frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

OpenCiv3: Open-source, cross-platform reimagining of Civilization III

https://openciv3.org/
418•klaussilveira•5h ago•94 comments

The Waymo World Model

https://waymo.com/blog/2026/02/the-waymo-world-model-a-new-frontier-for-autonomous-driving-simula...
770•xnx•11h ago•465 comments

Show HN: Look Ma, No Linux: Shell, App Installer, Vi, Cc on ESP32-S3 / BreezyBox

https://github.com/valdanylchuk/breezydemo
137•isitcontent•5h ago•15 comments

Monty: A minimal, secure Python interpreter written in Rust for use by AI

https://github.com/pydantic/monty
131•dmpetrov•6h ago•54 comments

Dark Alley Mathematics

https://blog.szczepan.org/blog/three-points/
37•quibono•4d ago•2 comments

Show HN: I spent 4 years building a UI design tool with only the features I use

https://vecti.com
241•vecti•8h ago•116 comments

A century of hair samples proves leaded gas ban worked

https://arstechnica.com/science/2026/02/a-century-of-hair-samples-proves-leaded-gas-ban-worked/
63•jnord•3d ago•4 comments

Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS

https://github.com/microsoft/litebox
309•aktau•12h ago•153 comments

Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/
309•ostacke•11h ago•84 comments

Show HN: If you lose your memory, how to regain access to your computer?

https://eljojo.github.io/rememory/
168•eljojo•8h ago•124 comments

Why I Joined OpenAI

https://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2026-02-07/why-i-joined-openai.html
38•SerCe•1h ago•34 comments

Hackers (1995) Animated Experience

https://hackers-1995.vercel.app/
391•todsacerdoti•13h ago•217 comments

An Update on Heroku

https://www.heroku.com/blog/an-update-on-heroku/
314•lstoll•12h ago•230 comments

Show HN: R3forth, a ColorForth-inspired language with a tiny VM

https://github.com/phreda4/r3
48•phreda4•5h ago•8 comments

I spent 5 years in DevOps – Solutions engineering gave me what I was missing

https://infisical.com/blog/devops-to-solutions-engineering
107•vmatsiiako•10h ago•34 comments

How to effectively write quality code with AI

https://heidenstedt.org/posts/2026/how-to-effectively-write-quality-code-with-ai/
181•i5heu•8h ago•128 comments

Understanding Neural Network, Visually

https://visualrambling.space/neural-network/
233•surprisetalk•3d ago•30 comments

Introducing the Developer Knowledge API and MCP Server

https://developers.googleblog.com/introducing-the-developer-knowledge-api-and-mcp-server/
14•gfortaine•3h ago•0 comments

I now assume that all ads on Apple news are scams

https://kirkville.com/i-now-assume-that-all-ads-on-apple-news-are-scams/
971•cdrnsf•15h ago•414 comments

Learning from context is harder than we thought

https://hy.tencent.com/research/100025?langVersion=en
141•limoce•3d ago•79 comments

FORTH? Really!?

https://rescrv.net/w/2026/02/06/associative
40•rescrv•13h ago•17 comments

PC Floppy Copy Protection: Vault Prolok

https://martypc.blogspot.com/2024/09/pc-floppy-copy-protection-vault-prolok.html
8•kmm•4d ago•0 comments

I'm going to cure my girlfriend's brain tumor

https://andrewjrod.substack.com/p/im-going-to-cure-my-girlfriends-brain
42•ray__•2h ago•11 comments

Evaluating and mitigating the growing risk of LLM-discovered 0-days

https://red.anthropic.com/2026/zero-days/
34•lebovic•1d ago•11 comments

Show HN: Smooth CLI – Token-efficient browser for AI agents

https://docs.smooth.sh/cli/overview
76•antves•1d ago•57 comments

The Oklahoma Architect Who Turned Kitsch into Art

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2026-01-31/oklahoma-architect-bruce-goff-s-wild-home-desi...
18•MarlonPro•3d ago•4 comments

Show HN: Slack CLI for Agents

https://github.com/stablyai/agent-slack
38•nwparker•1d ago•9 comments

Claude Composer

https://www.josh.ing/blog/claude-composer
102•coloneltcb•2d ago•69 comments

How virtual textures work

https://www.shlom.dev/articles/how-virtual-textures-really-work/
25•betamark•12h ago•23 comments

Planetary Roller Screws

https://www.humanityslastmachine.com/#planetary-roller-screws
36•everlier•3d ago•8 comments
Open in hackernews

Interstellar Comet 3I/Atlas: What We Know Now

https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/interstellar-comet-3i-atlas-what-we-know-now/
95•bikenaga•6mo ago

Comments

NitpickLawyer•6mo ago
> The Rubin team realized that their telescope had — unbeknownst to them — imaged the object starting 10 days before its discovery.

