Browser Harness – Gives LLM freedom to complete any browser task
Hey HN,We got tired of browser frameworks restricting the LLM, so we removed the framework and gave the LLM maximum freedom to do whatever it's trained on. We gave the harness the ability to self correct and add new tools if the LLM wants (is pre-trained on) that.Our Browser Use library is tens of thousands of lines of deterministic heuristics wrapping Chrome (CDP websocket). Element extractors, click helpers, target managemenet (SUPER painful), watchdogs (crash handling, file downloads, alerts), cross origin iframes (if you want to click on an element you have to switch the target first, very anoying), etc.Watchdogs specifically are extremely painful but required. If Chrome triggers for example a native file popup the agent is just completely stuck. So the two solutions are to: 1. code those heuristics and edge cases away 1 by 1 and prevent them 2. give LLM a tool to handle the edge caseAs you can imagine - there are crazy amounts of heuristics like this so you eventually end up with A LOT of tools if you try to go for #2. So you have to make compromises and just code those heuristics away.BUT if the LLM just "knows" CDP well enough to switch the targets when it encounters a cross origin iframe, dismiss the alert when it appears, write its own click helpers, or upload function, you suddenly don't have to worry about any of those edge cases.Turns out LLMs know CDP pretty well these days. So we bitter pilled the harness. The concepts that should survive are: - something that holds and keeps CDP websocket alive (deamon) - extremely basic tools (helpers.py) - skill.md that explains how to use itThe new paradigm? SKILL.md + a few python helpers that need to have the ability to change on the fly.One cool example: We forgot to implement upload_file function. Then mid-task the agent wants to upload a file so it grepped helpers.py, saw nothing, wrote the function itself using raw DOM.setFileInputFiles (which we only noticed that later in a git diff). Thi
FL score
out of 100
Verdict
high confidence
Competition
No competitor data yet
Trend
No signal yet
A minimal Chrome automation layer that lets LLMs handle their own edge cases instead of requiring developers to code thousands of heuristics.
The pain
The gap
Build angle
Strengths
- Solves a real, acute pain point for AI agent builders, edge case handling is genuinely the hardest part of browser automation
- The core insight (LLMs can write their own tools) is defensible and hard to copy without deep CDP knowledge
- Minimal surface area means fast iteration and fewer bugs than traditional frameworks
- Self-extending capability creates a flywheel, more tasks = more skills discovered = better agent performance
- Concrete proof of concept (agent writing upload_file function) shows the idea works in practice
Risks
- LLM reliability is still inconsistent, agents may write broken CDP code or get stuck in loops. Needs robust error handling and rollback mechanisms
- Security risk if LLMs can modify their own tools, malicious prompts could inject code. Requires sandboxing and audit trails
- Market timing: AI agent adoption is still early. Most companies aren't yet building multi-step browser automation systems at scale
- Competitive pressure from larger frameworks (Anthropic, OpenAI) adding native browser control. They have distribution and resources
- Skill discovery and sharing is a network effect problem, needs critical mass of users to be valuable. Chicken-and-egg problem
- Debugging is harder when the agent writes its own code. Support burden could be high
- Chrome/CDP API changes could break agent-written code. Requires versioning and compatibility layers
Fly Labs Method
Is the pain real, is there a gap, is it the right time, can one person build it.
Value Equation
Dream outcome and how likely it feels, against the time and effort it costs.
One-Person Business
Curiosity pull, identity fit, and a path from free value to paid for a solo creator.
Viral Frameworks
Hook strength, shareability, and how cheaply it can be tested.
Builder Lens
Evidence the problem exists, timing, defensibility, and a model that fits on a napkin.
Five lenses, one composite. How scoring works
The angle
No market research recorded for this idea yet.
