frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

DeepSeek-v4-flash-vision-exp

https://api-docs.deepseek.com/guides/vision/
209•dares2573•2h ago•51 comments

AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

https://annas-archive.pk/blog/physical-destruction.html
206•darccio•3h ago•129 comments

TigerBeetle Core System Architecture: Deconstructing Performance Engineering

https://ixuvo.com/blog/tigerbeetle-core-system-architecture-performance-engineering
51•ksec•1h ago•17 comments

The Lost Treasure of Sid Meier's Pirates

https://remapradio.com/articles/the-lost-treasure-of-sid-meiers-pirates/
156•spankibalt•5h ago•84 comments

Small, native web tricks worth remembering

https://htmlcat.net/
111•marcomezzavilla•3h ago•24 comments

Kino: A high-performance Ractor web server for Ruby 4.0

https://github.com/yaroslav/kino
23•ksec•2h ago•2 comments

We Rebuilt the Linux MicroVM Stack on Apple Silicon

https://encore.dev/blog/firecracker-apple-silicon
116•signa11•6h ago•56 comments

Flat Chair by Sara Paculdo

https://www.toxel.com/tech/2026/08/07/flat-chair-by-sara-paculdo/
67•surprisetalk•3d ago•18 comments

The Mystery of Dark Oxygen

https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/the-mystery-of-dark-oxygen
18•rbanffy•5d ago•5 comments

The August 17 outage

https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/the-august-17-outage-and-the-work-ahead/
584•0xedb•17h ago•659 comments

I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

https://www.experimental-history.com/p/i-like-em-thick
789•Ariarule•2d ago•321 comments

HTML Can Do That

https://chrisburnell.com/html-can-do-that/
898•encyclopedism•1d ago•203 comments

Malicious Rust crate Arrayref runs a build-time payload

https://safedep.io/arrayref-proc-macro1-rust-build-time-malware/
522•abhisek•23h ago•453 comments

Ox Alpha

https://openrouter.ai/stealth/ox-alpha
189•mtokmak06•13h ago•150 comments

Siemens PC-X (2015)

https://www.geekdot.com/siemens-pc-x/
8•naves•5d ago•2 comments

Micron announces $10B research hub in Boise

https://investors.micron.com/news/press-release/2026/Micron-Unveils-Micron-Research-Labs-a-U-S--B...
63•osnium123•9h ago•21 comments

I should have loved biology (2020)

https://jsomers.net/i-should-have-loved-biology/
305•tyre•19h ago•115 comments

Why aren't smart people happier? (2022)

https://www.experimental-history.com/p/why-arent-smart-people-happier
222•rafaelc•18h ago•308 comments

The Religious Experience of Philip K. Dick by R. Crumb (1986)

https://philipdick.com/resources/miscellaneous/the-religious-experience-of-philip-k-dick-by-r-cru...
70•wise_blood•7h ago•45 comments

Seed: Minimal, self-modifying agent harness

https://github.com/vivekhaldar/seed
43•gandalfgeek•7h ago•16 comments

CIA funding helped keep NeXT afloat in the 80s

https://www.wsj.com/tech/steve-jobs-apple-next-cia-161b65f9?st=NWWds1&reflink=desktopwebshare_per...
427•EwanG•1d ago•257 comments

Japan tried to build an operating system for the world, the US intervened

https://www.xda-developers.com/japan-tried-build-operating-system-entire-world-us-government-inte...
274•rdmuser•7h ago•153 comments

Launch HN: Vendo (YC S26) – Let users build features on top of your product

https://github.com/runvendo/vendo
49•yousefh409•21h ago•20 comments

Better Batteries

https://matklad.github.io/2026/08/20/better-batteries.html
19•olexsmir•5h ago•13 comments

Vomit: Clean up Claude 5's token output with a separate LLM

https://github.com/zachahn/vomit
273•Bluestein•21h ago•267 comments

Stop Anthropomorphizing Intermediate Tokens as Reasoning/Thinking Traces (2025)

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09762
265•nunodonato•2d ago•216 comments

Linux 7.2

https://www.igalia.com/2026/08/19/Linux-72-Released.html
272•mariuz•21h ago•117 comments