This is so cool! Vera Rubin is designed to detect lots and lots of similar things, and having a test case where they can go back and "track" 3I through data is probably a great thing for tuning their models. Can't wait to see what Rubin finds over the years.

Also, it's so cool that they found 3I pretty early, we'll now have lots and lots of data from multiple powerful observatories and probably from some remote ones as well. It's nuts that we'll probably get some images/data from probes out in the solar system (mars orbiters, maybe JUICE).

drewg123•6mo ago
> The Rubin observations also show hints of a dusty tail, but oddly this elongation points directly toward the Sun. Typically, the push of the Sun’s radiation moves dust in comet’s tails so that it points away from the Sun.

Deceleration burn?

bee_rider•6mo ago
I guess at some point we should expect dust to launch toward the Sun as that side gets heated more, right? But I have no idea when that is supposed to happen…
jandrewrogers•6mo ago
While uncommon, some ordinary comets also have an "anti-tail" that points toward the sun. As a recent famous example, the very bright comet in October 2024 [0] had a prominent anti-tail. The main photo on the wikipedia page shows it clearly.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C/2023_A3_(Tsuchinshan–ATLAS)

ge96•6mo ago
We might be the blue people
mkw5053•6mo ago
Gas released from fresh ice on the illuminated hemisphere can push millimeter-scale grains out at a few m/s, and since these particles weigh thousands of times more than typical cometary dust, solar radiation pressure at 3 au is too weak to bend their trajectories, letting them overtake the nucleus and form a sunward anti-tail. Finson–Probstein dust dynamics predicts this plume should flip to the normal anti-solar direction or fade once 3I/ATLAS moves inside 1 au later this year. Watch the position angle around September to see the theory tested.
ordu•6mo ago
Pity it travels too fast to decelerate enough to be captured by the Sun.
supportengineer•6mo ago
I'm inspired to re-watch Don't Look Up this afternoon.
pklausler•6mo ago
At a closest approach of 1.8AU, you really don't have to worry about a collision with Earth.

But that film is relevant to this comet in another way -- several missions that made it into space before the administration's war on the scientific enlightenment may be able to image the comet when we can't see it (perihelion) or when they're much closer to it than we'll ever be.

bdamm•6mo ago
Do you happen to know which missions those might be?
pklausler•6mo ago
The linked article has a good summary.
gnabgib•6mo ago
Related:

Astronomers discover 3I/ATLAS – Third interstellar object to visit Solar System (308 points, 26 days ago, 171 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44451329

Vera C. Rubin Observatory Observations of Interstellar Comet 3I/Atlas (3 points, 7 days ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44638392

Feasibility of a Spacecraft Flyby with the Third Interstellar Object 3I/Atlas (3 points, 6 days ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44649150

First Hubble telescope images of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS (109 points, 6 days ago, 29 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44649653

unsupp0rted•6mo ago
Could an object like 3I theoretically tell when eyes are being pointed at it?

Probably not ground-based eyes, but possibly Hubble.

i.e. "the inhabitants are scanning us"

dysfunction•6mo ago
I don't believe so, unless the object had such a powerful telescope it could image Hubble itself in high definition and literally see where it was pointing, which would require an absurdly large lens. A telescope like Hubble absorbing light is purely passive, it doesn't emit anything "back" that would tell the observed object it is being observed.
Enginerrrd•6mo ago
Observing passive observation systems over those distances is pretty unlikely even with an optimistic view of future technology. But perhaps not impossible.

