AI 资讯

Earlier this year, the “Because I Got High” rapper went viral for winning a case against the cops. Now he’s crypto’s free-speech hero, even though he isn’t quite sure how the digital currency works.

I ran a 4-bit medical-triage model on a laptop GPU and on a CPU. For one patient, the GPU said urgent and the CPU said emergency. Same model file, same prompt, same input. Here's the mechanism and why "validated on hardware X" doesn't mean what you'd hope. I've been building Aegis-MD , a local-first emergency-department triage console. You hand it a structured clinical picture: chief complaint, vitals, age, pain score, a few risk modifiers, and it returns an urgency category on the Australasian Triage Scale (ATS 1–5), where ATS-1 means resuscitate now and ATS-5 means this can wait two hours . The whole thing runs on-device: a quantized MedGemma 4B served through Ollama, a small RAG layer over open guidelines, and a deterministic rule-based floor underneath the model. I never set out to write about floating-point arithmetic. But while running my evaluation set across two machines, I hit a result that stopped me, and the explanation turned out to be more interesting and more current than the textbook answer most people reach for. The setup, and why a 4-bit model Two things about Aegis-MD's design matter for this story. First, it's local by design. Triage data is about as sensitive as data gets, so nothing leaves the machine. The trade-off is that I'm running a small, heavily quantized model: MedGemma 1.5 4B at Q4_K_XL , about 3.4 GB rather than a frontier API. Four-bit weights are the price of running offline on consumer hardware. Second, I tested on two configurations on purpose. The intended deployment is local GPU inference (an RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, 12 GB). But the public demo runs CPU-only on Cloud Run, because GPU instances need a paid quota I don't have. So I ran the same evaluation against both: the GPU build and the CPU build, same model, same code, same prompts. The eval is 17 hand-written cases spanning all five ATS levels, cardiac arrest down to a medical-certificate request. (Seventeen is a smoke test, not a validation; I won't quote a percentage off a sampl

Turn ideas & designs into stunning video/animation. Discussion | Link

Key takeaways Give an AI agent live web data by connecting it to Crawlora's hosted MCP endpoint — it calls documented tools (search, maps, commerce, social, finance) and gets normalized JSON back, with no scraping code or proxies to run. MCP (Model Context Protocol) is an open standard: agents discover and call tools through one interface instead of a bespoke integration per data source. Connect over Streamable HTTP at https://mcp.crawlora.net/mcp with your API key — about three minutes in Claude, Cursor, Cline, Windsurf, or any MCP client. One connection exposes 319 tools across 33 platforms (393 REST endpoints underneath): Google/Bing/Brave search, Google Maps, Amazon, YouTube, TikTok, Yahoo Finance, CoinGecko, and more. You pay only on a successful (2xx) response — failed calls are free — and the free tier includes 2,000 credits a month with no card. Versus writing your own scrapers: no per-source glue code, normalized JSON instead of HTML, and proxy routing, rendering, and retries handled behind the endpoint. You can give an AI agent live web data by connecting it to a hosted MCP endpoint : your agent calls documented tools — search, maps, e-commerce, app stores, social, finance, and more — and gets back normalized JSON, with no scraping code to write or proxies to run. This guide explains what MCP is, what data you can pull, how to connect in about three minutes, and what a real tool call and its response look like. Most LLMs are frozen at their training cutoff and can't see the live web. The usual fix — writing a scraper per source, then maintaining proxies, headless browsers, and parsers — is exactly the work teams don't want to own. MCP plus a hosted data server removes it: the model gets a stable set of tools, and the fetching lives behind an endpoint. What is MCP, and why does it matter for agents? The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open standard that lets an AI agent call external tools through one consistent interface. Instead of wiring a bespoke int

