frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Claude Code: Channels

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/channels
98•jasonjmcghee•1h ago•42 comments

Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years

https://omar.yt/posts/wayland-set-the-linux-desktop-back-by-10-years
90•omarroth•1h ago•46 comments

Astral to Join OpenAI

https://astral.sh/blog/openai
1208•ibraheemdev•12h ago•749 comments

Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/03/google-details-new-24-hour-process-to-sideload-unverified...
486•0xedb•8h ago•568 comments

Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers

https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit
164•modinfo•4h ago•102 comments

How the Turner twins are mythbusting modern technical apparel

https://www.carryology.com/insights/how-the-turner-twins-are-mythbusting-modern-gear/
112•greedo•2d ago•58 comments

Return of the Obra Dinn: spherical mapped dithering for a 1bpp first-person game

https://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=40832.msg1363742#msg1363742
236•PaulHoule•3d ago•34 comments

Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2026/march/bombarding-gamblers-with-offers-greatly-increases-betti...
60•hhs•2h ago•60 comments

Show HN: Three new Kitten TTS models – smallest less than 25MB

https://github.com/KittenML/KittenTTS
313•rohan_joshi•9h ago•106 comments

Noq: n0's new QUIC implementation in Rust

https://www.iroh.computer/blog/noq-announcement
142•od0•7h ago•19 comments

Drugwars for the TI-82/83/83 Calculators

https://gist.github.com/mattmanning/1002653/b7a1e88479a10eaae3bd5298b8b2c86e16fb4404
6•robotnikman•57m ago•2 comments

The Day I Discovered Type Design

https://www.marksimonson.com/notebook/view/the-day-i-discovered-type-design/
25•ingve•2h ago•2 comments

4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c624330lg1ko
262•mosura•10h ago•415 comments

EsoLang-Bench: Evaluating Genuine Reasoning in LLMs via Esoteric Languages

https://esolang-bench.vercel.app/
56•matt_d•4h ago•27 comments

How many branches can your CPU predict?

https://lemire.me/blog/2026/03/18/how-many-branches-can-your-cpu-predict/
15•chmaynard•1d ago•28 comments

Waymo Safety Impact

https://waymo.com/safety/impact/
211•xnx•5h ago•206 comments

Be intentional about how AI changes your codebase

https://aicode.swerdlow.dev
64•benswerd•4h ago•26 comments

“Your frustration is the product”

https://daringfireball.net/2026/03/your_frustration_is_the_product
426•llm_nerd•13h ago•248 comments

NanoGPT Slowrun: 10x Data Efficiency with Infinite Compute

https://qlabs.sh/10x
98•sdpmas•6h ago•16 comments

From Oscilloscope to Wireshark: A UDP Story (2022)

https://www.mattkeeter.com/blog/2022-08-11-udp/
76•ofrzeta•6h ago•17 comments

Juggalo makeup blocks facial recognition technology (2019)

https://consequence.net/2019/07/juggalo-makeup-facial-recognition/
229•speckx•12h ago•141 comments

Clockwise acquired by Salesforce and shutting down next week

https://www.getclockwise.com
68•nigelgutzmann•5h ago•45 comments

Scaling Karpathy's Autoresearch: What Happens When the Agent Gets a GPU Cluster

https://blog.skypilot.co/scaling-autoresearch/
120•hopechong•8h ago•58 comments

OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier

https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article;sid=20260319125859
177•defrost•11h ago•55 comments

Launch HN: Voltair (YC W26) – Drone and charging network for power utilities

48•wweissbluth•8h ago•23 comments

My Random Forest Was Mostly Learning Time-to-Expiry Noise

https://illya.sh/threads/out-of-sample-permutation-feature-importance-for-random
13•iluxonchik•3d ago•2 comments

An update on Steam / GOG changes for OpenTTD

https://www.openttd.org/news/2026/03/19/steam-changes-update
267•jandeboevrie•7h ago•185 comments

I turned Markdown into a protocol for generative UI

https://fabian-kuebler.com/posts/markdown-agentic-ui/
79•FabianCarbonara•11h ago•38 comments

The Shape of Inequalities

https://www.andreinc.net/2026/03/16/the-shape-of-inequalities/
95•nomemory•10h ago•14 comments

macOS 26 breaks custom DNS settings including .internal

https://gist.github.com/adamamyl/81b78eced40feae50eae7c4f3bec1f5a
319•adamamyl•10h ago•165 comments
Open in hackernews

Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2026/march/bombarding-gamblers-with-offers-greatly-increases-betting-and-gambling-harm.html
60•hhs•2h ago

Comments

xenadu02•1h ago
Super shocking (sarcasm).

