China made a breakthrough in its space program with the successful capture of a Long March 10B rocket booster.

GitHub热门项目 | Delightful JavaScript Testing. | Stars: 45,535 | 81 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | CLI tool for configuring and monitoring Claude Code | Stars: 28,654 | 104 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | The official Python library for the OpenAI API | Stars: 31,211 | 92 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | Abseil Common Libraries (C++) | Stars: 17,472 | 3 stars today | 语言: C++

GitHub热门项目 | A YAML parser and emitter in C++ | Stars: 6,050 | 65 stars today | 语言: C++

GitHub热门项目 | Skills for Real Engineers. Straight from my .claude directory. | Stars: 164,017 | 1,728 stars today | 语言: Shell

GitHub热门项目 | A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD - using C++14, C++17 and later (C++11 support is in v2.x branch, and C++03 on the Catch1.x branch) | Stars: 20,570 | 69 stars today | 语言: C++

GitHub热门项目 | Asio C++ Library | Stars: 6,035 | 87 stars today | 语言: C++

The strongest visual concepts don’t start in Figma. They start with the right questions. Explore the pre-concept phase of brand identity design, where teams research brand context, uncover hidden assumptions with stakeholders, and turn shared direction into a visual foundation before a single concept is created.

While fully loaded models are quite pricey, the HP OmniBook Ultra is hard to beat for those in the market for a premium Windows ultraportable.

The latest glasses from Xreal are designed to appeal to gamers and movie-watchers who want a big screen wherever they are.

I love it when a company challenges itself to make a cheaper version of a beloved product. Xreal's $299 A01 Plus is a stripped-down version of its $449 1S that's light on features but with just enough of the 1S' best qualities. These AR glasses are comfortable, they look good, and the screens are surprisingly […]

👋👋👋👋 Looking back on your week -- what was something you're proud of? All wins count -- big or small 🎉 Examples of 'wins' include: Getting a promotion! Starting a new project Fixing a tricky bug Cleared your inbox below 50 unread (which felt like defusing a bomb) 📬 Happy Friday!

It's Friday evening. An endpoint that normally answers in 200 milliseconds is suddenly taking eight seconds. You open Grafana. Every graph is green. CPU is calm, memory is fine, the disk isn't full. By every dashboard you have, the database is healthy. It is not healthy. This is the failure mode monitoring is worst at: the server is unmistakably alive , so nothing alerts, while inside the database something is slowly rotting. A table has bloated. An index nobody uses is dragging down every INSERT . A forgotten transaction is sitting open, holding a lock and quietly making everything worse. None of it crashes. It just degrades, a little at a time, until one Friday evening it tips over. The good news is that Postgres will tell you all of this — you just have to ask. The queries below run on bare PostgreSQL (13 or newer; one version note along the way), need no agent and no paid monitoring, and use an extension in exactly one place where it genuinely earns it. Open psql and check your own database as you read. 1. The cheapest signal: dead rows Start here, because it costs nothing and catches the most. Postgres never deletes a row in place. An UPDATE or DELETE leaves behind a dead tuple — an old version of the row — and autovacuum cleans those up later. Until it does (or if it can't keep up), the dead rows sit in the table, taking space and forcing every scan to page past them. The fastest look is pg_stat_user_tables , always available, no extension: SELECT schemaname , relname AS table , n_live_tup , n_dead_tup , round ( n_dead_tup * 100 . 0 / nullif ( n_live_tup + n_dead_tup , 0 ), 1 ) AS dead_ratio , last_autovacuum FROM pg_stat_user_tables WHERE n_dead_tup > 0 ORDER BY n_dead_tup DESC LIMIT 20 ; A dead_ratio above ~20% on a large table is worth investigating. And watch for a table where the ratio is high and last_autovacuum is empty — that means autovacuum has never successfully run on it, which is its own red flag (we'll see why in section 5; the whole story conver

Builder Journal · ARC Prize 2026 There is a moment in every role-playing game where you load your character with so much heavy gear that they can barely walk. Strongest sword in the game, can't reach the fight. I did the machine-learning version of that this month. I kept making my agent more capable, and the scoreboard kept punishing me for it, and it took me two tries to understand that the upgrades were the problem. A quick frame, in case this is your first entry in this thread : I'm in the ARC Prize 2026, building an agent that has to learn small games it has never seen, with no instructions. As the benchmark's creator measured it, the hardest part by far is the piece that figures out the rules of a game by experimenting on it. So that piece is where I have been pouring my effort. The obvious upgrade The obvious way to make that piece better is to teach it more kinds of games. If it can model three families of puzzle today, teach it a fourth, and it should win more. So I did exactly that. I built support for a new class of game it could recognize and solve, wrote it carefully, tested it, and confirmed the thing I wanted to confirm: the agent now beat a game it provably could not beat the day before. Real, verified, new capability. Not a story I was telling myself, a genuine new skill on the board. Then I submitted, and the score went down. Twice This is the part I want to be honest about, because one bad result is noise and two is a pattern. My agent's attempts to use this theory-building component had already been underwhelming on the real board, landing around 0.05, 0.07, and 0.09 across earlier tries, all of them under the 0.25 my plain, careful agent scores when it does not reach for the fancy component at all. The fourth skill was supposed to turn that corner. Instead the next submission came in at 0.04, the worst of the lot. I had added ability and the number had dropped, again. So I stopped adding and started counting. I ran a survey across twenty-five of