The AI landscape is evolving faster than ever. Keeping track of the right tools can feel like trying to drink from a firehose. I recently dug through my extensive bookmarks folders and compiled every single AI tool and Autonomous Agent I've saved. Whether you're looking for an autonomous coding agent, a rapid app builder, an LLM benchmark, or a creative suite, you need the right tool for the job. Bookmark this page, because you're going to want to refer back to it. Superdesign Maskara.ai Google Labs: Google's home for AI experiments - Google Labs Kilo Code - Open source AI agent VS Code extension hunyuan bolt.new Rocket.new | Build Web & Mobile Apps 10x Faster Without Code AI Web Scraping Extension | Chat4Data Sarvam AI Lovable Starc- film ShumerPrompt aipai.app Flowe MiniMax Official Website - Intelligence with everyone new.website | Build Websites with AI Higgsfield HeyBoss.ai Mitte Trickle AI - Turn your ideas into live apps and websites with AI. Dora: Start with AI, ship 3D animated websites without code Kimi AI – Think Bigger. Search Smarter. Write Better. a0.dev - Create Mobile Apps with AI sesame Vogent - Create AI Voice Agents Orchids - Make something beautiful Same PromptBase | Prompt Marketplace: Midjourney, ChatGPT, Sora, FLUX & more. LM Studio Mindstone Chat with Z.ai - Free AI for Presentations, Writing & Coding AI Model & API Providers Analysis | Artificial Analysis T3 Chat - Advanced AI Assistant & ChatGPT Alternative | $8/month Poe Freepik | All-in-One AI Creative Suite Replit – Build apps and sites with AI unwind ai Magic Patterns Soapbox - Build Your Decentralized Platform Shakespeare - AI Website Builder AI recruitment engine to hire top global talent | micro1 Ponder AI | New Way to Work with Knowledge Using AI Ask AI Questions · Question AI Search Engine · iAsk is a Free Answer Engine - Ask AI for Homework Help and Question AI for Research Assistance Firecrawl Kiro: The AI IDE for prototype to production Le Chat CodeArena – Which LLM codes best?

Every five minutes, Polymarket lists a new question: Will Bitcoin be higher at the end of this window than at the start? You can buy Up or Down . One side pays $1. The other pays $0. The market resolves using Chainlink BTC/USD — not Coinbase, not Binance. That last detail matters more than most people expect. This post is a rough, developer-friendly overview of a spike bot we built to trade those windows. It explains the shape of the system — feeds, decision loop, risk, logging — without publishing the parts that actually make it work: momentum math, tuned parameters, hedge mechanics, or when we choose to run it. Think of this as the architecture blog post, not the strategy leak. Why these markets are interesting (and annoying) Five-minute binary markets are a strange hybrid: They behave like options (probability priced between $0 and $1). They settle like oracles (Chainlink, on a schedule). They trade like retail sports books (fast repricing, thin books, emotional flow). The friction creates opportunity — but only if your bot understands which price is authoritative and which price is merely early. We run two price feeds in parallel: Feed Role Chainlink (via Polymarket RTDS) Resolution price. Slow but official. A fast exchange lead feed Early warning. Moves before the oracle updates. The bot's thesis is simple to state and hard to execute: When spot moves sharply, the prediction market sometimes lags. If you can detect the move early and buy the underpriced side before the book catches up, you have edge. We call that a spike bot — not because it only trades violent moves, but because entries are triggered by short-term momentum events rather than a fixed countdown window. System architecture (the boring, important part) Most of the complexity lives in plumbing. The strategy is one module; the infrastructure is the product. ┌─────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐ │ Chainlink RTDS │ │ Lead exchange WS │ │ (oracle) │ │ (fast spot) │ └────────┬────────┘ └────────┬────

I Built a GDPR Compliance Scanner Using the Claude API - Here's How It Works A few months ago I noticed something that kept bugging me. I was building and handing off websites for clients and every single time, GDPR compliance was either an afterthought or a panic right before launch. Privacy policies copied from templates, cookie banners slapped on at the last minute, no one really sure if the contact form was actually compliant. The bigger problem: there was no quick, affordable way to check . Enterprise compliance tools cost hundreds per month. Legal consultants cost more. Most small businesses just crossed their fingers. So I built ClearlyCompliant - an automated GDPR compliance scanner that analyses a website and delivers a detailed PDF report for a one-off fee. No subscription, no jargon, just a clear picture of where a site stands. Here's how it actually works under the hood. The Stack Django (Python) - backend and web app BeautifulSoup + requests - crawling and HTML parsing Python threading - async scanning without the overhead of Celery/Redis Anthropic Claude API (Haiku) - AI-powered policy analysis ReportLab - PDF report generation Stripe - payments IONOS SMTP - email delivery Gunicorn + Nginx on an IONOS VPS The Scanning Pipeline When a user submits a domain and completes payment, the scan kicks off immediately. Rather than making them wait on a loading screen, the scan runs asynchronously in a background thread and the report gets emailed when it's done. I deliberately avoided Celery and Redis here. For the scale I needed, Python's built-in threading module was more than sufficient and kept the infrastructure simple. One less thing to maintain, one less thing to break. import threading def run_scan_async ( domain , order_id , customer_email ): thread = threading . Thread ( target = run_full_scan , args = ( domain , order_id , customer_email ) ) thread . daemon = True thread . start () The scan itself runs 23 individual GDPR checks across several categori

