Any apps or websites that allow for turn based voice chat? I really missed the old standard voice mode on ChatGPT. It basically just read aloud the text models response. So it could allow for long responses unlike these new gen voice models that can only speak 1 paragraph max. I was wondering if there are any apps or websites that use turn based voice chat like the old standard voice mode on ChatGPT. So I would say my thing, then it would be the ai turn to speak and i couldn’t interrupt it till its finished. My current problem is that the new standard voice mode on ChatGPT can be interrupted. So it’s hears its own voice and keeps stopping. So I’m looking for alternative apps or websites that have this old functionality submitted by /u/obammala [link] [留言]

AWS Builder Center now offers free, time-limited sandbox environments for workshops, so developers no longer need to use their own AWS account and credit card or worry about unexpected charges. This has been a long-standing request from the community and removes one of the biggest friction points for practitioners learning new AWS technologies. By Renato Losio

Free open-source screen recorder & demo editor Discussion | Link

The Core Argument : AI agent reliability isn't achieved by "making the agent smarter" — it's achieved by the simple engineering principle of separating validation from generation . Quality isn't accidental. It's designed. What You'll Learn : Maker/Checker separation, 6 termination conditions, and an automated feedback loop — all with runnable code. 0. Prerequisites Python ≥ 3.10 OpenAI API Key (or compatible interface) pip install openai>=1.0.0 (Optional) pip install anthropic>=0.30.0 if using Claude as Checker 1. The Pain: Why "Agent Checks Itself" Is a Trap 1.1 The Copying of Cognitive Bias A team built a data-analysis agent. It pulled sales data from a database and generated business reports. The team added a "self-review" step: after generating, the agent told itself "please check if the data you just output is accurate." Result? The agent always replied "data is accurate." Even when the team deliberately injected obvious errors (e.g., monthly sales of -50M RMB), the agent confidently said everything was fine. This isn't the model being "disobedient." It's a more fundamental issue: when the generator and checker are the same entity, the check is just a restatement of the generation process — not real validation. The checker carries the exact same cognitive bias, knowledge boundaries, and reasoning path as the generator. 1.2 The Amplifier Effect of Confirmation Bias Self-checking also triggers a subtler problem: confirmation bias amplification. The model builds a "belief state" during generation; when re-examining, it tends to confirm rather than overturn. Experiment data (from Anthropic research): Same model does "generate → self-review": ~12% error-correction rate A separate model instance reviews: ~37% error-correction rate A different model family reviews: ~52% error-correction rate 1.3 The Value of Independence First principle of quality assurance: the checker must be independent of the generator. In agent architecture, the engineering expression of this is

submitted by /u/esporx [link] [留言]

The Pain : You search GitHub and find everyone using different memory stores — ChromaDB, PostgreSQL, plain Markdown files, "SQLite is good enough for a decade." Which is right? The Answer : All of them. And none of them. Choosing without understanding your scenario is like buying a car without checking the road. 1. The Counter-Intuitive Question: Does Your Agent Actually Need "Memory"? When I was building a university admissions data scraper (91 universities), I made the classic mistake: I equipped the agent with a full ChromaDB + vector retrieval stack, spent three days tuning it, and then discovered — 95% of the agent's time was just reading "which page did I get to last time." A boolean would have sufficed. I built a vector database capable of semantic search. An engineer friend at ByteDance told me their internal agent platform found, after six months, that vector retrieval accounted for only 3.7% of all Memory Store requests. The remaining 96.3%? Key-value lookups, state reads/writes, error dedup. The vector search you spent two weeks integrating might serve less than 4% of your queries. So before discussing "which storage," we must answer a more fundamental question: what does your agent actually need to remember? I categorize memory into four types: Memory Type Typical Content Size Access Frequency Consistency Session state "Processing university 37/91" ~100 bytes Every call Strong Domain knowledge "A-University rate limit is 10 req/s" ~1KB On demand Eventual Error history "B-University returns 403 because UA blocked" ~MB Before new task Append-only Semantic memory "Map 'that red button' to settings page" varies Occasional Eventual See the pattern? If your agent mainly does multi-step automation (data scraping, report generation, CI/CD pipelines), the first three types are the real needs — and none of them require a vector database. Core thesis: memory selection is about finding the layer that is "just enough." One layer too many is waste; one layer too few i