Anti-AI fonts are useless and harmful

https://blog.yaros.ae/anti-ai-fonts-are-useless-and-harmful/
185•speckx•22h ago•139 comments

AliExpress runs silent WebAudio fingerprinting that breaks Bluetooth multipoint

https://blog.laserphile.com/2026/08/aliexpress-webpage-keeping-multipoint.html
984•emctech•1d ago•316 comments

Captain Zilog

https://www.zilog.com/captain_zilog/
63•rbanffy•4d ago•8 comments
Open in hackernews

Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/21/us/politics/samuel-tunick-deleted-phone-felony.html
36•floathub•1h ago

Comments

floathub•1h ago
According to the article, he was actually using GrapheneOS and gave the border official the Duress PIN. So I guess technically it was the official that erased the data :-)
gruez•48m ago
"I wired a bomb to the safe which triggers if you enter a given code. When the police asked me for the safes code I gave them that code, so it was technically the cop that killed himself and his colleagues"

Or even

"A soldier stepped on a landmine but since it was his footsteps that triggered the mine he technically killed himself"

hamper653•40m ago
There is a difference between exploding a bomb and deleting your data. One is a crime.
LoganDark•30m ago
Deleting your data is absolutely a crime when the authorities could've wanted whatever it was you deleted -- even if they hadn't told you yet. It stands to reason that providing a duress PIN that deletes your data when entered would be a crime as well, if said data is of interest.

Not to say that I personally agree with either of those cases. But what is considered crime can get pretty unfair when it comes to the authorities thinking you did something wrong.

bdangubic•24m ago
Can you provide a statute number for this crime please? Any federal or even state statute will do
gruez•23m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampering_with_evidence
bdangubic•11m ago
First, that is not an actual statute and second exactly what "evidence" is my phone, evidence of what exactly?
someothherguyy•8m ago
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232

is what he was charged with (a)

see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

LoganDark•3m ago
> seems like a stretch though

I think the issue will fall on whether the encrypted data on the device counts as property. The rest looks pretty clear-cut to me.

LoganDark•7m ago
gruez•26m ago
>There is a difference between exploding a bomb

Mines (in wars, as implied by "solider") aren't illegal. Also even for the first example there are certainly improvised explosives you can set up that isn't criminal to create or set off, fireworks for instance. Same with a barrel of gasoline. It's certainly a crime to use it to kill someone, but that's my point. By OP's logic it's not the person who set it up's fault, it's the person who triggered it.

LoganDark•16m ago
If you set up a device to explode once someone enters the room, it doesn't matter who set it off by entering the room if they had no idea the room would blow up.

I don't think it'll be very easy to get out of liability in this case. The duress PIN is a feature explicitly designed to delete all data when it is entered, especially in cases of coercion like this. There would be more plausible deniability if officers had simply discovered it somewhere and tried it on their own, but in this case it was provided directly in place of the real PIN.

mc32•24m ago
Intentional destruction of evidence is also a crime. Now, whether this applies to this scenario I suppose will have to be determined by the courts.

Destroying potential evidence before suspicion is not a crime. Destroying it once under suspicion is a crime. So anyone can destroy their data at their hotel room even just before entry even if the data contains evidence of crimes. Of course the courts could take that into evidence to support the argument that there were crimes but it would not be a crime in and of itself.

ComputerPerson•15m ago
Great comment. Wish it was the top one so I didn't have to read through the others to get here.

Do you have thoughts as to how the courts would debate the deletion that you could present on a similar intellectual plane?

spacebanana7•29m ago
I wonder whether it'd be better for a duress PIN to delete existing data and also create a semi plausible artificial profile to hide the deletion event.
nkrisc•24m ago
I don’t think that would fly as a defense in court.
phoghed•20m ago
He’ll just have to pray the scene wasn’t recorded and his real PIN was one digit off
pjc50•42m ago
Paywalled, but what is the actual charge? Is it some extremely generic "obstructing an investigation" one? The US is quite good about making court documents available on line, if someone can find it.
owlninja•40m ago
Here's a gift link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/21/us/politics/samuel-tunick...
hoppyhoppy2•40m ago
The article says he was charged with obstruction.