TL;DR: I built PackagePal — paste in any package from any language, pick your target language, and AI instantly finds the equivalent. No more Googling "what's the Node.js version of Python's requests ?" The Problem That Drove Me Crazy You know that moment when you're migrating a project — or just jumping between ecosystems — and you hit a wall trying to find the right package? I do. Every time. # You're used to this in Python import requests response = requests . get ( " https://api.example.com/data " ) And you move to Node.js and think: "Okay, what do I use here? axios? node-fetch? got? undici?" So you Google it. You find a Stack Overflow thread from 2019. Half the answers recommend packages that are now deprecated. You open 6 tabs. 20 minutes later you're still not sure which one is the current best choice. This wasn't a once-in-a-while thing for me. It happened constantly — switching between Python, JavaScript, Go, and Ruby on different projects. I was wasting real hours on a problem that felt completely solvable. So I built PackagePal . What PackagePal Does PackagePal uses AI to understand what a package actually does — its purpose, not just its name — and finds the best equivalent in whatever language you're moving to. The key insight: this isn't a lookup table. A simple mapping of requests → axios misses context. What if you're using requests for its session management? Or its retry logic? PackagePal surfaces options and explains why each one is a good match. Example searches people use it for: Python's pandas → JavaScript Ruby's devise → Node.js Go's cobra → Python JavaScript's lodash → Go Just type the package, pick the target language, and get results in seconds. 👉 Try it: packagepal.dev How I Built It Tech Stack 🤖 AI: Gemini Pro — handles the semantic understanding of what a package does and why an alternative matches ⚛️ Frontend: React + TypeScript ⚙️ Backend: Node.js + TypeScript on Google Cloud ⚡ Caching: Redis — so repeat searches (e.g., "requests → No

Every time a course batch completes, you have a list of students who need certificates. The manual way: open Canva, duplicate the template, change the name, export, repeat — for every single student. If you have 10 students, that's annoying. If you have 200, that's a full afternoon. The better way A single n8n workflow that: Reads student names from Google Sheets Calls the RenderPix batch API Gets back 200 certificate images Emails each student their certificate Total time: ~2.5 minutes. Total manual work: zero. What you'll need A RenderPix account (free tier works for testing, Starter plan for production) n8n (self-hosted or cloud) n8n-nodes-renderpix community node A Google Sheet with student data Install the n8n node: npm install n8n-nodes-renderpix Or search "RenderPix" in n8n's community node panel. Step 1 — Design your certificate template Write your certificate in plain HTML. Here's a clean starting point: <div style= "width:1200px;height:850px;background:white; display:flex;flex-direction:column;align-items:center; justify-content:center;border:20px solid #0f172a; font-family:Georgia,serif;padding:60px;box-sizing:border-box" > <div style= "font-size:16px;letter-spacing:5px;color:#64748b; text-transform:uppercase;margin-bottom:24px" > Certificate of Completion </div> <div style= "width:80px;height:2px;background:#22d3ee;margin-bottom:32px" ></div> <div style= "font-size:52px;font-weight:700;color:#0f172a;margin-bottom:16px" > {{name}} </div> <div style= "font-size:18px;color:#475569;text-align:center;max-width:600px" > has successfully completed </div> <div style= "font-size:28px;font-weight:600;color:#1e293b;margin:16px 0 40px" > {{course}} </div> <div style= "font-size:14px;color:#94a3b8" > {{date}} </div> </div> Notice the {{name}} , {{course}} , {{date}} placeholders — RenderPix replaces these at render time. Step 2 — Set up Google Sheets Create a sheet with these columns: name course date Jane Smith Advanced n8n Automation June 2026 John Doe Advanced n8n