We have all kinds of space radars though that are active.

yetihehe•6mo ago
If it had several kilometer wide imaging array, then yes. Hubble and other telescopes are totally passive optics. You need to see the distant dot and have enough resolution to identify it as a telescope and see that it is pointing at you. Seeing hubble from more than 1 au would require optics about 8km in size. This doesn't need to be one giant mirror, could be two cameras 8km apart, but synchronized optically (distance known to a small part of wavelength of light). Seeing Hubble as more than 1 pixel to tell that it's a telescope pointing at you needs something much larger.
mathgeek•6mo ago
Theoretically, any sentient being with the necessary technology to get a craft to our solar system and spot the aiming of a telescope at that distance would have even better technologies for detecting what we are doing.
XorNot•6mo ago
It's a logistics problem: if you can build one of something, you can definitely build two.
nocoiner•6mo ago
Why build one, when you can build two at twice the price?
mcswell•6mo ago
If you can build two, then build three. In fact, always do things in threes.
lmm•6mo ago
Extremely unlikely, given that there is no "active" scanning happening (no "give me a ping, Vasily"), we're just passively looking. I'd think the most likely way to find out would be listening in on our radio broadcasts (I assume someone's been talking about this object on the radio) rather than being able to directly detect the Hubble being pointed at it.
lazide•6mo ago
We have a LOT of energy outbound in the form of space radars and interplanetary comms. We’re lit up like a christmas tree.
lmm•6mo ago
Sure, but none of that was pointed at this comet specifically.
lazide•6mo ago
Ah, fair point - I see what you mean.
Fripplebubby•6mo ago
One interesting thing I learned from this was how they determined the probable size of this comet probabilistically, rather than using direct observation - basically, based on the observations, it could either be really big (10km) or really small (0.5km), and we can basically rule out really big because we've been looking for comets for years, and during that time, to see one that is that big implies that we _should have seen_ thousands that are quite small over that time period, because the size of space objects follows a power law since they're always whacking into each other and breaking up. Since we've only seen one small interstellar object during that time rather than thousands, a large comet is so impossibly unlikely that we can conclude that it is 0.5km in size. I'm sure at some point this will be confirmed in a more conventional way, as well.
TMEHpodcast•6mo ago
What you’re describing is Bayesian inference in action. Given how rare big interstellar comets should be, and how common small ones should be, the lack of detections makes the big-comet hypothesis incredibly unlikely. So we update our beliefs: it’s probably small. Space statistics at work
EspadaV9•6mo ago
With the number of interstellar objects being detected only going up, it would be amazing if we could get some probes to hitch a ride on them. Imagine something lasting as long as Voyager 1 but travelling 3.5x the speed as it leaves the solar system.
bmiekre•6mo ago
I would guess there all kinds of technical logistics reasons as to why this is improbable, but I agree that would be really cool.
kqgnkqgn•6mo ago
Visiting one with a probe would surely be amazing in it's own right...but hitching a ride would mean matching velocities with them. And if you can do that...you're already in the same orbit, so the comet doesn't really help.
pandemic_region•6mo ago
The comet having virtually unlimited fuel would be of great help.
danparsonson•6mo ago
No it wouldn't because once you've matched speed with it, you stop accelerating and therefore need no more fuel. The comet isn't doing anything except following gravity.
grues-dinner•6mo ago
The comet probably doesn't have a great amount of fuel. Even if it's all ice, how are you going to split the water? Only if you have a fusion reactor that can do H-H fusion, or you can scrape enough dueterium out of it, can you use that. You will find no tritium as it has a short half life, and He-3 (probably) won't have been implanted by solar wind in interstellar space, so if you need that, you have to bring it or breed it somehow.

It does have a great amount of mass, so you could rendezvous, construct a mass driver or ion drive and start taking it apart and using chunks of it as extra reaction mass. That would allow you to essentially get a free reaction mass "refill". You will still need a lot (a lot) of power, and solar will be near zero.

themgt•6mo ago
There's disposable FPV drones that launch with 50km spools of kevlar cable. Seems like smart people could work out a way to "hitch" a probe on a comet without fully matching velocities first.
andrekandre•6mo ago
that would probably be... extremely hard?

i mean aren't we talking like km/s of speed difference? idk of any kind of material even 50km long that could absorb that kind of stretch/sheering like that...

signa11•6mo ago
matching velocities till you can hitch the ride. from that point onwards, you can just do…nothing (at least in that department)
kristianp•6mo ago
They're saying if you can match velocities in the first place, you don't need to hitch a ride, because you're already travelling fast enough.
lazide•6mo ago
And also, good luck hitting 70+km/s with chemical rockets, even without it going in the wrong direction relative to us for that to go well.
mcswell•6mo ago
Question: I know that our planetary probes often use planetary gravity to boost their speeds. That only works for prograde speeds, right? Because you're subtracting a miniscule amount of orbital speed from the planet and adding it to your spacecraft's speed. You couldn't whip around a planet and somehow use that to give you retrograde speeds, could you? (Presumably an airless planet, like Mercury.) Or what about using a large moon during the retrograde (relative to the planet's motion around the sun) part of its orbit?
lazide•6mo ago
I’m not an expert on orbital mechanics, I just want to provide some data points.