Gamblers are the whales of that industry. The industry is well aware of that and well aware of how much harm they can cause. But their paychecks depend on not knowing so they choose not to.

Same as pay-to-win freemium games. Find the whales and milk them for all you can. For every high-spender who can afford it they know full well the other 99 cannot. They know they are ruining some people's lives. They know they use dirty psychological manipulation tactics. Their paychecks depend on not knowing so they choose not to.

mc32•1h ago
Also there’s a bit of a tragedy of the commons. If one entity is scrupulous that doesn’t mean another will. Obviously if they had any morals they’d see the bright line.
eucyclos•46m ago
I wonder how incentives could be better aligned.

Had an interesting case study where a coworker liked to gamble - he was fairly responsible, kept to his budget and treated it like an expensive hobby he enjoyed- but at the same time, he had someone else handle his retirement investments, which is an unpredictable payoff market where you come out ahead on average. I asked a couple times why he didn't replace gambling with investing and never got a good answer. He was certainly smart enough that he could have had fun with the research and chance.

Then there was a market downturn and his investment advisor had to talk him down from selling in a panic, and I was like "oh... It's not an information problem at all. It's entirely an emotional regulation problem"

I should sell a "meditation for investors" course

mothballed•39m ago
I'm not sure it's irrational to sell in a market downturn. It's a way to pad your emergency savings rather than try to catch a falling knife later when you're already fired. Of course if you sell more than you need to survive a layoff, then that's probably not smart.
Jerrrrrrrry•32m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal–agent_problem
epolanski•1h ago
The worst thing is that gambling companies are free to ban you if you win too much.

So if you're still there it's just because you're being milked.

There's a a giant market for second hand accounts on betting websites for this very reason.

Forgeties79•59m ago
No different than Big Tobacco right? They loved researching all the things that weren’t linked to smoking.
schubidubiduba•36m ago
No different than big tech and their divisive algorithms. Or big pharma and side effects. Or big manufacturing and environmental harm (including harm to the people living around manufacturing companies).

It is an inherent property of unchecked capitalism to externalise and ignore any unwanted costs. Or on the flip side of that coin, profit from causing damage to others, where possible.

Forgeties79•25m ago
Absolutely
anonymars•18m ago
Ha, well, opinions sure vary here. I'm sure it has nothing to do with that Upton Sinclair quote about "understanding"
rimbo789•1h ago
The legalization and expansion of gambling was a massive mistake and should be undone as soon as possible.
recursivedoubts•1h ago
Crazy how we (the US) just decided as a society that gambling was not only not illegal anymore but that it was perfectly reasonable to integrate it deeply into every sporting event possible in a span of about five years.

We didn't decide that, btw.

epolanski•1h ago
And not just sports, but world events where insiders can have the financial incentives to make terrible things happen.

But say that, and the same non sensical asinine crowd that spammed about crypto future or NFTs will tell you that's just to have more accurate information and you don't get it.

ludston•1h ago
I mean if it didn't make the gambling organizations more money they wouldn't do it. Gambling industry has always been about how much wealth it can extract from the punters without being regulated for it.

Hopefully this research ends up being used to justify more gambling regulations, but governments are addicted to the gambling lobby donations so who knows what will happen.

kelseyfrog•1h ago
If it's so bad for gamblers, why don't they stop?

If gambling orgs do something that you know causes harm, why isn't the a legal sense of responsibility?

snarfy•1h ago
> If it's so bad for gamblers, why don't they stop?

That's not how addiction works.

chrislh•1h ago
I highly (and regularly) recommend reading Gabor Mate's "In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts"

It's an enlightening read on addiction that will make you more empathetic for addicts of all types: gambling, substances, shopping, whatever.

Definitely worth a look if you find yourself asking "Why don't they just stop?"

https://www.amazon.com/Realm-Hungry-Ghosts-Encounters-Addict...

kelseyfrog•1h ago
If someone cannot stop gambling, then what moral responsibility do gambling organizations have when giving them offers?
cjcenizal•1h ago
I understand moral arguments but also see how others might not. I think it might be more useful to view this from a societal perspective. Is it to society's benefit to ensure gamblers don't ruin their own lives? To answer that question, what's the cost to society when a gambler ruins their life?

Lost savings means an impoverished individual and potentially an impoverished family and children. These draw support resources from the state and community, are more likely to turn to crime, and are less likely to develop into contributing members of society.

kelseyfrog•1h ago
Help me understand the difference between preying on gambling addicts vs preying on gullible old people to get them to buy $500 in apple store gift cards.
sd9•58m ago
Huh? I don’t think you should do either.
fc417fc802•46m ago
Both are scummy but it's not clear how to regulate the latter without huge collateral damage whereas the former is quite straightforward (because there's effectively no societal benefit to begin with).
santoshalper•1h ago
Only the moral obligation not to prey on the weak. Gambling addicts are sick. Taking advantage of a sick person makes you scummy.
sd9•1h ago
If you were friends with an alcoholic it would be pretty shitty to give them a bottle of vodka for their birthday.