I run a web design agency and there is already way too much stuff to deal with every day. Hosting client websites, maintaining them, building new sites, replying to clients, fixing random issues, handling support, doing outreach. Once you start managing a lot of company websites it quickly becomes overwhelming. That’s why I never wanted cold calling to become my main way of getting clients. I know cold calling can work, but I personally hate doing it. It drains my energy and takes up so much time. Sitting there making calls all day was never the kind of business I wanted to build. So instead I focused on email automation. The reason it works so well for me is because I can set everything up once and let interested businesses reply instead of spending my whole day chasing people. But I also don’t do the typical outreach where agencies send generic messages saying “your website is outdated” or “you need a redesign.” I use a tool called Swokei where I upload lists of company websites and it analyzes them for actual problems like speed, SEO, mobile responsiveness, layout issues, and design problems. Then it automatically creates personalized outreach emails based on those issues. That’s what helped me stand out because the emails actually feel relevant to the business instead of sounding copied and pasted. The reply rates became way better once I stopped sending generic outreach. Now I spend most of my time building websites, working with clients, and scaling the agency instead of letting outreach take over my entire day. submitted by /u/Murky_Explanation_73 [link] [留言]

Ten weeks ago I did the thing every "grow your open source project" guide tells you to do. I carved a few small, self-contained tasks out of my backlog, labeled them good first issue , wrote crisp descriptions, and waited for contributors to roll in. They didn't roll in. The issues just sat there. This morning, one of them finally got picked up. A first-time contributor opened a clean PR against my MCP server: a smoke-test suite, no new dependencies, green across the whole Node CI matrix. Exactly the contribution the label was advertising for. And then my own repository spent the next twenty minutes trying to stop it from getting merged. Not with anything dramatic. With three quiet, individually-reasonable "best practice" gates that, stacked together, form a gauntlet aimed squarely at the one person you spent ten weeks trying to attract. I want to walk through each gate, because almost everything written about contributors is about attracting them, and almost nothing is about the last hundred feet — the silent friction between a willing PR and a merged commit. The advice is only half the story "Add good first issues and contributors will come" is true in the same way "build it and they will come" is true: technically, eventually, for a small subset, with survivorship bias baked in. My good first issue opened on March 31. The PR that closed it merged on June 8. That's sixty-nine days of a clearly-labeled, beginner-friendly task sitting untouched. I'm not complaining about the wait — that part is normal. I'm pointing out that the advice stops exactly where the interesting problem starts. Because the bottleneck was never finding someone willing. When someone willing finally showed up, the friction was entirely on my side of the fence. Gate 1: the CI that silently refuses to run GitHub Actions does not run workflows on pull requests from first-time contributors until a maintainer approves the run. This is a sane anti-abuse measure — fork PRs can run arbitrary code in yo

Everyone's writing specs for AI now. We hand the model a markdown file, tell it what we want, and hope it builds the right thing. It mostly works — until it doesn't. Markdown has quietly become the spec language. People reach for it as the DSL for their AI-driven workflows — headings, bullet lists, the odd table — and treat that loose structure as if it were a contract. The thing is, it isn't a DSL. It's markdown. It's prose formatting with no grammar to enforce, no structure you can execute, no shared vocabulary, and no way to tell whether the spec and the code still agree. You're leaning on a document format to do a job it was never built for, and you hit the limit the moment you want the spec to actually mean something a machine can check. Before you go down that road, I want to make a small, slightly absurd suggestion. Eat a cucumber. What I actually mean Gherkin is the plain-text language behind Cucumber , a tool that's been around for years in the behavior-driven development (BDD) world. It looks like this: Feature : User login Scenario : Successful login with valid credentials Given a registered user "ada@example.com" When she logs in with the correct password Then she should land on her dashboard And she should see a welcome message Scenario : Rejected login with wrong password Given a registered user "ada@example.com" When she logs in with an incorrect password Then she should see an "invalid credentials" error And she should remain on the login page That's it. Feature , Scenario , Given / When / Then . Structured enough that a machine can parse it, loose enough that a product manager can write it. The gap it bridges Most specs live at one of two extremes. On one end you have written specs : docs, tickets, markdown files. Readable by anyone, but inert. Nothing checks whether they're still true. They rot the moment the code moves on. On the other end you have tests : precise, executable, always honest — but written in code, illegible to half the people who a