The voyager craft, which not only had very good acceleration early on (the best we could do, really), combined with exceptional gravity slingshots and a lot of time - and are by all accounts some of the fastest man made objects ever - are going 15.4 km/s and 17 km/s relative to the sun.

3I/ATLAS is going so much faster than these objects they might as well be stationary.

Even ignoring the limited amount of time we have to intercept, catching up to 3I/ATLAS would be incredibly difficult to do. Perhaps impossible with our current technology*. Like catching up to a semi-truck going full speed on a highway with a bicycle. After it’s already passed us and is a couple miles down the road.

*barring theoretical (and kind of insane and dangerous) tech like Orion drives.

simne•6mo ago
Problem is another. To got additional speed from other body, you need to move very close to it and in perigee use some powerful acceleration to increase rotation speed fast, so could not use slow acceleration engines, like ion engines.

Idea of gravity-assist acceleration, mechanically is just rotation of pair tightly tied bodies (and cut tie in right moment, so one body got acceleration and other got deceleration), but as it is impractical to tie for example to Moon with rope, used gravity force.

What also interesting, gravity-assist could use not only orbital speed of large body, but also got some acceleration from rotation of large body, as for gravitation, large planet is not just one material point, but system of few smaller (sub)bodies, and closer (sub)bodies give more acceleration than others.

motoboi•6mo ago
When you achieve speed in space, after acceleration, the speed won’t change forever unless you encounter some other force, like a celestial body gravity to change it. So if you achieve interestelar comet’s speed, you can shutdown the rocket and just travel at that speed for eternity like the comet does.

Even better: you can forget the comet, accelerate, keep accelerating until there is no more power or even a working motor while also extending a big sail to let solar wind accelerate you a little more.

actionfromafar•6mo ago
At first I thought, "no silly, it has to gain matching speed first, what's the point". Then it occurred to me - if we can make something which can survive the impact, we "just" have to place it in the path of the comet and it will be swept with it.

The whole thing would be like something like shooting a bullet at a moving target, but it's an idea.

That hypothetical probe will not look anything like any other space probe before it, but more like an artillery shell. (They can survive pretty damning Gs and still run that little embedded computer, so it's not a completely insane idea, I guess.)

We would also have to detect the interstaller object plenty in advance, so the probe can be launched "comfortably" in a trajectory which will intercept at exactly where the "object" is going to be.

thegrim33•6mo ago
Some quick prompting seems to say a G force of somewhere between 16-160 billion Gs, for a CPU-equivalent object getting hit by a solid object moving at 3I's escape velocity. Compared to a "typical" artillery shell of 10-15 thousand Gs. Not sure you're manufacturing anything that could survive 6-7 orders of magnitude more Gs than an artillery shell.

Of course the G-load would lessen based on how much you sped up to match its speed beforehand, but still, I think you'd need to be pretty much sped up to near the same speed as it before you could remotely possibly survive the impact.

actionfromafar•6mo ago
Wow, I clearly didn't think this through. That's brutal.

That leads to another idea - if something more substantial was placed in its path - the resulting debris and gas cloud from the impact could reveal something about the contents of the object.

Or, if it's an alien probe, it would force their hand. :-D We could see some exotic manuevering.

TheOtherHobbes•6mo ago
Or an interstellar war.

But they're probably used to it. At 61,000 m/s, 0.5mv^2 must turn every collision with a small rock into quite a big bang.

mcswell•6mo ago
A "solid object". But it's not clear how solid a comet is (or more to the point, this or any interstellar comet). If it were a fuzzball of snow, maybe 20 km across, you could in theory decelerate through it more slowly, maybe using a very large parachute initially, then discarding that for successively smaller parachutes as you approach denser and denser parts of the comet. The EPOXI mission to the Hartley 2 comet was reportedly hit nine times by "snowflakes" coming off the comet, but not damaged (https://www.astronomy.com/space-exploration/spacecraft-sees-...).

Of course your point is probably still valid.