Word review artifacts need a CI boundary too Word already has useful interactive review workflows: legal blackline comparison and Document Inspector. But a controlled handoff or CI workflow has a different question: did this package gain unresolved revisions, comments, hidden runs, external relationships, macros, custom XML, or another opaque payload change? And can we answer that without turning a build artifact into a copy of the document? DocFence 0.1.0 is a local-first CLI for that boundary. It compares .docx and .docm packages without opening Word, executing macros, evaluating fields, following links, rendering a document, or uploading source material. More than a text diff The visible body is only one stored story. DocFence inventories the body, headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, comments, and glossary parts. It also tracks revision markup, direct hidden-text runs, field codes, content controls, Track Changes, external relationships, custom XML, and macros. A generic opaque payload signal covers mutations in parts the specialized inventories do not explain, such as styles, media, embeddings, metadata, and the package manifest. The output intentionally contains counts and fixed change categories rather than paragraphs, comments, reviewer names, URLs, relationship targets, field instructions, custom XML values, macro bytes, part paths, or fingerprints. That makes JSON, Markdown, and SARIF practical for CI artifacts while keeping source material inside the team’s environment. Policies that are small enough to review A policy is a strict, short YAML file. It distinguishes a comparison boundary from a candidate-state boundary: a team can block a newly introduced external relationship while separately requiring that the candidate contain no comments or unresolved revisions at all. version : 1 rules : no_external_relationship_changes : true no_macro_payload_changes : true no_custom_xml_changes : true require_no_unresolved_revisions : true require_no_comments : tr

Every RAG tutorial I've read makes the same two assumptions: you have a GPU, and you can call a cloud API. For the environments I build for, both assumptions are wrong. I work on health information systems in the public sector. The stack has to run inside institutional infrastructure — no data leaves the network — and the hardware I get is whatever the procurement cycle produced two years ago. In practice that means Windows Server, CPU only, and open-weight models running locally. So I built a RAG stack that runs entirely on-premise, no GPU, no cloud, no Docker. It's open source at github.com/psychohub/rag-onpremise : ASP.NET Core 9 for orchestration, Ollama for local inference, Qdrant for vectors, Python for the ingest pipeline, Mistral 7B as the LLM, nomic-embed-text for embeddings. Getting it into production took longer than the design did, because five things broke that no tutorial had warned me about. This is the field report. The environment, and why it matters Before the lessons, it's worth being precise about the constraint, because it changes what "good" looks like. The stack has to run on a Windows Server, not a Linux workstation. Docker is not available on many of the target machines — either because it wasn't approved, because GPO policies restrict it, or because ops teams already run everything as Windows services and adding a container runtime is a new operational surface nobody wants to own. GPUs are aspirational. In the meantime, you have CPU inference and you have to make it work. None of this is exotic. It's the default reality in a lot of public sector, healthcare, and legacy enterprise environments. It's also the reality most RAG content on the internet quietly assumes away. The overall shape of the system: Documents (PDF / Word / Excel) │ ▼ [ Python ingest ] ├─ Text extraction (pdfplumber, python-docx, openpyxl) ├─ Chunking (500 tokens, 50 overlap) ├─ Embeddings (nomic-embed-text via Ollama) └─ Store (Qdrant, cosine similarity) │ User query │ │

Here is the whole method: get access to a real Linux machine, type commands on it for 30 to 60 minutes every day, and follow a plan that builds from navigating the filesystem up to running your own web server. Do that and you will be comfortable in four weeks and genuinely fluent in about eight. No experience required, no money required. The rest of this article is the specific plan: what to type each week, where to get a free machine you can safely break, what the three scariest errors mean, and how to tell you are actually improving. Why most people fail at Linux The pattern is nearly universal. Someone decides to learn Linux, finds a nine-hour video course, watches it at 1.5x speed, takes beautiful notes, and three weeks later cannot list the contents of a directory without checking those notes. Watching someone else type is not practice. It feels like learning because the explanation makes sense while you hear it. But command line skill is muscle memory wrapped around a mental model, and both are built one way: typing, failing, reading the error, trying again. An hour of reading about ls teaches you less than typing ls twenty times in twenty directories. Videos are fine as a preview. They are just not the workout. So flip the ratio: for every minute reading or watching, spend five with your hands on a keyboard. This article included. Read a section, then go type it. Two smaller failure modes show up almost as often. Trying to memorize everything Linux has thousands of commands. Working engineers lean hard on a core of about 25 and look up the rest without shame. The plan below teaches that core and nothing else. Fear of breaking things On a practice machine, breaking things is the goal, not the risk. A system you broke and fixed teaches more than ten flawless tutorials. Every option in the practice section makes the worst case "start over," which costs a minute. The four-week plan First, get a machine from the free options below (one minute to one afternoon, dep