Semble – Code search for agents that uses 98% fewer tokens than grep
Hey HN! We (Stephan and Thomas) recently open-sourced Semble. We kept running into the same problem while using Claude Code on large codebases: when the agent can't find something directly, it falls back to grep, reading full files or launching subagents. This uses a lot of tokens, and often still misses the relevant code. There are existing tools for this, but they were either too slow to index on demand, needed API keys, or had poor retrieval quality.Semble is our solution for this. It combines static Model2Vec embeddings (using our latest static model: potion-code-16M) with BM25, fused via RRF and reranked with code-aware signals. Everything runs on CPU since there's no transformers involved. On our benchmark of ~1250 query/document pairs across 63 repos and 19 languages, it uses 98% fewer tokens than grep+read and reaches 99% of the retrieval quality of a 137M-parameter code-trained transformer, while being ~200x faster.Main features:- Token-efficient: 98% fewer tokens than grep+read- Fast: ~250ms to index a typical repo on our benchmark, ~1.5ms per query on CPU (very large repos may take longer)- Accurate: 0.854 NDCG@10, 99% of the best transformer setup we tested- MCP server: drop-in for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, OpenCode- Zero config: no API keys, no GPU, no external servicesInstall in Claude Code with: claude mcp add semble -s user -- uvx --from "semble[mcp]" sembleOr check our README for other installation instructions, benchmarks, and methodology:Semble: https://github.com/MinishLab/sembleBenchmarks: https://github.com/MinishLab/semble/tree/main/benchmarksModel: https://huggingface.co/minishlab/potion-code-16MLet us know if you have any feedback or questions!
AI
Postgres extension for BM25 relevance-ranked full-text search
Last summer we faced a conundrum at my company, Tiger Data, a Postgres cloud vendor whose main business is in timeseries data. We were trying to grow our business towards emerging AI-centric workloads and wanted to provide a state-of-the-art hybrid search stack in Postgres. We'd already built pgvectorscale in house with the goal of scaling semantic search beyond pgvector's main memory limitations. We just needed a scalable ranked keyword search solution too.The problem: core Postgres doesn't provide this; the leading Postgres BM25 extension, ParadeDB, is guarded behind AGPL; developing our own extension appeared daunting. We'd need a small team of sharp engineers and 6-12 months, I figured. And we'd probably still fall short of the performance of a mature system like Parade/Tantivy.Or would we? I'd be experimenting long enough with AI-boosted development at that point to realize that with the latest tools (Claude Code + Opus) and an experienced hand (I've been working in database systems internals for 25 years now), the old time estimates pretty much go out the window.I told our CTO I thought I could solo the project in one quarter. This raised some eyebrows.It did take a little more time than that (two quarters), and we got some real help from the community (amazing!) after open-sourcing the pre-release. But I'm thrilled/exhausted today to share that pg_textsearch v1.0 is freely available via open source (Postgres license), on Tiger Data cloud, and hopefully soon, a hyperscalar near you:https://github.com/timescale/pg_textsearchIn the blog post accompanying the release, I overview the architecture and present benchmark results using MS-MARCO. To my surprise, we were not only able to meet Parade/Tantivy's query performance, but exceed it substantially, measuring a 4.7x advantage on query throughput at scale:https://www.tigerdata.com/blog/pg-textsearch-bm25-fu
AI
Consus (YC F24) – LLM gateway for companies handling sensitive data
Hey Hacker News! I'm Eric, the founder of Consus. We route all AI requests to ITAR restricted and controlled unclassified information (CUI) compliant infrastructure. Consus itself satisfies ITAR restrictions, and we recently completed our FedRAMP equivalency audit against the 410 FedRAMP High controls. FedRAMP High is the U.S. government’s strictest security baseline for cloud services handling sensitive unclassified data. A breach of this data could cause severe or catastrophic harm. Achieving FedRAMP equivalency, or authorization, is required before processing CUI information.Demo: https://youtu.be/6MYxJe6P4oYAerospace and defense is experiencing rapid growth. Unfortunately, most companies are struggling to use AI because of necessary data protections & compliance risk. These companies can move even faster if they could use the AI tools that most other industries take for granted.I spent most of my career prior to Consus in aerospace & defense. I launched national security payloads at SpaceX, and was an early employee at Castelion. I’ve watched first hand how compliance red-tape makes it difficult for companies to adopt new technologies and trust vendors that touch their sensitive data. For example, I worked with a satellite manufacturer that doesn’t allow any AI tools, even for non-sensitive work.Even as AI has become extremely useful over the past 9-12 months, I was surprised by how many aerospace & defense companies refused to touch it. They could see how it could be helpful, but they were scared about model providers training on their data, violating an ITAR rule, or risk losing new business because of a failed cyber assessment. These are all rational fears.There were a lot of ways to solve some/all of these problems, but we focused on building a compliant AI inference layer that can "plug" into any AI tool or workflow. Just as OpenRouter integrates with most tools, Consus can connect to tools like ChatGPT or Clau
AI
Questions about this idea?
FlyBot reads the scoring and gives you a second opinion on “Browser Harness – Gives LLM freedom to complete any browser task”.