Let's shine a spotlight on the open-source ecosystem. What are the best OSS products launched this year from your perspective? Dropping here are some of my favorite, most inspiring product launches so far, in no particular order. 5 awesome open-source products launched on Product Hunt in 2026 OpenClaw Launched last February on Product Hunt, the AI that "actually does things" is the fastest ever growing project on GitHub with 300k+ stars and 70k+ forks. It created a new category, enabling 50+ related products like moltbook (acquired by Meta) and KiloClaw - both ranked #1 Product of the Day. Kilo Code First launched last year, the open-source agentic engineering platform (19k+ GitHub stars) launched a code reviewer and a new VS Code extension this year. Both ranked #1 Product of the Day and #1 Product of the Week. InsForge The backend platform launched 2.0, hit 10k GitHub stars, ranked #1 Product of the Day, #3 Product of the Week, and joined YC. The Product Hunt effect? Tailgrids The 3.0 release of this React UI library ranked #1 Product of the Day. Ghost The latest project by @haydenbleasel , maker of next-forge , Kibo UI , and Ultracite , just cracked Product Hunt again, ranked #1 Product of the Day. Wrapping up Over to you! What are the best open-source products launched on Product Hunt in 2026 from your perspective? More awesome dev-first product launches in this repository for inspiration. Launched 42+ dev-first products on Product Hunt. AMA. fmerian fmerian fmerian Follow Feb 23 '25 Launched 42+ dev-first products on Product Hunt. AMA. # discuss # startup # marketing 1 reaction Comments Add Comment 5 min read

title: Your AI Agent Should Not Be Locked to One LLM Provider published: false description: Why serious AI agents need a provider-agnostic architecture, model routing, fallback, and a unified API gateway. tags: ai, llm, agents, architecture Your AI Agent Should Not Be Locked to One LLM Provider Most AI agent prototypes start the same way. You pick one model provider. You install one SDK. You write a few prompts. You add tool calling. You build a demo. It works. Until it does not. The moment you want to try another model, reduce cost, add fallback, improve latency, or support different task types, your simple agent starts turning into a messy collection of provider-specific logic. That is when you realize something important: A real AI agent should not be locked to one LLM provider. If you are building a personal AI agent, coding assistant, research assistant, internal workflow agent, or AI-native product, the model should be replaceable infrastructure — not a hardcoded dependency. The Problem with Single-Provider Agents A simple agent architecture often looks like this: CopyUser ↓ Agent ↓ One LLM Provider ↓ Response This is fine for a proof of concept. But real-world agent systems need more flexibility. Different tasks often need different models: Task Better Model Strategy Quick summarization Fast, low-cost model Complex coding Strong coding model Long document analysis Long-context model Reasoning-heavy planning Reasoning model Multilingual writing Model strong in that language Background automation Cheap and reliable model Production fallback Backup provider If your agent is deeply coupled to one provider, every optimization becomes harder. You cannot easily answer questions like: What happens if the provider is down? What if latency spikes? What if another model is cheaper for simple tasks? What if a new model is better for coding? What if a user wants Claude for writing but GPT for structured reasoning? What if you want to route Chinese tasks to a different mod

Microsoft announced the general availability of Microsoft Discovery, its Azure-based platform for deploying autonomous AI agent teams in scientific R&D. The platform powered the development of Majorana 2, a topological quantum chip with 1,000x reliability improvement and 20-second qubit lifetimes. Microsoft now targets a scalable quantum computer by 2029, halving its original timeline. By Steef-Jan Wiggers

Much is new about this month’s upcoming FIFA World Cup tournament, which will be held in the US, Canada, and Mexico. It hosts more teams than ever before. It’s the first to occur in three different host countries. And, like predecessor cups for over half a century, it will employ a soccer ball with a…

Not talking about which one sounds smarter. talking about which one you’d actually rely on when the answer genuinely matters to you. which one and why? submitted by /u/aiprotivity_ [link] [留言]