People are not machines, it’s not as simple as deciding whether to do something or not. You have stronger and weaker days. Temptation makes it harder to do what is in your best interests, even if you’ve decided on another day that you’d rather not partake.

Getting concrete about gambling: lots of people decide not to gamble and just don’t. Lots of people decide they don’t care whether they gamble and they do. But there are also many people in the middle, who would rather not gamble, but find that they sometimes act against their own best interests, and their own past resolutions to not gamble. Bombarding these people with offers of free bets increases the likelihood that they will gamble on their weaker days.

When I hear takes like yours, I feel very jealous. I would love to always act in my own best interests and according to some policy I predetermined. But that’s just not my experience of how life works.

kelseyfrog•57m ago
It seems like a gambling addiction is the same as not having the capacity to choose not to. Is that a misunderstanding?
sd9•50m ago
I think… sort of.

I feel like you’re trying to force some sort of binary here, but I’m trying to say that you may choose not to gamble in general, on day X, but find that you do gamble later.

In fact I would say that many gambling addicts have _chosen_ _not_ to gamble in some sense, but in another moment they do find that they choose to. There’s a temporal aspect to this.

Advertising gambling to those people makes it less likely that they will follow through on their choices.

Do you always do literally everything you choose with a clear head? Never procrastinate, get angry, feel sad, whatever? It’s really hard for me to see your perspective on this.

fn-mote•43m ago
People in Gambler’s Anonymous (GA) would definitely disagree with this characterization.

The same way sober alcoholics would disagree with a similar statement about alcohol addiction.

kelseyfrog•41m ago
Please correct me! Gaps in my understanding are opportunities to learn something new.

I'd like to know the difference between the characterization of being "powerless over alcohol" for example and not having the capacity of choice.

1. https://www.aa.org/the-twelve-steps

jazzpush2•1h ago
It was legal up til a few years ago. Take a guess why it's not now (or just read the news).

| If it's so bad for gamblers, why don't they stop?

If this is serious, lol. "Why are you addicted to X. Just stop, it's easy!"

bombcar•1h ago
“Stop being poor.”
yearolinuxdsktp•46m ago
> If it's so bad for gamblers, why don't they stop?

Because harm does not guarantee control.

When it becomes compulsive, it’s not a simple cost-benefit choice anymore. People can know it’s hurting them and still feel driven to keep doing it.

The dopamine rush of gambling means the brain can get stuck chasing relief, hope, or reward, despite also knowing that it is destructive.

> If gambling orgs do something that you know causes harm, why isn't the a legal sense of responsibility?

Because it’s not that easy to prove responsibility in the face of powerful money lobbying and victim-blaming. Shame and stigma around addiction means people don’t come forward. Freedom argument comes in that not everyone who gambles is an addict, so restricting it takes freedom away. The same argument is used to push the personal responsibility angle.

Ultimately I think the way the gambling orgs cover their ass is by advertising gambling addiction helplines and adding small disclaimers to call those lines if you have a problem: “that’s it, legislators, we are clearly giving them the tools to help themselves, and that shows us exercising responsibility. Bombarding gamblers with offers is simply marketing and creating engagement for our business, you can’t make that illegal.”

Do they have moral responsibility to not exploit addicted gamblers? I would argue, yes, they do. But unless you prohibit all gambling marketing, how would you accomplish this moral responsibility even if the gambling company agreed it had it? It’s not like addicts identify themselves or that you can filter your marketing easily to people without problems. This is why the solutions have been on outlawing the whole thing, because it’s really hard to operate as a business without the societal cost.

beloch•1h ago
>“Although the findings relate to direct marketing, I see no reason why the same or similar adverse effects wouldn’t occur for gambling advertising on TV or social media.”

Controlling/banning advertising for Alcohol and Tobacco results in significant health benefits. Sports gambling used to be illegal in many places or limited to specific places. Now that it's available in your pocket, like a pack of smokes or a flask of whisky, why wouldn't advertising triggers, direct or otherwise, be effective at encouraging susceptible people to partake? This is not a surprising result. It's the inaction of most governments that is surprising.

jazzpush2•1h ago
It's everywhere on YouTube, usually as a 'hidden' ad in the alt-right manosphere (e.g. the recent Nick Shirley video he wears a sweatshirt for a gambling site throughout, with constant name drops of it that aren't over ads).

