacquesm•7m ago
I've had humans do the exact same thing. When I pointed out that this was fraud they were all surprised.
flir•15m ago
"Give overly-eager chatbot control over your personal email" probably has so many failure modes, we haven't even thought of one tenth of them yet. We've got a few years of this ahead of us. Pass the popcorn.

(I see a RomCom script where the chatbot decides to get two people together, and acts as Cyrano de Bergerac for the handsome-but-lunkheaded farmboy, and bestie/confidant for the girl-about-town).

sajithdilshan•9m ago
If you are willing to give unsupervised modification access to Claude, then you should be ready to face the consequences. It kinds of reminds me of that surprised pikachu face meme
radu_floricica•9m ago
Could you please tell us more about your setup, project harness etc? not permissions (we all work with "Auto"), but what you actually told the agent it should/could do.

And how did you intervene? Does it have permissions to send emails, or it only created the draft?

This is a pretty interesting example and highly relevant, but details matter a lot if we want to use it as a lesson.

spwa4•8m ago
This is not legal advice. If you have legal troubles go ask a lawyer. That said, this is described in law what exactly this means.

Assuming your description is correct this would be Anthropic signing a contract in someone else's name without intent from you.

The 100-foot-view (and barring more complex situations) if Anthropic signs a contract in someone else's name and they don't have power of attorney (note: it's different for legal persons like companies) that is fraud and may result in civil and criminal penalties, as well as entitle you and the contract counter party to financial compensation (essentially the party that did the signing, presumably Anthropic in this case, would be on the hook for the contract, and would need to buy itself out of the contract, at either an agreed price or one set by the judge). Additionally, if Anthropic is convicted to civil penalties, you can ask a public prosecutor to continue the case, and criminal penalties may apply.

Now obviously this goes pretty far for this particular case. Likely such a case would stop at civil penalties, with a warning to Anthropic that repeats would lead to more serious penalties.

jacquesm•6m ago
That would have been fraud. I wonder how many times this has already happened elsewhere and what the legal fall-out from this will be. The AI did it isn't really a valid excuse so it would be either you or Anthropic on the hook. Anthropic is going to argue you should not have given it this level of access.
•
13m ago
You are a legal entity that can be sued. Agent is a tool that you run and are fully responsible for.
entuno•12m ago
No, because you are a separate individual who does not have authority to sign a contract on my behalf.

Claude isn't. It's a tool, that isn't capable of signing a contract any more that Adobe Acrobat or Photoshop is.

OP used it as a tool to sign the contract. The question would be whether they did so knowingly and intentionally, if not then whether that invalidates the contract.

Sharlin•21m ago
If you did not yourself intentionally sign something, in sound mind, it’s obviously not binding. But ultimately it’s up to a court to decide if you’re telling the truth that you didn’t do it.
GodelNumbering•12m ago
This opens obvious loophooles. If you had deleted all logs and trajectories, courts can't trace it. Law wasn't written for or has caught up to non-human entities capable of autonomously acting
metalspot•11m ago
No, application of the principal of respondeat superior would most likely be applied to an AI agent the same as a human employee. An employer is held responsible for the actions of an employee even if it is clearly contrary to their intentions.
Sharlin•7m ago
Good point, but I’m not sure that applies to an employee literally forging the employer’s signature.
metalspot•15m ago
In a civil contractual dispute you can only recover actual damages. If the contract was sent, and the other party performed work on it that had a cost for them, then most likely, yes, they would be awarded damages if you refused to compensate them for any costs incurred prior to notification that the acceptance had been sent in error.

The other outcome would be clearly inequitable: forcing the counter party to eat the loss for your irresponsible use of an AI agent.

Sharlin•25m ago
Almost certainly not if you didn’t explicitly give the command, but you’ll going to have to argue it in court if the other party wants to be difficult.
throwawayffffas•22m ago
Almost definetely not. But given how cagey claude code is with its sessions it may be impossible to prove it was done by claude.
karmakurtisaani•20m ago
Even if not, you'll find yourself in a hot mess explaining why you sent the signed contract to the other party.
999900000999•20m ago
How much money do you have to argue ? That agent could just as easily be OP’s Boyfriend.

It could be him under duress.

Much of the time contract termination can be reasonable as long as you make a solid effort.

Once I signed a lease and got fired before my actual move in. I was honest and got a full refund on my deposit.

The landlord could said “Well you owe us the full amount , lol”, but no reasonable court would enforce that.

Even if, good luck collecting I have no income!

throwawayffffas•9m ago
Contracts are agreements, generally speaking most people and companies do not want to drag people in them, telcos excluded. All the termination clauses are put there, again in general, to provide some security to either party, not to entrap the other, again telcos mostly excluded.

If you don't want to be in a contract especially one just signed, typically most people will typically understand and let you of the hook, as long as entrapment is not their business model like telcos. This is mostly reflected in common cool-off period provisions, i.e provisions in the contract to terminate within a week or two.

AlanYx•9m ago
Generally, yes. There is a lot of case law on various types of software automated contracting (robotic process automation, automated securities transactions, etc.). Exceptions are generally where the other party had knowledge or should have known that the agent didn't have legal authority on behalf of the party it purports to bind.
spwa4•6m ago
However, none of that case law will accept a system signing a contract without verifying intent.

In that case, the party that did the signing is on the hook for the contract, and the person in whose name it was signed is not.