It all started in a plaza. One guy with apples, another with wheat. They looked at each other, negotiated, and traded. That's how commerce worked for thousands of years: face to face, hand to hand, trust to trust. If you wanted to buy something, you had to go where it was. If you wanted to sell, you had to wait for someone to show up. Commerce had a physical limit: your body. You couldn't be in two places at the same time. Your market was your street, your town, your city. Nothing more. Then internet came along and someone asked: what if the store doesn't need walls? E-commerce eliminated distance. Amazon started selling books from a garage. MercadoLibre connected a seller in Santiago with a buyer in Antofagasta. Shopify gave an online store to anyone with a credit card. Suddenly, an artisan in southern Chile could sell to the entire country. An entrepreneur in Colombia could have clients in Mexico. The market stopped being a street and became the planet. But e-commerce had a problem nobody wanted to see: it still needed a human behind it. Someone had to update the inventory. Someone had to answer the questions. Someone had to make the quotes, check the payments, control the stock, send the shipments, analyze the metrics, decide the prices. E-commerce digitized the storefront, but it didn't digitize the operation. And that's where we are now. MCP-Commerce is not a term that exists yet. I'm inventing it because I need a name for what's coming. MCP — Model Context Protocol — is a protocol that lets AI use tools. Not "display" tools. Use them. Read a database, send an email, create an invoice, update an inventory, analyze this month's sales. In traditional commerce, you were the store. In e-commerce, you had an online store. In MCP-commerce, the AI IS your operation. It's not a chatbot that answers questions. It's a system that manages your entire business through conversation. You say "how much did I sell this week" and it responds with real data. You say "I need to c

Your LLM bill is exploding because 70% of user queries are semantically identical, yet your traditional cache ignores them completely. Even worse, if you implement semantic caching poorly, a single bad actor can poison your entire AI model's knowledge base, leading to incorrect or malicious responses for legitimate users. The Cost of Redundancy in LLM Systems Imagine running an AI-powered customer support chatbot for an e-commerce platform. Users frequently ask things like, "What's your return policy?", "How can I send this item back?", or "Do you offer refunds if I'm not satisfied?". To an LLM, these are distinct prompts, each triggering an expensive API call to OpenAI or Anthropic, costing you dollars per thousand tokens. On the surface, it looks like individual requests. But structurally, they all ask the same question with a similar intent. Your traditional HTTP cache, which relies on exact string matches, sees "What's your return policy?" and "How can I send this item back?" as entirely different requests. It misses the semantic similarity. So, for every variation of the same question, you're making a full LLM inference call. If 50-70% of your user queries fall into these semantically redundant categories, your LLM costs skyrocket. For a system handling millions of requests daily, this can quickly turn a profitable product into a money pit, all while adding unnecessary latency for your users. Semantic Caching: The "Fast Path" for LLMs Semantic caching solves this by moving beyond exact string matches. Instead of looking for an identical prompt, it looks for prompts that mean the same thing. It works by converting incoming user prompts into numerical vector representations (embeddings) and then performing a similarity search against a cache of previously embedded prompts and their corresponding LLM responses. Here's the workflow: USER PROMPT | v [ EMBEDDING MODEL ] -- Transform Prompt to Vector (e.g., [0.1, 0.5, -0.2, ...]) | v [ VECTOR DATABASE / CACHE ] | +--

I didn’t expect to care this much about language tools. I started messing around with two different projects, Linguaboard and Parley , mostly out of curiosity. What I got was a surprisingly clear look at two very different ways we interact with language as developers and builders. Linguaboard: translation as exploration, not just output Linguaboard isn’t trying to give you the translation. Instead, it feels more like it’s saying: “Here are several valid ways this could be expressed, pick what fits your intent.” That shift is subtle but important. Most translation tools optimize for a single “correct” answer. Linguaboard leans into ambiguity in a way that actually helps you understand nuance instead of hiding it. I found myself thinking less like: “What does this mean?” and more like: “How should this sound in context?” Parley: learning through interaction, not memorization Parley takes a completely different angle. Instead of treating language as something to decode, it treats it as something to use. You’re not just passively consuming translations, you’re engaging with patterns, context, and recall in a more active loop. What stood out to me is how quickly it shifts you out of “study mode” and into “usage mode.” It feels closer to building intuition than studying rules. The interesting contrast What I didn’t expect is how well these two complement each other: Linguaboard → helps you understand nuance and meaning Parley → helps you internalize and use language One is about interpretation, the other about retention through interaction. Put together, they highlight something a lot of dev tools miss: Language work isn’t one problem. It’s at least two: understanding, and using. Why this matters (especially for devs) If you’re building anything with multilingual UX, AI translation, or global audiences, you’ve probably hit this wall: Translation APIs give you “correct” text But correctness ≠ clarity, tone, or intent These tools made that gap feel very obvious to me. And o

