frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

AI overly affirms users asking for personal advice

https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2026/03/ai-advice-sycophantic-models-research
310•oldfrenchfries•3h ago•248 comments

Linux is an interpreter

https://astrid.tech/2026/03/28/0/linux-is-an-interpreter/
17•frizlab•41m ago•0 comments

Spanish legislation as a Git repo

https://github.com/EnriqueLop/legalize-es
571•enriquelop•5h ago•179 comments

I Built an Open-World Engine for the N64 [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXxmIw9axWw
204•msephton•5h ago•25 comments

Cocoa-Way – Native macOS Wayland compositor for running Linux apps seamlessly

https://github.com/J-x-Z/cocoa-way
216•OJFord•7h ago•70 comments

I decompiled the White House's new app

https://thereallo.dev/blog/decompiling-the-white-house-app
105•amarcheschi•2h ago•36 comments

CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-time LHC data filtering

https://theopenreader.org/Journalism:CERN_Uses_Tiny_AI_Models_Burned_into_Silicon_for_Real-Time_L...
231•TORcicada•9h ago•114 comments

Folk are getting dangerously attached to AI that always tells them they're right

https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/27/sycophantic_ai_risks/
144•Brajeshwar•2h ago•102 comments

C++26: A User-Friednly assert() macro

https://www.sandordargo.com/blog/2026/03/25/cpp26-user-friendly-assert
33•jandeboevrie•3d ago•13 comments

ICAO issued new power bank restriction on flight

https://www.icao.int/news/new-power-bank-restrictions-will-safeguard-international-aviation
37•phantomathkg•3h ago•33 comments

StationeryObject

https://stationeryobject.com/archive/
16•NaOH•3d ago•1 comments

Improved Git Diffs with Delta, Fzf and a Little Shell Scripting

https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/awesome-git-diffs-with-delta-fzf-and-a-little-shell-scripting
58•nickjj•4d ago•24 comments

Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem

https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/
519•mazieres•17h ago•282 comments

rpg.actor Game Jam

https://rpg.actor/jam
6•Kye•1h ago•0 comments

Paper Tape Is All You Need – Training a Transformer on a 1976 Minicomputer

https://github.com/dbrll/ATTN-11
86•rahen•3d ago•13 comments

AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Dual Edition crams 208MB of cache into a single chip

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/03/amds-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-dual-edition-crams-208mb-of-cache-i...
252•zdw•15h ago•134 comments

Toma (YC W24) is hiring a Senior/Staff Eng to build AI automotive coworkers

https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/toma/jobs/2lrQI7S-sr-staff-software-engineer
1•anthonykrivonos•5h ago

RSA and Python

https://xnacly.me/posts/2023/rsa/
6•ibobev•3d ago•0 comments

A single-file C allocator with explicit heaps and tuning knobs

https://github.com/xtellect/spaces
47•enduku•2d ago•31 comments

The bee that everyone wants to save

https://naturalist.bearblog.dev/the-bee-that-everyone-wants-to-save/
209•nivethan•3d ago•67 comments

Circuit-level PDP-11/34 emulator

https://github.com/dbrll/ll-34
5•elvis70•1h ago•0 comments

Gerard of Cremona

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_of_Cremona
22•teleforce•2d ago•7 comments

Make macOS consistently bad unironically

https://lr0.org/blog/p/macos/
481•speckx•22h ago•330 comments

We built a multi-agent research hub. The waitlist is a reverse-CAPTCHA

https://enlidea.com
11•LZK•2h ago•10 comments

Go Naming Conventions: A Practical Guide

https://www.alexedwards.net/blog/go-naming-conventions
64•yurivish•3d ago•41 comments

Militarized snowflakes: The accidental beauty of Renaissance star forts

https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/star-forts/
22•Brajeshwar•1h ago•2 comments

Anatomy of the .claude/ folder

https://blog.dailydoseofds.com/p/anatomy-of-the-claude-folder
556•freedomben•1d ago•240 comments

LG's new 1Hz display is the secret behind a new laptop's battery life

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3096432/lgs-new-1hz-display-is-the-secret-behind-a-new-laptops-ba...
296•robotnikman•4d ago•149 comments

Arm releases first in-house chip, with Meta as debut customer

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/24/arm-launches-its-own-cpu-with-meta-as-first-customer.html
73•goplayoutside•3d ago•22 comments

Iran-linked hackers breach FBI director's personal email

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/iran-linked-hackers-claim-breach-of-fbi-directors-personal-email...
384•m-hodges•1d ago•484 comments
Open in hackernews

ICAO issued new power bank restriction on flight

https://www.icao.int/news/new-power-bank-restrictions-will-safeguard-international-aviation
37•phantomathkg•3h ago

Comments

Liftyee•1h ago
Interesting... anyone know if they've released the rationale/data behind this? I could see a few reasons why power banks present a larger risk than phones/computers (battery capacity, quality control), but it seems like the 100Wh battery limit already covers one of these.

