AI 资讯

submitted by /u/WrongdoerRough4712 [link] [留言]

DIYer and TikTok user Annike Tan, who goes by @ubeboobey, can carry her cyberdeck around without anyone noticing because it doesn't look like a computer at all. Tan, who has been featured in The Cut and Wired, went viral earlier this year with a mermaid-themed cyberdeck she made inside an old purse. She has since […]

Hi, everyone I am working as a Software engineer. The past few years I oversleep a little bit in scope of AI mostly because I am sceptical about it. I decided that I would like to move on and be more up to date with it and potential use of it. How do you use it in day to day habits or work? How to monetize it? submitted by /u/Blvckhype [link] [留言]

By targeting large numbers of users, attackers increased their chances of success.

Musk can't be trusted to protect X user privacy, public commenters warn FTC.

As a high school student, I’m trying to figure out what major I’m interested in. About half a year ago, I thought EECS was a great major for some STEM students like me, because I see many of the world's most influential entrepreneurs, such as Elon Musk and Jensen Huang, have built companies around software, hardware, and artificial intelligence, helping advance technological and society. Recently, however, I have been exposed to a variety of AI-powered programming tools, such as Claude Code and

For those doing heavy AI programming or running local models on mobile hardware: Is the current generation of iPhone Pro or Samsung Galaxy Ultra actually making a difference in your workflow, or is it mostly a gimmick right now? submitted by /u/Spirited_Good9789 [link] [留言]

Poke, the startup that lets people use AI agents through simple text messages, has become the first AI agent approved for Apple’s Messages for Business platform.

Canada's "AI for All" plan prioritizes strengthening data protections and increasing AI adoption.

Fusion startup Helion is racing to complete a power plant for Microsoft by 2028. A fresh infusion of cash should help with that.

Hello, I'm Shrijith Venkatramana. I'm building git-lrc, an AI code reviewer that runs on every commit. Star Us to help devs discover the project. Do give it a try and share your feedback for improving the product. What if you could change how an AI thinks without retraining it? Not by rewriting prompts. Not by fine-tuning billions of parameters. Not by collecting another mountain of training data. Instead, imagine finding a direction inside the model's internal representation space and nudging the model a little in that direction. A small push. A different behavior. This idea sits at the heart of one of the most fascinating areas of modern AI interpretability: steering vectors . Steering vectors suggest that many behaviors we care about—careful reasoning, honesty, coding style, security awareness, verbosity, and more—may already exist inside a model. The challenge is learning how to activate them. Let's explore what steering vectors are, how they're created, and why they might become one of the most practical tools for controlling AI systems. 1. What Exactly Is a Steering Vector? Large language models process information through layers of high-dimensional activations. At any point during generation, the model's internal state can be represented as a vector containing thousands of numbers. Researchers discovered something surprising: Different behaviors often correspond to different regions of this activation space. For example: Writing Python code Solving math problems Speaking French Explaining concepts carefully Producing insecure code Each tends to produce distinctive activation patterns. A steering vector is essentially the difference between two activation patterns. Suppose we gather examples where the model is: Careful Methodical Thorough and compare them to examples where it is: Rushed Superficial Incomplete The average difference between these internal states becomes a steering vector. At inference time, we can add that vector back into the model's activatio

Voltage lies. Put a battery under load and its terminal voltage sags. Let it rest and the voltage springs back. A naive fuel gauge watching only voltage will happily tell you a worn-out cell is "fine" right up until it falls off a cliff. The number you actually care about — is this battery still good, or is it time to replace it? — isn't in the instantaneous voltage at all. It's in the capacity : how much charge the cell can still deliver between full and empty. That quantity fades as a cell ages. Tracking it is called State of Health (SoH) , and it's the difference between "the device says 80%" and "the device has 80% of the runtime it had when it was new." I wanted my open-source battery SDK ( ibattery-sdk , Apache-2.0) to learn SoH on the device itself — no cloud model, no floating-point, on MCUs with kilobytes of RAM. This post is the story of getting that working end to end: from a coulomb integral in firmware to a faded value showing up live on a Grafana dashboard. The idea: learn capacity from one full→empty trip You don't need a PhD-grade model to estimate usable capacity. You need two anchors and an ammeter. Full anchor — when the cell is at its full-voltage plateau, declare "this is full" and set the coulomb counter to the rated capacity. Discharge — integrate current over time (coulomb counting). Every milliamp-hour that leaves the cell ticks the counter down. Empty anchor — when the cell hits its empty-voltage threshold, look at how much charge actually flowed. A healthy cell delivers close to its rated capacity before going empty. An aged cell hits empty early — it simply has less to give. From the charge measured between those two anchors, you get the cell's real usable capacity, and SoH = measured / rated . The SDK runs it through an integer EMA (so one noisy excursion doesn't whip the estimate around) and a plausibility guard (reject anything outside 30–120% of rated — that's almost certainly a glitch, not a real measurement). The whole thing is inte

On Uncanny Valley, we dive into the IPO bonanza that the top AI companies are embarking on to the point where some real estate listings are looking for not just regular old cash, but Anthropic stock.