Disgusting behavior, especially coming from those who often claim their content is to improve things. Hypocrites across the board.

epolanski•1h ago
I see Kalshi promoted on many sports highlights videos on YouTube.
joecool1029•1h ago
Makes sense, it’s high in protein.
cm2012•1h ago
The US Supreme Court made it illegal for states to ban gambling ads, as a first amendment issue. I think it was a bad decision.
fc417fc802•59m ago
I wonder if they would overturn that if sufficient evidence of harm were demonstrated. They've been remarkably consistent about permitting violations of constitutional rights where the government can unambiguously demonstrate a pressing need.
charcircuit•46m ago
The 1A does not have an exception for harm.
fc417fc802•42m ago
And yet SCOTUS has carved out a number of exceptions where they felt it was clearly necessary. Disorderly conduct and noise ordinances are examples. It's not the end of the world but (very approximately) being woken up by someone shouting in the street at 2 am was deemed a larger problem than restricting your individual right to drunkenly shout at your friend in that scenario.
lokar•24m ago
Not true. Generally the law must be evaluated by the “strict scrutiny“ standard.
Bratmon•1h ago
Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Association, Inc. v. United States (1999) makes it illegal for the government to ban advertising of legal gambling in the US.
lokar•19m ago
That was because they allowed advertising for some forms of (legal) gambling but not others.
abcde666777•1h ago
I've always found the marketing around gambling (and most things really) completely disgusting. As a society I think we're far too tolerant of these things.

A lot of the ads basically go along the lines of: 'you could win big and have a great time, awesome! (disclaimer: will probably ruin your life)'.

It should be like it is with smoking - photos of lung cancer patients on the package. People will still do it of course but at least it's not falsely advertised.

So the gambling ads should be things like, that moment where your wife finds out you've drained the family's savings and the house is about to be re-possessed. Yeah.

snarfy•1h ago
south park alcohol commercial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Cg8klY9JI
epolanski•1h ago
And gambling, same as prediction markets, has literally no positive social outcome.
xXSLAYERXx•23m ago
At this point I question whether they should even be allowed to advertise.
Invictus0•1h ago
why can't we have a law that just caps your gambling losses? Everyone gets a federally issued gambling license tied to your ID, if you lose more than X amount the casino is no longer legally allowed to let you play. Casual gamblers can still enjoy, problem gamblers get cut off; just like with alcohol at the bar.
santoshalper•1h ago
For the same reason it isn't outlawed to begin with. It makes some wealthy, influential people even wealthier. They, not we, control our government.
quickthrowman•1h ago
Someone could create a market where problem gamblers can buy wagering power (the ability to risk more after reaching their own loss cap) from non-gamblers unless you force physical in person gambling with ID checks.

Gambling should return to being legal in Vegas and on reservations, 24/7 gambling anywhere is very problematic.

bluGill•53m ago
They can but most non gamblers wouldn't partictpate. Many non gomblers won't particitate because they might go to vegas this year and so want the chance.
fn-mote•45m ago
> Many non gomblers won't particitate because they might go to vegas this year

I’m pretty sure you would see so many people selling their quotas that the price would be dirt cheap.

At the most basic level: how many can afford to go to Vegas? This would be sure money. They’d take it when they need it.

bluGill•5m ago
vegas is cheap. Not free, but cheap to get to compared to most other tourist traps. There are a fair amout of free trips to vegas those hopes will keep a lot away.

and most people have ethics and so would not sell. Maybe to someone in the family, but strangers.

alex43578•51m ago
Alcohol should only be legal in pubs and bars; alcohol in Disney World, on planes, and in grocery stores is very problematic.
Invictus0•46m ago
your market idea makes no sense, and it could be outlawed easily.
hattmall•56m ago
Interesting approach but crack is illegal and still people are addicted to it.
Invictus0•48m ago
your point is not clear to me. alcohol is legal and people are addicted to it
mothballed•47m ago
When online sports gambling started in the US they were offering $500-$1000 of free bets to sign up. Very tempting to sign up, even though I don't gamble anymore than about once a decade, but I decided whoever did that offer was probably smarter than me about who would win out in the end.

I've been around the block long enough to know you never take an 'easy profit' deal from someone who is in the business of making money from them while in their own domain.

xXSLAYERXx•15m ago
It was truly a wild time. All the books desperate for action in this new online gambling world (US). I went from book to book, took "advantage" of their promos, never collected a dime. When I was up, I bet more. Hit zero? Go to the next book. Their lines were better anyway ;)
APDNixon37•3m ago
tldr for anyone skimming: the key insight is in section 3