AI 资讯

Original post: GitHub Copilot for Engineers: Getting Better Results GitHub Copilot moved to usage-based billing in June 2026, dropping the flat subscription model that made monthly costs predictable. For teams using it heavily across multiple projects, that shift puts a premium on being deliberate: reaching for the right model, keeping prompts focused, and building a configuration that produces good results without a lot of back-and-forth iteration. Many of us install the extension, start with the defaults, and only tune settings later. The defaults are a reasonable starting point, but they are not a full configuration. A small investment in setup changes how much you get out of every request on an ordinary working day, and that matters more now that each request has a cost attached. This guide covers the full path: getting the tooling in place, choosing models with cost in mind, layering global and project-level rules, and building out instructions, agents, and skills that make Copilot predictable across different kinds of work. Architecture overview Diagram fallback for Dev.to. View the canonical article for the full version: https://sourcier.uk/blog/github-copilot-for-engineers Before you start Subscription and VS Code extension You need an active GitHub Copilot subscription. Plans are available at individual, business, and enterprise tiers at github.com/features/copilot . Once active, all tools use your GitHub account credentials. The GitHub Copilot extension for VS Code is the primary day-to-day interface. Install it from the Extensions panel or via the CLI: code --install-extension GitHub.copilot The extension provides inline completions as you type, Copilot Chat in the sidebar, inline chat on any selection via Cmd+I / Ctrl+I , agent mode for multi-step tasks, and multi-file edits with a single review step. Defaults keep improving, so avoid cargo-culting old setting lists. Focus on non-default tweaks that improve signal quality and control usage: Setting Value

I learned this the hard way: when an LLM says “it matches the docs”, it can still be wrong for a boring reason—it didn’t read the part that matters. I’m building a small SaaS (checklists as a service). No users yet. Plenty of documentation already. And at some point my docs stopped being an asset and started turning into a liability. This is the story of how I rebuilt my documentation so that an LLM could actually read it end-to-end —and how that restructure helped me. The moment I got scared: “silent misses” The docset grew. I kept asking the LLM to verify tasks against it. And then I noticed a pattern that felt worse than hallucinations. Not “the model invented stuff”, but “the model confidently said it matches ”—while quietly missing exceptions, prohibitions, and thresholds. Keyword scanning instead of reading. I called it silent drift : code slowly moves away from conventions, while the invariants remain only in my head. In a project with roles, audit, and CI/CD security gates, that kind of drift isn’t “just messy docs”. It’s how you lose the ability to implement and review changes consistently. I couldn’t do it manually (and I couldn’t delegate it fully) I knew I had to redo the documentation. But I also knew I couldn’t realistically do it all by hand. At the same time, I couldn’t just tell an LLM: “Rewrite everything according to approach X.” Not enough context, too easy to lose control. So I went with a third option: build a reliable process out of unreliable components— me + an LLM . Step 1: I separated my docs into domains (and forced the model to actually read) First, I extracted domain areas from the old documentation—the vocabulary I was using to describe the project and its parts. I tried to keep domains mutually independent (so the overall framework stays holdable in my head). Then I ran the same loop for each domain: I asked the LLM to read all old docs carefully and extract requirements for that domain. I moved those requirements into a dedicated fil

AI applications are generating more data than ever before. From model telemetry and user interactions to observability events and real-time analytics, modern systems need infrastructure that can ingest, process, and query massive datasets with low latency. That's exactly the problem ClickHouse is targeting with its latest release. The update introduces improvements across query performance, memory management, Kafka integration, lakehouse support, and developer tooling. While many of these changes appear incremental on the surface, together they highlight a much larger shift happening across the industry. One of the most notable additions is improved memory management for large joins. ClickHouse can now automatically spill hash joins to disk when memory usage exceeds configured thresholds. Instead of failing due to memory pressure, queries can continue running using more efficient execution strategies. For teams working with large feature tables, event enrichment, AI telemetry, or observability data, this can significantly improve reliability. The release also expands ClickHouse's Kafka capabilities with Schema Registry integration, AvroConfluent write support, metadata mapping, and zone-aware communication. These improvements make it easier to integrate ClickHouse into real-time event pipelines while reducing latency and unnecessary cross-zone traffic in cloud environments. Another major focus is support for modern lakehouse architectures. Improvements for Apache Iceberg and Apache Paimon strengthen ClickHouse's ability to query data stored in open table formats while maintaining high analytical performance. As more organizations separate storage and compute, ClickHouse is increasingly positioning itself as a high-speed query layer on top of cloud-native data lakes. Performance optimization remains a major theme throughout the release. Improvements include faster JOIN execution, better ORDER BY LIMIT performance, enhanced JSON processing, smarter index pruning, redu