If I need to upgrade .NET 8 to .NET 10 , I treat the work as an API contract migration, not a project-file edit. A service can compile, pass unit tests, and still surprise consumers with a changed JSON shape, status code, authentication response, or OpenAPI document. That risk matters now because Microsoft has confirmed that .NET 8 and .NET 9 reach end of support on November 10, 2026 . .NET 10 and C# 14 are the current stable releases, and .NET 10 is the supported LTS destination. Why the deadline changes my upgrade order My first step is inventory, not retargeting. I list every deployable project, test project, global.json , container base image, CI SDK pin, and Microsoft package reference. dotnet --list-sdks shows what a machine can build; dotnet --info shows what the current environment actually resolves. If that inventory needs more detail, my older guide to dotnet sdk check is a useful starting point. For APIs still on .NET 8, the broader Web API setup and security checklist can help identify behavior worth protecting before the move. I then separate the migration into three changes: SDK and target framework, NuGet dependencies, and runtime infrastructure. Keeping those changes visible makes a failure easier to locate. A giant dependency-refresh commit may be quick to create, but it is hard to diagnose. Upgrade .NET 8 to .NET 10 behind contract tests Before changing net8.0 , I add a small set of tests around the endpoints consumers cannot tolerate changing. I care about observable behavior: status codes, content types, required JSON names, and authentication boundaries. I avoid asserting an entire serialized string because harmless property ordering can make that test noisy. Here is a focused xUnit test for a Minimal API: using System.Net ; using System.Text.Json ; using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing ; using Xunit ; public sealed class ProductContractTests ( WebApplicationFactory < Program > factory ) : IClassFixture < WebApplicationFactory < Program >> { [

Hey 👋 I'm Liesliy, a developer working on tactile data infrastructure for robots. The Problem That Brought Me Here If you work in robotics, you've probably noticed something: nobody can agree on how to label tactile data. Every lab has its own format. Every dataset ships in a different schema. When you try to combine data from two sources, you spend more time writing converters than doing actual research. I've been there. So I built TLabel — an open-source unified format standard for tactile annotation data. Think of it like this: ROS standardized how robots communicate ROS Bag standardized how robots record Nobody has standardized how we label tactile data That's the gap TLabel tries to fill. What It Actually Does Unified schema with 14 semantic dimensions and 4 compliance levels (L1–L4) Adapters to convert between formats (GelSight, BioTac, digit, TacTip, and more) PyPI-installable, plug into your existing pipeline It's early — v0.17 just shipped — but the architecture is solid and I'm actively looking for real-world feedback. Why Dev.to I've been reading Dev.to for a while. What I appreciate about this place: Engineers write for engineers — no fluff, no engagement farming "Hello World" culture actually works — people genuinely welcome newcomers The comment sections are better than most conferences I'm here to: Share what I learn building a data standard nobody asked for (yet) Meet people working on sensor data, robotics, and embodied AI Get honest feedback — the kind that hurts but makes the project better What I'd Love to Hear From You If you work with tactile sensing, robotics data pipelines, or open-source tooling — I want to talk. Especially curious: How do you handle format conversion in your current workflow? What's the most painful part of working with tactile datasets? Drop a comment or DM. I promise I'm more interested in listening than pitching. 🦞

How we added an on-demand translation help feature to our book translation platform, streaming LLM suggestions for tricky passages. At LectuLibre, our AI-powered book translation service allows users to upload EPUB or PDF files and get translations generated by large language models like Claude and DeepSeek. But we quickly noticed a pain point: automated translations, while fast, sometimes produced awkward or ambiguous results for culturally specific phrases, idioms, or technical jargon. Users wanted a way to get instant, contextual help for these tricky passages without leaving the platform. That’s when we set out to build the 翻译与转录求助 (Translation Assistance) feature — an interactive side panel where users can select any sentence or paragraph and receive alternative translations, explanations, and stylistic suggestions from an LLM in real time. In this article, I’ll walk you through the engineering challenge, the architecture we chose, and the specific code and trade-offs that made it work smoothly under production constraints. The Problem: Real-Time, Context-Aware Translation Help The core requirement was simple: a user highlights a piece of text in the translated book and clicks “Get Assistance”. Immediately, the system should stream back multiple translation options, a brief explanation of differences, and stylistic notes — all aware of the surrounding context, the author’s style, and the target language. Under the hood, this meant: Low latency : Users expect a response in under 2 seconds. Streaming : The LLM output can be long, so we needed to stream tokens as they are generated. Context awareness : We must include enough surrounding text from the book to ground the model’s response. No blocking : The main translation pipeline shouldn’t be affected; the assistance feature should exist as an independent async service. Cost efficiency : Avoid re-processing the entire book each time a user asks for help. Our Approach: Async FastAPI + SSE + Rate Limiting We run a P