We've poured hundreds of billions into bigger models, bigger clusters, bigger training runs, all pointed at AGI. And yet: the model still rebuilds context every few turns, still forgets what you told it ten messages ago, still degrades over long horizons. The capability is staggering and the continuity is brittle. We keep making the pattern-matcher bigger and acting surprised when a bigger pattern-matcher is still a pattern-matcher. Start with the measurement problem, because it sets up everything else. Faster output and better output are not the same thing. The industry measures speed. Tokens per second, FLOPs, parameters, because speed is easy to measure. But *effective* output, the useful work you actually get before the model starts reconstructing or fabricating what it already knew, is a different axis entirely. And on that axis, raw hardware speed tells you almost nothing. A system that generates twice as fast but burns half its output re-establishing context it should have retained isn't ahead. We've been optimizing the number that's easy to read instead of the one that matters. Here's the part I think gets skipped entirely. Current systems have no intrinsic drive. They don't want anything. They sit idle until prompted and optimize the next token. A bacterium has more impetus than a frontier model, it has a goal (find food, avoid toxin) and acts on it unprompted. That's not intelligence, it's drive, and drive is the thing evolution built *first*, hundreds of millions of years before cognition. We built the cortex and skipped the brainstem. So the bet that "scale the transformer until AGI falls out" may be optimizing the wrong layer entirely. You can't scale your way into goal-generation if goal-generation isn't a function of scale. If genuine intelligence needs a motivational substrate, something that forms its own goals and acts on them, then no cluster on earth produces it by getting larger, because it's an architecture problem, not a compute problem. That

A few weeks ago I was on a call sharing my screen, walking a teammate through a prompt I'd been iterating on in ChatGPT. Mid-sentence I scrolled up — and there, three messages back, was a chunk of a customer's data I'd pasted in earlier to debug something. Real email, real account info, sitting right there on a shared screen. Nobody said anything. Maybe nobody noticed. But I noticed, and I spent the rest of the call only half-present, trying to remember everything else still in that thread. If you live in ChatGPT all day, you already know the problem. The thread is your scratchpad. You paste logs, keys, customer rows, half-finished internal docs — things you'd never put in a doc you planned to share. And then someone says "can you share your screen real quick" and suddenly your scratchpad is a presentation. Why the usual advice doesn't work The standard answers are all some version of "be careful": Open a clean tab before sharing. Scroll to the top. Use a separate "demo" account. These fail for the same reason all manual checklists fail under pressure: the moment you actually need them is the moment you're distracted, talking, and not thinking about hygiene. You remember after . The fix has to happen before the screen goes live, and it has to require zero discipline in the moment. What I wanted instead I wanted something that just sat there and blurred sensitive parts of a page automatically, so that even if I forgot, the leak couldn't happen. A few requirements: Local only. Whatever it does, it never sends page content anywhere. A privacy tool that phones home is a contradiction. Before, not after. It blurs while the page renders, not after I've already exposed it. Per-element, not whole-screen. A full black box is useless for a demo. I still need to show the working parts. The interesting technical bit The naive approach is to listen for some "I'm sharing now" signal and react. That's too late — there's a visible frame where the data is exposed before the blur kic

Rust Ownership System Explained for JavaScript Developers Quick context (why you're writing this) I was trying to rewrite a small utility I’d written in JavaScript—a function that takes a string, splits it into words, and returns the longest one. In JS it’s trivial: you pass the string around, mutate arrays, and nothing blows up. When I attempted the same thing in Rust, the compiler kept yelling at me about “use of moved value” and “cannot borrow as mutable because it is also borrowed as immutable”. I spent a good chunk of an afternoon staring at those errors, thinking I’d missed some syntax detail, only to realize the real issue was a completely different way of thinking about data. If you’ve ever felt that Rust’s compiler is being overly pedantic, you’re not alone—but once you grasp what it’s protecting you from, the frustration turns into appreciation. The Insight Rust doesn’t treat variables like JavaScript’s loosely‑typed references. Instead, it enforces ownership at compile time. Three ideas tend to surprise developers coming from a garbage‑collected world: Move semantics – assigning a value to another variable moves it; the original is no longer usable unless you explicitly clone it. Borrowing rules – you can have either many immutable references or exactly one mutable reference to a piece of data, but never both at the same time. Lifetimes – the compiler tracks how long references are valid, preventing dangling pointers without a garbage collector. The first two are the ones that trip people up most often, and they directly address the class of bugs JavaScript developers know all too well: accidental shared‑state mutations and use‑after‑free‑like mistakes (though in JS they show up as weird undefined values rather than crashes). Let’s look at each with a concrete example, show the common mistake, and then see how to do it right. How (with code) Move semantics – the “you can’t use it after you give it away” surprise fn main () { let greeting = String :: from