A linked list is an ordered linear data structure where elements are not stored in sequential memory locations, instead they are stored in nodes that are linked together by a pointers. Linked list are used in data intensive application because linked list offer specific benefits for high frequency data manipulation, this benefits include: Efficient insertion and deletion Adding and removing elements from a linked list is highly efficient, unlike arrays which requires shifting all subsequent elements to maintain indexing. A linked list only requires updating the pointer. Dynamic sizing: linked list can grow or shrink during runtime without needing to pre-allocate memory. Memory management: Nodes in a linked list are only allocated when needed which prevents memory wastage. Flexible Traversal: Doubly and circular list allow you to move forward or backward, which makes them helpful for complex navigation The first node in a linked list is called the head which signifies the start of the list, while the last node is called the tail and has a pointer of null except in a circular linked list. Each node in a linked list has two things which are: the actual data the pointer or reference There are three main types of linked list: Singly linked list Doubly linked list Circular linked list Singly Linked List: Singly linked list are lists where each node has a next pointer that points to the next node. Doubly Linked List: Doubly linked list are list where each node has a next and previous pointer that points to the previous and next node. Circular Linked List: Circular linked list are list where the last node points back to the first node, forming a circle. Table of Contents create node class create linked list class isEmpty and getSize Methods prepend and append Method removeHead and removeTail Methods insert and search Methods getIndex and removeIndex Methods clear and print Methods create node class First let's open our code editor and create a new file called singlyLinkedLi

Keeping up with trending technical topics and new tools on developer forums can be time-consuming. To save time, I wanted to automate the process of finding popular articles, reading the comments to understand community sentiment, and drafting a summary. While I could write a standard Python script to scrape the dev.to API, simple scripts tend to be brittle. If an article doesn't have comments yet, a basic script will likely crash unless you write extensive error-handling logic. Instead of a rigid script, I built an Agent —a program that can dynamically reason about errors and adjust its approach. If one task fails, it can figure out the next best step. In this tutorial, I'll show you how to build a Trend-Spotting Agent using Python, the Google Agent Development Kit (ADK) , and Gemini 2.5 Flash. What We're Building We are going to write a Python application that acts as an autonomous agent. We'll give it three abilities: Search the dev.to API for rising technical articles based on specific tags. Dynamically fetch the top comments of those articles to read real community sentiment. Automatically draft a newsletter-style article on your DEV.to account summarizing its findings. Prerequisites Python 3.9+ installed on your machine. Google ADK . (Check out the Google ADK Docs if you need help installing). A DEV API Key . Grab this from your DEV.to account settings under "Extensions" and throw it in a .env file. Step 1: Giving the Agent its "Hands" (API Tools) Large Language Models (LLMs) are incredibly smart, but out of the box, they can't actually do anything on your computer. The coolest part about Google ADK is that we can write standard Python functions, hand them to the LLM as "tools", and let the AI decide how and when to use them. Let's write our API functions. Tool 1: Finding Rising Articles Here is our function to fetch rising articles. Pay close attention to the docstring ( """Fetches the top...""" ). We aren't writing this for other developers; the ADK actually

Stop Shipping 20 Locale Files in React Native: On-Device Translation for Dynamic Language Packs Internationalization in mobile apps usually starts clean and then gets expensive. At first, you keep a couple of JSON files: en.json es.json fr.json That works when your product is small and the set of languages is stable. It breaks down when: you want to support many languages the product team keeps changing copy translated files drift out of sync some languages are only partially used you do not want to run every string through a server-side translation pipeline This is the problem @tcbs/react-native-language-translator is trying to solve. It lets a React Native app keep a source language, translate missing keys on device, and cache the generated language pack locally. Package: @tcbs/react-native-language-translator The problem Many React Native apps treat localization as a static asset problem: keep one JSON file per language ship all of them in the app update all of them whenever English changes That model has real costs. 1. Translation files become operational debt Every new feature adds more keys. Every copy change forces translators to update multiple locale files. Over time, the translation layer becomes a maintenance queue. The result is predictable: missing keys stale translations untranslated fallback strings inconsistent release quality across languages 2. Shipping many locales is wasteful Most users only need one target language. But many apps ship every locale anyway. That increases bundle size and creates a lot of dead weight for users who will never use most of those files. 3. Dynamic product copy is hard to localize well If your app changes quickly, static translation files lag behind. Teams either accept stale translations or build a backend workflow to keep everything synchronized. That is often more infrastructure than the app actually needs. 4. Server-side translation is not always the right tradeoff Calling a translation API at runtime introduces: la

Teach your AI to build document templates Discussion | Link

presenting a poster there, and have registration covered. but they are placing me on waitlist for travel funds. As my travel depends on whether I get the travel grant, I need to get this off of my mind, either invite me or just say no. I'm waiting forever for this, more wait again? should i ask for a decision, or what to do. submitted by /u/Active-Tip3130 [link] [留言]

Ship AI that stays on-brand Discussion | Link

Donald Trump killed an executive order to regulate AI. Now, administration officials and AI executives are trying to figure out if there’s anything left to piece back together.

submitted by /u/lilubba [link] [留言]

Hello this might be weird but I am doing a study on society's view on AI as a school project. Therefore I am asking all kinds of communities and trying to get a very wide audience. This is clearly an AI sentric sub so hopefully his is relavent? I would be very happy if any of you would like to be a part of it! submitted by /u/Timely_Special_5011 [link] [留言]

This article is from Making AI Work, MIT Technology Review’s limited-run newsletter examining how to apply LLMs across industries. To receive it in your inbox,sign up here. From accounting to design to market research and product development, there’s a staggering breadth of skills needed to run a business. A large company can hire experts to…

Discover new Codex plugins, sites, and annotations that help analysts, marketers, designers, investors, and other teams get more done with AI.

