AI 资讯

Cloudflare Turnstile in Playwright: Why Your Tests Stall and How to Solve It in 8 Lines If you're running Playwright or Selenium against any site behind Cloudflare, you've already met Turnstile. It's the new "managed challenge" widget Cloudflare started shipping in 2023, and it now appears in front of login flows, contact forms, signup pages, and increasingly the entire site root. Here's the part most teams miss: Turnstile doesn't always show a checkbox. A lot of the time it just sits invisible, runs its scoring loop, and either issues a token silently or stalls forever. Your test doesn't crash. It just times out at the next page.click("button[type=submit]") . The CI log says "element not interactable." Nobody knows why. I work on CaptchaAI. I'm going to show you exactly what's happening, then drop in 8 lines that fix it. The real scenario You have a Playwright suite that runs every PR. One day a test starts failing on the signup flow. You re-run it. It fails again. Locally on your laptop it passes. On CI it doesn't. What's actually happening: Cloudflare flagged your CI runner's IP block (GitHub Actions, GitLab runners, Hetzner, OVH, DO — all of them are on Cloudflare's "elevated risk" list). Turnstile decides to switch from invisible mode to "managed challenge" mode. Now there's a widget in the DOM that needs a real token before the form submit will accept. Your test never interacted with the widget because last week it didn't exist. Why retries don't help The instinct is to add a retry: 2 and move on. Don't. Cloudflare's scoring is per-IP-per-fingerprint, and each retry from the same runner makes the next challenge harder, not easier. After ~3 attempts you'll get full block pages instead of the widget. The right move is to solve the widget once, inject the token, and submit normally — exactly what a human user does, just faster. How Turnstile actually issues a token The widget renders an iframe pointing at challenges.cloudflare.com . Inside the iframe it runs a fi

I like ChatGPT in general, but whenever I mention, say, a dispute with a business or an unorthodox opinion about something, it aggressively starts defending the business or the status quo. It's almost like a paternalistic version of a center-right politican. I get strong "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave" vibes (ala the film "2001: A Space Odyssey"). Are there better options out there for someone like me? Probably needs to have a free tier to be useful to me. Degrading to a lesser model after a certain number of questions (like ChatGPT) is fine, but if it stops letting me ask questions completely, I'm out. Local LLMs are out of the question as I'm just dealing with a dirt cheap low end phone. I've tried them, they don't run on my hardware. submitted by /u/CharmCityCrab [link] [留言]

Gemma 4 12B Multimodal, AI Copilot Selection, & AI-Optimized Documentation Strategies Today's Highlights Today's top stories delve into a new foundational multimodal AI model, strategic selection of AI copilots for productivity, and practical techniques for creating documentation suitable for both human readers and AI assistants. These insights are crucial for developers building and deploying advanced AI solutions in real-world workflows. Gemma 4 12B: A unified, encoder-free multimodal model (Hacker News) Source: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/developers-tools/introducing-gemma-4-12b/ Google has announced Gemma 4 12B, marking a significant step forward in multimodal AI. This model distinguishes itself with a "unified, encoder-free" architecture, simplifying the process of handling diverse data types such as text and images without the need for separate encoding layers. This architectural innovation promises more efficient training, reduced inference costs, and improved coherence in understanding and generating content across different modalities. For developers, Gemma 4 12B provides a robust and flexible foundation for building sophisticated AI applications. It enables the creation of intelligent systems that can process and respond to complex queries involving various input formats, from intelligent search and content generation to advanced human-computer interaction. This streamlined approach to multimodal processing is critical for developing next-generation AI tools and frameworks. Comment: An encoder-free, unified multimodal architecture for Gemma 4 12B is a big deal for reducing complexity and improving cross-modal understanding. This model could significantly simplify building AI applications that need to process and generate content across text and images efficiently. Presentation: Choosing Your AI Copilot: Maximizing Developer Productivity (InfoQ) Source: https://www.infoq.com/presentations/choosing-ai-copilot/?utm_campaign=infoq_content&

