AI 资讯

Take control of your AI models with our newest skill, designed to make local fine-tuning efficient.

Bullshit is cheap but truth is expensive. Anyone with half a brain cell can post wild misinformation that goes mega viral, which wastes the time and expertise of highly trained people who feel an obligation to inform others of the truth. Today I want you to meet one of those highly-trained people, Dr. Zachary Rubin, […]

PSA: A change to Google's privacy settings let it train its AI on more of your data. Here's how to opt out.

The european AI gateway for agents Discussion | Link

Anthropic accused of spying on users; engineer says “experiment” is over.

Talk Once. Publish Everywhere. Discussion | Link

Get excited for a feature film starring an AI character that doesn't exist in any real way.

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 o

Originally published on satyamrastogi.com Seqrite Labs identifies multi-stage DcRAT campaign impersonating India's Income Tax Department. Attackers exploit tax professional workflows to deliver remote access trojans capable of data exfiltration and lateral movement. Operation DragonReturn: DcRAT Deployment via Fake ITR Utilities Executive Summary A China-nexus threat cluster is actively exploiting the predictable workflows of Indian tax professionals, corporate finance teams, and individual taxpayers through phishing campaigns distributing DcRAT (Dark Crystal Remote Access Trojan). Operation DragonReturn, as tracked by Seqrite Labs, demonstrates sophisticated understanding of Indian taxation cycles and organizational structures - critical operational intelligence required for high-success-rate social engineering. From an attacker's perspective, this campaign is methodologically sound: it targets a specific, predictable event (tax filing deadlines), uses trusted entity impersonation (Income Tax Department), and deploys a mature RAT with established evasion capabilities. The selection of DcRAT indicates access to commodity malware-as-a-service (MaaS) infrastructure, likely from Chinese underground forums where such tools are actively monetized and continuously updated. Attack Vector Analysis This operation chains multiple MITRE ATT&CK techniques into a cohesive infection chain: Initial Compromise: Spear-Phishing with Pretexting Attackers execute T1566.002 (Phishing - Spearphishing Attachment) by crafting emails impersonating legitimate Indian Income Tax Department communications. The social engineering layer leverages T1598.003 (Phishing - Spearphishing Link) with URLs pointing to malicious tax filing utilities. Pretexting is enhanced through T1589.001 (Gather Victim Identity Information - Credentials) , as attackers likely harvested tax professional contact lists from public records, LinkedIn OSINT, or previous data breaches. The timing of campaigns around Indian fis

For internal websites, client portals, development environments, and WordPress projects that should not be publicly accessible. Not every private WordPress website needs a complete membership system. Sometimes there is no need to manage subscriptions, membership plans, payments, complex user roles, or dozens of content-access rules. Sometimes the requirement is much simpler: The website should only be accessible to logged-in users. That is the reason I created Supracorona Login Gate , a lightweight WordPress plugin that places a simple access gate in front of a website. When the plugin is enabled, logged-out visitors cannot browse protected site content. Instead, they are redirected to the standard WordPress login page or to a custom page selected by the site administrator. The plugin is now published on WordPress.org: Supracorona Login Gate The problem the plugin solves Many WordPress projects are not intended to be publicly accessible at every stage of their lifecycle. They may be: development or staging websites; internal company or organization websites; client portals; private knowledge bases; documentation websites intended only for team members; projects being prepared for launch; demo websites available only to selected users; websites temporarily closed during migration or reconstruction. WordPress provides privacy controls for individual posts, but that is not the same as restricting access to the entire website. Installing a full membership plugin is possible, but it is often far more than the project requires. Such systems may introduce additional database tables, large settings panels, custom profiles, login forms, subscription management, and complex rule engines that will never be used. Supracorona Login Gate has a much narrower responsibility. It is not intended to become a complete membership platform. It is intended to answer one clear question: Is the current visitor logged in? When the answer is yes, the website behaves normally. When the answer

Orasort, a sorting algorithm from Oracle, came into the public domain in 2024 after its patent expired, providing massive benefits to open-source software. submitted by /u/Ok_Stomach6651 [link] [留言]

In this blog post, we will see how to performance test a RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) application properly, covering both speed and correctness, and how to wire both into a CI/CD pipeline so regressions get caught before they reach production. Performance testing a RAG application requires two separate testing gates: one for speed and one for answer quality. Traditional load testing tools measure response times but cannot detect hallucinations, where a model returns fast but factually incorrect answers grounded in fabricated context rather than retrieved documents. The guide demonstrates using k6 for load testing end-to-end latency and DeepEval for evaluating faithfulness and answer relevancy using an LLM-as-judge approach. Both gates are integrated into a GitHub Actions CI/CD pipeline so regressions in either performance or output quality are caught automatically on every pull request before reaching production. If you've come from a JMeter or k6 background like I have, your first instinct with a RAG endpoint is probably to point a load test at it and check response times. That gets you halfway there. A RAG app can return a fast, confident, completely wrong answer, and a plain load test will never tell you that. You need two testing surfaces, not one: performance and quality. This guide covers both, using a single running example throughout: a documentation assistant that answers "How do I run JMeter in non-GUI mode?" against a small knowledge base. Why RAG breaks traditional load testing assumptions A conventional API returns a complete response and you measure the round trip. A RAG endpoint does two expensive things before it answers: it retrieves context from a vector store or search index, then it streams a generated response token by token. That second part matters a lot. A single request can stream hundreds of tokens over several seconds, so "request duration" as a single number hides two very different problems: how long the model took to start answe

You've seen the claim in every Ruby thread for the past year. Ruby and Rails are the most AI-friendly stack. Fewer tokens, less hallucination, the model just writes it cleanly. Half of that claim I'll concede without a fight . The other half I measured, across thirteen real Ruby codebases, and that's where a line shows up, sharp enough to put every repo on one side or the other. Including yours. The half that's true: writing Ruby is solved Start with the part that holds up, because it really does. A model that has seen ten thousand Rails apps knows where the model lives, where the job goes, what a concern does, what has_many implies, before it reads a line of yours. Convention over configuration was always written partly for the next human reading the code. It turns out the model is the next reader too, and the conventions answer half its questions before it asks them. So "write me a service object," "add a scope," "refactor this controller"? The stack carries the model. Fewer wrong guesses, tighter loops, less to hallucinate because the shape is already known. Anyone who builds on Rails has lived this, and the AI-friendly reputation earned it. I'm not here to take that away. I'm here to point out it answers a question nobody dangerous is asking. The half that isn't: navigating Ruby at scale "Can AI write Ruby" is settled. The question that ships broken deploys is different: can AI navigate Ruby? What breaks if this model changes, who depends on it, where the blast radius ends. Reading and navigating feel like the same skill when you're fluent. They are not the same skill for an agent. Reading a file is local, the answer is right there in the text. Navigating is structural, the answer lives in the edges between files, what calls what, what breaks what, and no single file contains it. So I ran the structural question on all thirteen repos. Same task each time: take the hub model, the Inbox , the MergeRequest , the Spree::Order , and find every dependent before a tear