The Pain : You spent an afternoon tuning your agent. Next morning, it stares at you blankly — as if yesterday never happened. What You'll Learn : The 4-stage evolution (Prompt → Context → Harness → Loop), and a runnable 50-line Loop Agent that persists memory. 0. Prerequisites Python ≥ 3.10 pip install openai (openai ≥ 1.0.0) OpenAI API Key OS: macOS / Linux / Windows WSL Goal : Copy-paste the code, run it, and see a Loop Agent that doesn't forget. 1. The Pain: Why Does Your Agent Forget Overnight? At 2 AM, you finally got that multi-step workflow working. The agent followed your carefully designed prompt — data fetching, cleaning, analysis, charting. You close your laptop, satisfied. Next morning, you open the conversation full of hope — and the agent looks at you blankly, as if none of it ever happened. You check the logs. No errors. No exceptions. The agent regenerated everything — it just "forgot" where it stopped yesterday. This isn't a joke. It's the nightmare every serious Agent developer experiences. The root cause isn't "the model isn't smart enough." It's a more fundamental fact: your agent was never designed to survive the night. 2. Four-Stage Evolution: Prompt → Context → Harness → Loop 4-Stage Evolution — each stage solves the previous flaw but adds its own constraint. To understand this, let's use a simple evolution framework: Stage What You Do Fatal Flaw Prompt Engineering Write task description, examples, format into prompt Any unexpected input crashes output Context Engineering Stuff history + intermediate results into context window Token cost grows linearly, hits window limit Harness Engineering Add tool calling, structured output, error capture Framework built, but agent is still "one-shot" Loop Engineering Build closed loop: state + memory + feedback + retry + persistence True engineering — agent starts to "live" Loop Engineering isn't a rejection of Prompt Engineering — it's a transcendence. Prompt still matters. But it's the engine, and you ca

This is an English translation of my original article on Qiita . An Android build failed in an Expo SDK 54 app. The project still used Expo SDK 54, but several Expo packages had been upgraded to versions intended for SDK 55. TypeScript checks passed, and the development server ran normally. I did not catch the mismatch until EAS Build reached the native build step. What the dependency list looked like The relevant part of package.json looked like this: { "dependencies" : { "expo" : "~54.0.33" , "expo-apple-authentication" : "~55.0.13" , "expo-dev-client" : "^55.0.27" , "expo-image-picker" : "^55.0.18" , "expo-linking" : "^55.0.12" , "expo-notifications" : "^55.0.19" , "expo-splash-screen" : "^55.0.18" } } The expo package was still on version 54, while several related packages were on version 55. This happened because those packages had been installed individually using their latest versions. The package version does not always match the Expo SDK number. For example, Expo SDK 54 uses expo-notifications 0.32 and expo-splash-screen 31. Looking only at major version numbers is not enough to determine SDK compatibility. Start with expo install --check Expo CLI can compare the installed packages with the versions expected by the current SDK: npx expo install --check It can also return the result as JSON: npx expo install --check --json This is more reliable than trying to infer compatibility from package.json manually. Expo CLI can fix the versions automatically: npx expo install --fix npx expo-doctor I wanted to review each change, so I used the reported versions to update package.json myself. The versions I changed These were the main corrections: - "expo-apple-authentication": "~55.0.13" + "expo-apple-authentication": "~8.0.8" - "expo-dev-client": "^55.0.27" + "expo-dev-client": "~6.0.21" - "expo-image-picker": "^55.0.18" + "expo-image-picker": "~17.0.11" - "expo-linking": "^55.0.12" + "expo-linking": "~8.0.12" - "expo-notifications": "^55.0.19" + "expo-notifications"

Google Gemini offers an AI trip planner that combines travel research, itinerary generation and Google service integrations in one conversational workflow. The capability can surface real-time flight and hotel options, build itineraries around a traveler’s interests and adjust plans as needs change. Although Google is continuing to promote the feature, its official materials position it as an established part of the Gemini ecosystem rather than a newly launched product. The practical appeal is straightforward: trip planning often requires moving among airfare searches, hotel listings, maps, saved locations and notes. Gemini is designed to bring several of those steps together. On Google’s official Gemini AI trip planner page , the company describes prompts such as planning a four-day Tokyo visit around particular interests, then using Gemini to organize a tailored schedule by neighborhood. What Gemini’s travel planner can do Gemini’s travel functionality is framed as a consumer assistant for the research and planning stages of a trip. Users can describe a destination, trip length, interests or preferred travel style in natural language. Gemini can then help turn that input into an itinerary while drawing on relevant Google travel and mapping services. The official descriptions identify several connected capabilities: Real-time flight options through Google Flights. Real-time hotel options through Google Hotels. Customized itineraries organized around a traveler’s requested interests and locations. Plan adjustments during the trip , rather than a fixed itinerary created only before departure. Maps integration for navigation and points of interest along a route. Google’s Gemini Apps support material also confirms that the apps can help plan trips and retrieve live flight information. Maps integration matters because it extends the experience beyond trip inspiration: a user can move from deciding what to do to navigating to places and discovering points of interest whi