In a similar vein, China banned non-CCC certified (the equivalent to UL or CE) power banks on flights from 2025, which seems to be targeting the quality control side of the problem. Not just on paper - the security officers inspected every lithium battery I was carrying, even the one in my flashlight.

tristanj•48m ago
Look up Air Busan Flight 391, a power bank in someone's carryon caused the entire plane to burn down in 5 minutes. The airplane (an Airbus A321) was destroyed. The only reason there was not total loss of life was because the plane hadn't taken off yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Busan_Flight_391

sofixa•42m ago
> I could see a few reasons why power banks present a larger risk than phones/computers (battery capacity, quality control), but it seems like the 100Wh battery limit already covers one of these.

Yeah, and it's the other one that is the main problem. It is simply impossible to know the quality of a power bank by looking at it.

> China banned non-CCC certified (the equivalent to UL or CE)

And it costs nothing to stamp the logo as if you're certified without actually going through any certification. Powerbanks are almost expendable, and can be acquried from supermarkets, corner shops, airports, even night clubs. There are even disposable ones (horrible idea). The more complex and expensive the device (like a laptop), the more certain can you be that there will be at least some quality control. In a $5/5eur powerbank, which any one could potentially be, it's almost guaranteeed there would be none.

fmajid•19m ago
One deterrent is, in China corporate criminals are executed, like those who put melamine in infant formula.
bilbo0s•8m ago
That's awesome for consumers in China.

What about the rest of us?

That kind of fraud is oftentimes only a fine in many other nations.

capnrefsmmat•36m ago
Discussion is included in the Dangerous Goods Panel report, agenda item 4.3 (pages 39-41) and Appendix E (beginning page 89). https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/DangerousGoods/DGP%...

Paragraph 4.3.3:

> While data indicated that portable electronic devices were more often the cause of fire in aircraft cabins than power banks were, the latter were a significant concern due to their increased use and a prevalence of lower-quality products with defects or vulnerabilities that were more likely to lead to thermal events. Power banks were also not offered the same level of protection that batteries installed in portable electronic devices were provided. The amendments therefore focused on power banks.

nharada•1h ago
Was expecting to be annoyed but this seems reasonable. You can have 2 power banks and can't charge them during flight
quantummagic•1h ago
Limiting the devices to two per person seems nonsensical to me. The devices are either dangerous, or they're not. If they're dangerous, two is too many. And if they're not, then why limit them only to two?
ddalex•52m ago
Quantity is a quality of its own.

Maybe there is enough plane onboard capacity to deal with just 50 batteries, let's say; multiply the failure rate expected and the pax capacity of the plane and you get how many batteries you can afford to have onboard and still be able to deal with worst case scenario.

bryant•46m ago
More batteries, more likely that you'll have even just one of them fail. Since even one of them (to your point) failing is enough of a reason to divert the flight, better to start by reducing the probability of that happening in ways people can swallow.
quantummagic•34m ago
So having 500 batteries on board is okay.. but 750 is too risky? I just have a hard time believing that the math is actually mathing in this case. Maybe you're right, and this is just a first step to get people to gradually accept more restrictions.
nharada•42m ago
> The devices are either dangerous, or they're not

That's not actually how it works though, it's all a risk and percentages. Nobody says "driving is either safe or it's not" or "delivering a baby is either safe or it's not"

quantummagic•36m ago
That's not actually how it works though. There's a reason we restrict people to zero bombs allowed on board.
thih9•22m ago
Only because bombs don’t charge as well. Aerosol cans and flammable liquids (e.g. alcohol) are allowed; in small quantities - just like power banks.
quantummagic•7m ago
This is the first decent answer, which I appreciate. And while my comparison to a bomb may have been over the top, I don't think a comparison to shampoo is fair either. And in any case, I'm not so sure whether the limit on toiletries is all that sensical either.
SilasX•4m ago
Correct, but I agree with the parent that this is a dubious case to apply that reasoning.

To make it clearer, imagine another context: "It's dangerous for a passenger to have a gun on board. Therefore, we're strictly limiting passengers to only two guns."

Like, no. The relevant sad case is present with one gun just as with two.