This is what production AI costs when nobody's watching. A 4-person team posted their Anthropic invoice. Agentic systems don't make just one API call per task. They read context, plan steps, call tools, hit errors, retry. Each step is a separate call to Opus at $25 per million output tokens. One user instruction can trigger 20+ calls before it's done. A lot of engineers have no idea what a single task costs end-to-end. - They don't know which prompts trigger the longest loops - They don't know how many silent retries are happening in the background - They can't tell which tasks could run on a smaller model without losing quality Frontier models are genuinely impressive. But agentic systems don't make one call.. they make dozens. Every single day. And most teams aren't watching the meter. If you're running agentic workloads in production, start tracking what individual tasks actually cost before your next invoice does it for you. submitted by /u/aipriyank [link] [留言]

Most AI tutorials start with a setup checklist. Pick a model provider. Create an account. Wire up a...

I built CVE-Bench: 20 real-world CVEs across 18 Python projects (Pillow, GitPython, yt-dlp, urllib3, others), 5 frontier models, 3 prompt conditions, 300 runs total. Each agent runs in a sandboxed container and is scored against a hidden test_security.py derived from the maintainer's own fix. Binary pass/fail (a 90%-patched vulnerability is still a vulnerability). To better understand failure modes, I've tested three prompt conditions : advisory (full GHSA report), diagnose (exploit description only, no file or function), and locate (exact file and function, no description of the flaw). The three conditions test meaningfully different things. A model that does well on advisory but drops on diagnose can’t translate a behavioral description into a location in the codebase. A model that holds up on locate is recognizing dangerous code on its own. The leaderboard isn't the finding. Best solve rate is 50% overall, 60% under advisory. Cross-family separation (OpenAI vs Laguna) is confirmed under McNemar's test with continuity correction (all four pairs cross α = 0.05). Within-family gaps are noise: a power analysis puts the task count needed to detect a meaningful within-family edge at ~700. That cuts both ways: if the expensive models had a large true advantage, 20 tasks would have been enough to surface it. gpt-5.5 at 12× the cost of gpt-5.4-mini is not the rational choice. All four cross-family pairwise comparisons reach statistical significance at α = 0.05 (McNemar test with continuity correction, n = 60 tasks per model pair): gpt-5.5 vs laguna-m.1 (p = 0.015), gpt-5.4-nano vs laguna-m.1 (p = 0.017), gpt-5.5 vs laguna-xs.2 (p = 0.028), gpt-5.4-nano vs laguna-xs.2 (p = 0.040). Within-family comparisons remain far from significance; those rankings should be read as approximate. The failure taxonomy is the most interesting finding. Wrong-search drift — model finds the right file early, makes one incorrect inference, spends the remaining turns chasing it. Budget expires,

https://preview.redd.it/se5nr2z7tt4h1.png?width=3046&format=png&auto=webp&s=7db15b73afb749da236e5bb50ff96372f6a3239b Hi, Niels here from the open-source team at Hugging Face. It's been 2 weeks since I launched paperswithcode.co , a revival of the website we all loved. It allows us to keep track of the state-of-the-art (SOTA) across various domains of AI, from agents to computer vision and time-series forecasting. I've just added conference support as a new feature. The idea is that you should be able to easily browse all papers of major AI conferences like NeurIPS, CVPR, and ICML. As CVPR 2026 takes place next week in Denver, USA, I've indexed all papers with corresponding arXiv IDs. They are categorized by task, and tagged with linked GitHub and project page URLs, Hugging Face artifacts, and evals. You can also browse the papers which were accepted for an Oral presentation as well as the Spotlight papers. You can try it at https://paperswithcode.co/conferences ! Feel free to leave feedback. submitted by /u/NielsRogge [link] [留言]

Frontend automation has been getting pretty wild lately. 🫠 A few months ago, this comparison would...

So basically Claude at 20 buck sub is not much better than free. Chatgpt. It is pretty much shit. Gemini. It seems to have some reductions to its abilities in the last couple of months as well. The 20 buck price range used to have lots of good ais. Now they are all limited, downgraded. What would be the king in this price range? I have found myself using gemini ai pro with other ais as free on the top of that. submitted by /u/aluode [link] [留言]