There's a specific kind of bad animation I notice immediately: the count-up stat that stutters as it ticks, the progress bar that lags a frame behind your scroll, the "active" tab underline that snaps instead of glides. None of it is broken, exactly. It just feels cheap. And nine times out of ten, the cause is the same — the animation is being driven through React state, so every frame triggers a re-render, and the main thread can't keep up. I build motion-heavy interfaces for a living, mostly in Next.js 16 and React 19, and I've landed on a small set of patterns that stay smooth because they bypass React's render loop entirely . They lean on Motion — the library formerly known as Framer Motion. It went independent and got renamed in 2025, so the package is now motion and the import you want is motion/react , not framer-motion ( the APIs are identical, only the import path changed ). Here are three I reach for constantly, plus the reduced-motion discipline that should wrap all of them. The mental model: MotionValues over state The single idea that fixes most jank: a MotionValue is a value Motion tracks outside of React. When it changes, Motion updates the DOM directly via transform or opacity — it does not call setState , so your component doesn't re-render. That's the whole trick. A number ticking from 0 to 4,200 should touch the DOM ~60 times a second and re-render React zero times. If a value changes every frame, it should live in a MotionValue, not in useState . State is for things that change when a user does something; MotionValues are for things that change continuously. Keep that line in your head and the rest of this falls out naturally. 1. A reading-progress bar with useScroll + useSpring The bar at the top of an article that fills as you read. The naive version listens to scroll events and sets state — which is exactly the re-render trap. Motion's useScroll hands you scroll position as a MotionValue already, so there's nothing to re-render. useScroll retu

Bilingual post · Post bilíngue Jump to: English · Português English {#english} Configuring CrabPascal with crabpascal.toml Every serious compiler needs project-level configuration. CrabPascal v2.22.0 reads crabpascal.toml from your project root — search paths, preprocessor symbols, Delphi vs FPC mode, output format, and runtime defaults. Where the file lives The compiler searches in order: crabpascal.toml (project root) .crabpascal.toml (hidden) config/crabpascal.toml If none exist, sensible defaults apply. Add the file when your project grows beyond a single .dpr . Starter configuration [compiler] version = "2.22.0" search_paths = [ "rtl/" , "lib/" , "examples/" ] defines = [ "CRABPASCAL" , "RELEASE" , "MSWINDOWS" ] mode = "DELPHI" # or "OBJFPC" strict = false warnings = true [preprocessor] enabled = true process_includes = true symbols = [] [output] error_format = "vscode" # or "gcc", "delphi" colors = true [runtime] default_http_port = 9000 [paths] rtl_path = "rtl/" output_path = "output/" Place this beside your .dpr file. All CLI commands ( check , run , build-exe ) pick it up automatically. Common use cases Delphi vs Free Pascal mode [compiler] mode = "DELPHI" defines = [ "CRABPASCAL" , "MSWINDOWS" ] Switch to FPC compatibility: [compiler] mode = "OBJFPC" defines = [ "FPC" , "UNIX" ] Mode affects parsing rules and RTL resolution under rtl/ . Custom unit search paths Large projects split units across folders: [compiler] search_paths = [ "rtl/" , "src/units/" , "src/services/" , "third_party/" ] This replaces hardcoded -U flags in scripts. Preprocessor symbols Match Delphi conditional compilation: [preprocessor] enabled = true symbols = [ "DEBUG" , "TESTING" ] Your Pascal code can use: {$IFDEF DEBUG} WriteLn ( 'Debug build' ); {$ENDIF} Run crab-pascal preproc MyApp.dpr to inspect expanded source. CI-friendly error output [output] error_format = "gcc" colors = false show_stacktrace = false GitHub Actions parsers often prefer gcc-style lines. Local development can

I'm in San Francisco, putting together a cracked research lab team of founders who think they can build ASI. If you are interested, let me know on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/eliaspfeffer submitted by /u/DasDouble [link] [留言]

Building a Resilient Real-Time Chat System with WebRTC, Faye, and WebSockets: A Practical End-to-End Building a Resilient Real-Time Chat System with WebRTC, Faye, and WebSockets: A Practical End-to-End Tutorial In this tutorial you’ll build a small, resilient real-time chat system that works across browsers, mobile devices, and constrained networks. You’ll learn how to architect a client/server model with signaling, leverage WebRTC data channels for peer-to-peer messaging when available, and fall back to a robust WebSocket-based relay when direct peer connections fail. The focus is on practical patterns, testable code, and observability to keep a live chat running under load or flaky networks. Key takeaways Understand when to use WebRTC data channels vs. WebSocket relays for real-time chat Implement a signaling server to establish WebRTC connections safely and efficiently Build a resilient message delivery pipeline with idempotent processing and retry semantics Instrument the system for latency, jitter, and message loss to avoid silent failures Test end-to-end flows with simulated network conditions and automated resilience tests Overview of architecture Clients (web and mobile) connect to a signaling server to negotiate WebRTC peers and/or WebSocket sessions. If a direct WebRTC peer connection is possible, use a data channel for low-latency chat messages. If WebRTC is blocked (firewalls, NAT), route messages through a relay server using WebSockets. The relay can also bridge peers that can’t connect directly. A lightweight message store (in-memory for demo, with an optional Redis-backed queue in production) provides at-least-once delivery guarantees and retry capabilities. Observability: metrics for connection attempts, handshake times, message delivery latency, retry counts, and error rates. Tracing spans help diagnose cross-service flows. Tech stack (example) Frontend: TypeScript, WebRTC DataChannel, WebSocket Backend: Node.js with Express for signaling API, ws or

Generate and edit images with precise scene control Discussion | Link

submitted by /u/DataBaeBee [link] [留言]

Generate design-ready image with open weight, layout control Discussion | Link

submitted by /u/fagnerbrack [link] [留言]

Qual a melhor I.a para a criação de videos com a inteligência Artificial( Ilimitada) Não da para criar um bom conteúdo é extenso desenvolvimento com tokens limitado submitted by /u/Dry_Resource_6762 [link] [留言]

Run Claude Code and Codex in your own cloud environment Discussion | Link

Leading AI labs, executives, and scientists are sending a letter to lawmakers urging them to improve tracking of synthetic DNA sequences that could be used for bioweapons.