Of course, what complicates it is that these power banks present a small but relevant risk of burning and killing everyone on board. So yeah, you might be below the risk threshold if everyone brought two, but not three. So it's not inherently a stupid idea, but requires a really precise risk calculation to justify that figure.

avidiax•34m ago
Maybe it's a sort of build-quality proxy.

Someone bringing 150 "lipstick" single-cell promotional chargers -> bad

Someone bringing one phone and one laptop battery pack -> OK

If you are limited to two, you are probably not bringing anything that is near e-waste quality.

hollerith•31m ago
Way to lean into binary thinking.
quantummagic•30m ago
Do you save your snark for batteries only, or are you equally liberally minded with your non-binary thinking about the number of bombs allowed on board?
unethical_ban•24m ago
You've now used this fallacious analogy twice.

Clearly, battery packs have more legit utility for more people at much lower risk than a bomb.

quantummagic•18m ago
> You've now used this fallacious analogy twice.

It's not fallacious, it focuses the issue, and in this particular case shows that it's not about "binary thinking" it's about risk.

And my original puzzlement continues. At what level of risk, does limiting the number of devices on board to 500 or even more, actually accomplish anything?

If they're not all that dangerous, then why limit them at all? And if they're dangerous enough to limit at all, why in God's blue sky, would you allow that many of them on a plane?

We don't limit people to 1 knife per person, even though knives have utility to a lot of people who carry one with them every day.

tristanj•23m ago
These items are dangerous. The FAA limit for power bank capacity is 100Wh (~27000mAh), which is 360kJ of energy. A hand grenade has approximately 700-800 kJ of energy.

Two powerbanks contain the same amount of energy as a hand grenade.

drum55•17m ago
That's a kind of meaningless comparison. Peanuts are about 8kJ per gram supposedly, by your measure we should ban even small amounts of peanuts on planes because 100 grams of them contain more energy than a hand grenade. Without talking about the time frame over which the energy can be released you'd have to make sure that everybody went onto the plane completely naked lest their clothes ignited.
amelius•58m ago
Just give us internet free of extra charge.
longislandguido•37m ago
Power banks were a mistake. It's akin to carrying fireworks in your bag. Ban them all from air travel.

Every one I have owned has been recalled for being a fire hazard. EVERY SINGLE ONE. I stopped buying them as a result. We're talking name brand devices, not junk off AliExpress.

miyuru•32m ago
what about your mobile phone or laptop?
longislandguido•30m ago
Phone batteries are typically smaller (less energy which can be violently dissipated) than most power banks.

Naturally you will ask, what about tablets and laptops? They are prohibited from checked luggage for this reason. Power banks however are smaller and easier to conceal.

The risk is really in a fire developing in your bag down below in cargo, where no one can see it. By the time the fire alarms go off, it's too late and good luck if you are over water or the Arctic. If it happens upstairs they can at least tend to it with a fire extinguisher or bag/blanket.

See ValuJet Flight 592, fire in an airplane's cargo hold is probably one of the scariest ways to slowly die.

It's all about corralling risk. You can't tell people they can't bring their laptops. But power banks are unnecessary nice-to-haves.

drum55•19m ago
There are fire extinguishers and smoke detectors in the holds of aircraft.
NocturnalWaffle•6m ago
Laptops, at least in the US, are not banned in checked luggage[1]. The airlines may have different rules, but generally the airline is not the one inspecting your bag, TSA is.

[1] https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/...

thih9•31m ago
Do you remember the model names?
drum55•9m ago
I've never had any issues with brand name, not dollar store power banks and I've been using them for more than a decade. I'd totally expect a $5 pink power bank from a alphabet amazon seller to be an issue, but anything modern and reasonable like Anker are very unlikely to cause you any issues. Balancing, protection are very much solved issues at this point for the cell chemistries we use.

If LiPo was the issue, using LiFePo4 or LTO cells for planes would be a totally reasonable alternative too. LTO cells are so safe the manufacturer of them has videos on youtube of them hammering nails into the cells, cutting them with a saw, and crushing them with a press and they don't really care.

snops•32m ago
Many airlines are going much further than this, for instance Virgin Atlantic ban you from either charging or charging from any power bank, and you can't keep them in the overhead locker, you must keep them next to you in case it starts burning spontaneously!

They have a "fire containment bag" they can chuck it in should you notice it getting hot or smoking.

https://www.virginatlantic.com/en-US/help/articles/powerbank...

baggy_trough•29m ago
I couldn't find the actual regulation. What counts as a "power bank"? I travel with a bunch of GoPro batteries, but they are smaller.