You can try this "gift link" to the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/21/us/politics/samuel-tunick...

hamper653•38m ago
Obstruction to what though?
c0l0•30m ago
Injustice ;)
stymaar•28m ago
Illegitimate abuse of border control power to restrict freedom of speech.
jmclnx•37m ago
Yet another case that will waste the court's time and money. All this is doing is keeping defense lawyers pocket's lined.

At this point, people should buy a burner phone when going to/from the US. In that phone only have a couple of phone numbers and that's it.

Sharlin•33m ago
Oh, they may well give you bad time if your phone looks like a burner with too little content.
skinfaxi•26m ago
If you are a citizen like this person is then you can tell them to fuck off, they can keep the phone, and they have to let you in.
nucleardog•24m ago
They have to let you in. Doesn't mean they have to let you roam the country freely. They can just send you to some form of detention.
iamnothere•19m ago
That isn’t true. They can detain you briefly for questioning at the border, but if there is no crime then you will be released. Feel free to dig into historical court cases about border detention if you disagree.

If you get charged with a crime, things are very different.

iamnothere•25m ago
If you are a citizen it doesn’t matter. They have to let you in.
yellow_lead•33m ago
https://archive.is/SflVC
neom•30m ago
Legal Eagle just covered this, it's quite interesting analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2rokxux5cU
bena•20m ago
Not even a minute in. "Oh, he's protesting Cop City, got it. This is just police harassment."
knute•7m ago
The guy from Game Changer?
34679•29m ago
Amendment 4:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Amendment 5:

"..nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

gruez•24m ago
>Amendment 4:

He was charged for destroying evidence, not refusing a search

>Amendment 5:

Destroying evidence isn't testimony. Moreover he would have been in the clear if he just kept his mouth shut.

Varelion•20m ago
You wouldn't catch me making a defense case for obese nazis.
gruez•14m ago
Please try again with an actual argument rather than attacking people based on which "side" I'm on.
Varelion•11m ago
If you missed what the actual argument was, you're already too far gone to have a conversation with.
gruez•
amazingamazing•23m ago
If the government wants you no amount of technical gotchas will prevent this.
phoghed•17m ago
Seems like it would be better to have a truecrypt type of situation, where if you put in a certain pin, then it just logs you into a separate OS with nothing you want to hide.

Obviously have the duress pin if what’s in your phone is worse than the obstruction charges too.

quickthrowman•16m ago
Would it be permissible to wipe your phone before going through customs to get back into the US? If they ask to search your already wiped phone, you aren’t destroying any evidence.
delichon•5m ago
I keep my sensitive data on an encrypted Cryptomator volume on my phone. The volume is not hidden. As I understand it they would have to get a separate warrant to legally demand the second password, and I'd usually have the time and opportunity to challenge the process. It's far from ideal but seems like worthwhile protection to me, given that the data could let someone empty my life savings.
There is a federal criminal provision, 18 U.S.C. § 1519 (destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations)

> Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

That covers the first part of my comment. As for the second part, there is 18 U.S.C. § 2232(a) (destruction or removal of property to prevent seizure)

> Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government's lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

IANAL, but the encrypted data on the device can be considered property, and the act of providing the duress PIN in place of the real one can be considered a knowing action for the purpose of preventing the government either from continuing to hold that data under its control, or from seizing the data into its control in the first place (since the data was never decrypted).

yodon•5m ago
> Can you provide a statute number for this crime please? Any federal or even state statute will do

The google search required to find the answer ("federal statute for destruction of evidence") is shorter than your question here.

"Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry..."[0]

[0]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519

floathub•32m ago
He is charged with obstruction, but under domestic terrorism (as defined by a national security presidential memorandum).
jeroenhd•39m ago
Knowingly providing a PIN that would erase evidence is going to get tough in court.