Draw the boundary first. Then write Terraform. A federal customer was ready to procure. The architecture was not. This is a redacted write-up of a real engagement: a FedRAMP Moderate authorization boundary built on AWS GovCloud for an AI SaaS vendor selling into federal buyers, against a customer-driven timeline tied to a fiscal year. The context The client ran production on commercial AWS with a strong engineering culture, modern Terraform practice, and zero prior federal experience. A federal customer had committed to procurement contingent on a FedRAMP Moderate path, with an aggressive deadline. The internal team understood the application deeply and had read enough FedRAMP material to know they were in trouble. The architecture decisions that worked beautifully for commercial customers each failed boundary review: shared accounts with the commercial environment a hosted vector store outside the cloud OpenAI behind the application an observability stack running outside the cloud account The remediation list grew faster than the team could keep up with, and the timeline did not move. They reached out for boundary architecture help. Not policy writing, not 3PAO selection. Engineering work to redesign the cloud footprint so the boundary could be drawn cleanly and the assessment could proceed. The approach: boundary before Terraform The most common FedRAMP failure pattern is to start with the existing environment and try to bend it to fit the boundary. We do not do that. The first deliverable was a boundary diagram drawn from scratch, before any IaC was touched, identifying every service inside, outside, and at the edge of the authorization boundary. From the boundary, every other architectural decision derived. The Terraform module library was written against the boundary, not the existing accounts. Identity federation, network architecture, KMS topology, and logging all followed. ┌─────────────────────────── FedRAMP Moderate Boundary (AWS GovCloud) ────────────────

Parent/child first. Evidence emission second. Ansible control plane third. Every release was a manual evidence collection exercise. The pipeline was the bottleneck. This is a redacted write-up of a real engagement: rebuilding a healthcare SaaS company's CI/CD pipeline across a fleet of Linux hosts on AWS. The context The engineering team had grown faster than the pipeline architecture had evolved. What started as a single-stage GitLab job for a small team had been extended, patched, and worked around as the team scaled past the patterns the original pipeline was built for. The result was familiar. Each deploy took 30 to 45 minutes of mostly-serial execution. Engineers had developed informal habits to work around the slowness, including pushing partial changes outside the pipeline when the timeline got tight. Audit windows were preceded by three-week sprints in which the team manually compiled deployment logs, screenshots of access reviews, and approval chains into PDFs describing what the pipeline was supposed to be doing. The work was technically passing HIPAA audits, but the audit was a snapshot of a system the auditor could not independently verify. The cost was paid twice: the velocity loss on every deploy, and the three-week scramble before each assessment. The team knew the architecture was wrong. They needed engineering hands to redesign it without slowing the product roadmap the audits were already eating into. The approach The redesign moved in three layers. First, decompose the monolithic pipeline into parent/child stages so work can parallelize and the audit boundary of each stage is provable. Second, build structured evidence emission into every stage as a property of how it runs, not an after-the-fact compilation task. Third, layer an Ansible control plane across the host fleet so HIPAA control state is continuously validated, not reviewed quarterly. ┌────────────────────────── Parent Pipeline (.gitlab-ci.yml) ──────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ ┌────────

NoSuggest is a quiet act of resistance against YouTube algorithms always trying to pull you into a loop of unlimited videos in turn into unlimited screen time. With unending side cards of videos, auto-play, what's next suggestions, YouTube shorts and notifications, users will be doom scrolling for many hours in a day. I faced the same problem. Acknowledging that, not all content in YouTube is bad. There are educational videos, genuine news contents without political bias which is very hard to fi