İlk yazıda Event Driven Architecture’ın temel kavramlarını, Kafka üzerinde topic/channel tasarımını, event-command ayrımını, schema contract’ları ve producer-consumer ilişkisini ele aldık. Bu yazıda odağı bir adım ileri taşıyıp event’in platform içindeki yaşam döngüsüne bakacağız. Çünkü EDA tasarımında asıl zorluk yalnızca event üretmek değildir. Asıl mesele, üretilen event’in güvenilir, izlenebilir, tekrar işlenebilir, zenginleştirilebilir ve farklı tüketiciler tarafından kullanılabilir hale gelmesidir. Bu yazıda şu sorulara odaklanacağız: Ham event platforma geldiğinde ne olur? Event nasıl doğrulanır, zenginleştirilir ve tüketilebilir hale gelir? Raw, validated, enriched ve curated topic’ler nasıl konumlandırılmalıdır? Bu yapı modern lakehouse mimarilerindeki Medallion yaklaşımıyla nasıl ilişkilendirilebilir? DLQ ve alert topic’leri ne zaman devreye girer? Replay, idempotency, monitoring, security ve governance nasıl düşünülmelidir? Event Pipeline Nedir? EDA mimarilerinde özellikle data platform projelerinde event’ler genellikle bir yaşam döngüsünden geçer. Bu yaşam döngüsü şöyle modellenebilir: raw -> validated -> enriched -> curated | | v v dlq alert Bu yapı, veri akışının aşama aşama olgunlaşmasını sağlar. Raw topic kaynaktan gelen ham event’i taşır. Validated topic schema ve temel kalite kontrollerinden geçmiş event’leri içerir. Enriched topic event’in referans veriler veya başka veri kaynaklarıyla zenginleştirilmiş halidir. Curated topic ise tüketiciler için güvenilir, normalize edilmiş ve iş anlamı netleşmiş event’leri temsil eder. Event Pipeline ve Medallion Architecture İlişkisi Bu yapı, modern lakehouse mimarilerinde sık kullanılan Medallion yaklaşımıyla doğal bir benzerlik taşır. Lakehouse tarafında Bronze katmanı ham veriyi, Silver katmanı temizlenmiş ve zenginleştirilmiş veriyi, Gold katmanı ise iş tüketimine hazır veri ürünlerini temsil eder. Kafka üzerindeki raw, validated, enriched ve curated topic’leri de benzer bir olgunlaşma mantığını akan veri ü

Sliding Your Way Out of Panic: The Mental Trick That Speeds Up Coding Under Fire Quick context (why you're writing this) I still remember the sweat on my palms during a technical interview a couple of years back. The interviewer tossed out the classic “longest substring without repeating characters” problem, gave me five minutes, and watched me stare at the whiteboard like I’d never seen a string before. I started with a brute‑force double loop, felt the clock ticking, and ended up writing a mess that was O(n²) and full of off‑by‑one errors. I walked out feeling like I’d choked, even though I knew the solution deep down. Later, after I’d spent way too many hours replaying that moment in my head, I realized the problem wasn’t my knowledge—it was the way I was framing the question while under pressure. I’d been trying to solve the whole thing at once instead of focusing on the tiny piece that actually mattered. When I finally isolated that piece, the answer clicked in seconds. That’s the mental framework I now teach anyone who’s about to face a ticking clock: identify the invariant you must keep true, and let everything else revolve around it . The Insight When the pressure’s on, your brain wants to grab the biggest chunk it can see and start hacking. That’s a recipe for wasted time and bugs. Top coders do the opposite: they strip away everything that isn’t a constant rule the solution must obey, then build the smallest possible state machine that enforces that rule. For the substring problem the invariant is simple: the current window must contain only unique characters . If you can guarantee that, the answer is just the biggest size that window ever reaches. All the fiddly details—where to move the left pointer, how to know when a duplicate appears—fall out of tracking the last index you saw each character. So the mental steps are: State the invariant (what must always be true). Find the minimal data you need to enforce it (usually a map or a set). Update that data