Pulpie – Models for Cleaning the Web

Hey HN, I'm Shreyash, founder of Feyn. We built Pulpie, a family of Pareto optimal models for cleaning the web. Pulpie strips boilerplate (ads, footers, sidebars) from raw HTML and returns just the main content as HTML or Markdown.We match SOTA extraction quality while being 20x cheaper. Cleaning 1 billion webpages costs $7,900 with Pulpie versus $159,000 with Dripper, the current leading extractor.The gains come from architecture. Today's leading extractors are decoders that generate output one token at a time. Each step reads the full model from memory to produce a single token. Conversely, Pulpie models are encoders. They run one forward pass over the full input HTML and label each block as boilerplate or content. As a result, Pulpie is compute-bound while decoders are memory-bound. Cheaper GPUs have relatively more compute than memory bandwidth. This makes Pulpie easy to run optimally.Here's Pulpie and Dripper cleaning the same pages side by side: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibd-tIiQECo. You can try a side-by-side comparison yourself: https://huggingface.co/spaces/feyninc/pulpieOur motivation for Pulpie came from building a deep research harness. Every search API returns noisy content that contains ads, nav elements, and sidebars. In one instance, an ad for "Gemini on Pixel" slipped into our search results, got passed into LLM context, and ended up in the final answer served to the user. Pretty embarrassing moment for us but it helped us realize how bad data kills model intelligence. We built Pulpie to get clean data for cheap.All models are open source on Hugging Face. You can read about our training process and how to use Pulpie here: https://usefeyn.com/blog/pulpie-pareto-optimal-models-for-cl...Happy to answer any questions!

Hacker NewsToolAISource
0Sign in to voteCopy link

FL score

72

out of 100

Verdict

VALIDATE

high confidence

Competition

No competitor data yet

Trend

No signal yet

A cheaper, faster HTML content extraction model that undercuts existing solutions by 20x on cost through better architecture choices.

The pain

Companies building search, RAG, and data pipelines waste money on content extraction. Current tools like Dripper cost $159k to clean 1 billion pages. Boilerplate (ads, footers, navigation) contaminates downstream LLM outputs, degrading answer quality. The founders experienced this directly when an ad ended up in their search results.

The gap

Existing extractors use decoder architectures that are memory-bound, they read the full model repeatedly to generate one token at a time. This forces expensive GPU usage. Pulpie uses an encoder that labels HTML blocks in a single forward pass, making it compute-bound instead. Cheaper GPUs have more compute relative to memory bandwidth, so Pulpie runs efficiently on commodity hardware.

Build angle

Start by selling to companies running RAG pipelines and search products that already know they have a data quality problem. They're already paying for extraction or doing it poorly. Offer a drop-in replacement with clear ROI (20x cheaper). Open source the models to build trust and reduce friction. Expand to a managed API service once you have proof of product-market fit and understand customer deployment patterns.

Strengths

  • Concrete 20x cost advantage with measurable metrics ($7,900 vs $159,000)
  • Technical insight is sound, encoder vs decoder tradeoff is real and well-explained
  • Open source models lower barrier to adoption and build credibility
  • Founders have domain expertise from building their own search product and hitting the problem firsthand
  • Clear use case with existing customers (anyone doing RAG, search, or web scraping at scale)
  • Demonstrated working product with side-by-side comparisons

Risks

  • Extraction quality must match SOTA, any regression in accuracy kills the value prop. Dripper has years of refinement; Pulpie is new
  • Market may be smaller than it appears. Many companies either accept noisy data or use cheaper heuristics (regex, CSS selectors). Hard to know TAM without customer conversations
  • Dripper and similar tools may quickly adopt encoder architectures if the advantage is real, collapsing the moat
  • Monetization unclear. Open source models are free. Managed API service faces competition from Dripper and others offering similar services. Margins may compress fast
  • Dependency on Hugging Face for distribution. Platform changes or policy shifts could affect reach
  • No evidence of customer traction yet. This reads as a technical launch, not a business launch

Questions about this idea?

FlyBot reads the scoring and gives you a second opinion on “Pulpie – Models for Cleaning the Web”.

Open FlyBot