i've been leaning on ai for real decisions lately. not "write me an email" stuff, actual ones. whether to take a contract, whether an idea's worth building, how to price something. and i kept running into the same thing: the answer totally depends on which model i happen to open that day. one says go for it. one lists every reason to wait. one hedges so hard it's useless. i was making real calls off these and slowly realized i wasn't getting an answer, i was getting one model's opinion in a confident voice and treating it like it settled things. so i started pasting the same question into 5 different models and reading them next to each other. and the interesting part was never where they agreed. agreement usually just meant the call was obvious and i was overthinking it. the value was where they split. the one model that broke from the other four was usually pointing right at the thing i hadn't thought about. the disagreement was the signal, not the noise. stuff i've noticed doing this for a couple weeks: fast agreement = easy decision, stop overthinking it a clean split = there's a tradeoff you haven't actually named yet the odd one out is right more often than "4 vs 1" makes it sound, because the other four are usually just pattern-matching the same obvious take i got obsessed enough that i've been building something to automate the side-by-side and have the models actually push back on each other instead of me copy-pasting across five tabs. but that's not really the point of this. mostly just curious if other people landed in the same place. do you trust the disagreement between models more than the consensus? also maybe people arent making decisions with ai like i am that i need to be pressure tested before answers come back to me? lmk submitted by /u/wartableapp [link] [留言]

tokenmaxxing is the new AI slop Posting from our company account, so the usual disclaimer: we build code review and reliability tooling, and that access is how we got this data. Pulled 1M+ pull requests across 2,444 engineering orgs to answer a question almost nobody is measuring: when a team spends on AI coding tools, how much of it actually turns into shipped product? The short version: $0.18 of every dollar reaches users. The other $0.82 goes to bug fixing, rework, and review that catches nothing. 44% of all PRs at the median org are reactive work, not new features. 1 in 4 lines of code written each week gets deleted before the week ends. Over 12 weeks, PR volume grew 2.6x while reverted PRs grew 3.7x. Failures are scaling faster than output. Roughly half of all PRs get approved in under an hour. Our read: AI made generating code cheap but did nothing about the loop after merge, so maintenance compounds. Genuinely curious whether this matches what people here see on their own teams, or whether our sample skews a certain way. Full report with charts, percentile breakdowns, and methodology: https://research.entelligence.ai/ submitted by /u/entelligenceai17 [link] [留言]

Bulk delete, archive & timestamp your ChatGPT conversations Discussion | Link

Google must change AI Overviews after claiming users don't want "lots of sources."

It’s confusing because they said applicants will be notified on 3rd June but also said you’ll be notified 2-4 weeks after the deadline (29th may) submitted by /u/Smol_pp001 [link] [留言]

CURRENTLY WORKS - will update if that changes Someone likely already posted this, so I apologize if this is redundant, but an effective method to disable Google AI overview was discovered. It works because AI overview isn't available in France, so they may change it eventually, but for now it works. It will automatically disable AI overview on every search, you don't need to put -ai after every search. Go to the home Google search page. Click "settings" on the very bottom, then select "search settings". On the top click "other settings". Click "language and region". At the bottom, change "results region" to France. This removes AI overview and does NOT change your default language. You're welcome. submitted by /u/Glad_Writing [link] [留言]

Just in case you were wondering, Nvidia's RTX Spark isn't supposed to be a one-off. The company is not just flirting with becoming the fifth high-profile vendor of consumer laptop chips to see if people bite. At Computex 2026 in Taipei, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang confirmed at least two additional generations of RTX Spark are […]

Security advisory leaves out key details. Dashlane maintains complete silence.

I just finished my first year of undergrad, and I got my first first-author paper accepted to an ICML workshop! Super stoked, especially since I was lowk a crashout in high school I wanted to know if it is worth it for me to go? It's quite expensive, and I will be the only one in my lab in attendance, so I will be on my own. If I do attend, how would I best maximize this opportunity? I got an email saying main conference tickets would also be made available for accepted authors, so I would likely be able to attend that as well. What are the best ways to network, meet people, and make sure it's worth it? Also, I am applying for transfer for this next cycle, so any advice relevant to that is also appreciated. submitted by /u/YukiOnnaLake [link] [留言]

As the title says. I am not a reciprocal reviewer but I just noticed a clever prompt injection like they did in ICML for our submission. submitted by /u/Massive-Bobcat-5363 [link] [留言]