But the man was also hated by the cops because of his activism. They were going to catch him for something, some day. This incident just provided the necessary excuse to lock him up.

hamper653•38m ago
Evidence of what?
jeroenhd•22m ago
Whatever they claimed they needed access for his phone to. Probably nothing serious that would be worth more than a fine, if anything. But now they've got him for deleting evidence, which is pretty bad.
gonzalohm•37m ago
How can they prove that? What if it was a glitch?
jeroenhd•19m ago
That shouldn't be too hard. Get someone from Google or someone with any tech knowledge to explain to the judge how phones normally work, what encryption keys are, the implications of wiping an encryption key, and then get someone to show the difference between entering a normal PIN wrong several times and entering the duress PIN. You just need to convince the jury (or judge, if there is no jury for whatever reason).

People have gone to jail or have been executed for less than a glitch. Theoretically a highly charged particle from space could've messed with exactly the right transistors exactly when entering the correct PIN and trigger the wipe process. There is no way to prove that didn't happen. But you don't need that kind of proof.

bdangubic•30m ago
> They were going to catch him for something, some day. This incident just provided the necessary excuse to lock him up

funny reading this (don't disagree) and then also reading on HN how China is "bad" this is some gestapo shit but not surprising that it is getting normalised ...

deaux•18m ago
China is indeed "bad" for the gestapo shit. The difference is that China's gestapo shit comes with benefits for the common man too, whereas in the US the gestapo shit only serves the inner circle at the top of the regime with zero benefits to 99% of the populace.
jeroenhd•14m ago
China is strictly worse than the USA when it comes to border controls. That doesn't mean the USA is good or acceptable in any way; these laws are part of the reason why I don't plan on visiting the country. The USA also has much worse laws on the books, like having to give the authorities your social media passwords to check if you're secretly a terrorist (though that doesn't apply to citizens).

Excessive border patrol power has been around in the USA for ages now, it's all part of the post-9/11 package. I don't think many Americans even know they live in a zone where the border police can do shit like this, even if they haven't left the country, as international airports are usually near big cities, and they have a wide border zone around them. This stuff only really makes it into the news when it happens to one of the "good guys".

myrmidon•3m ago
There is no duty to keep a copy of messages and private data on your phone for the FBI to peruse at its leisure. Quite the opposite, actually (according to the constitution).

It is pretty clear to me that law enforcement conspired to abuse a border crossing to effect basically an unconstitutional search ("fishing expedition"), which it would never have gotten a warrant for.

This is them being spiteful after that whole thing failed. Note how law enforcement basically admits this on the record. The whole thing is a disgrace; every decisionmaker involved in this should be sacked immediately.

bdangubic•21m ago
They won't unless you are already on "their list" My phone basically looks like a burner phone, I do not use social media, do not install apps, my iphone fits (with room to spare) all "apps" on a "single page." I just call and text from my phone and have a browser and maps and that is basically it.
GJim•12m ago
> Oh, they may well give you bad time if your phone looks like a burner with too little content.

Issuing 'burner phones' and laptops to staff visiting countries such as China or the USA is now SOP for many companies handling sensitive data, including mine.

Don't think this isn't unusual.

ramgine•24m ago
Think it’s better to travel without a phone at all and buy one when arriving in the us? Problematic I guess with everything being digital
iamnothere•23m ago
Also, you might accidentally drop your burner in the lake/ocean before you return. It happens!
9m ago
"obese nazis"?
Humorist2290•9m ago
Is there any question the person who was baselessly charged with CSAM, then terrorism when they realized it was so obviously untenable, as a pretense to detain him would've been treated differently if he were on a different "side"?
krapp•17m ago
"Evidence" of what, exactly? What specific crime did they expect to find evidence of on his phone?
josefritzishere•14m ago
Evidence of what? Destroying evidence assumes he is guilty of a crime which there be evidence of. Our system is predicated on an assumption of innocence. The normal threshold to accuse is a "reasonable, articulable suspicion." Theis does not meet that criteria.
gruez•1m ago
Well that's the thing with destroying evidence. If you destroyed it, it becomes harder (or impossible) to prove you did the crime. That's why it's not uncommon for people to be only charged with stuff like "obstruction of justice" rather than the actual crime they allegedly did.
robviren•15m ago
But the bar for hauling someone to court and defacto punishing them financially and smearing them in the eyes of the public is so low. And the path to getting compensation for wrongful prosecution so fraught. What an easy tool the justice system is to punish uppity citizens thinking they don't have a king.