AI 资讯

The Question Nobody Wants to Ask: Does Your Skill Actually Help? You spent an afternoon crafting a carefully structured Skill for your agent. Clear steps, thorough edge-case notes, well-formatted output requirements. You tested it manually a few times, the outputs looked great. You shipped it. Three weeks later, you notice that some task success rates have gone down compared to before the Skill existed. This is not a hypothetical. In May 2026, Microsoft Research published two concurrent papers — SkillLens ("From Raw Experience to Skill Consumption") and SkillOpt ("Executive Strategy for Self-Evolving Agent Skills") — that measured this failure mode at scale. Their finding: negative transfer happens in 25% of cases , and you cannot reliably identify the bad skills just by reading the text. One paper answers "why skills sometimes backfire." The other answers "how to make skills systematically better." Together they sketch a new paradigm for agent capability improvement. Part One: SkillLens — Mapping the Full Skill Lifecycle A Skill Is Not a Point — It's a Pipeline Most practitioners think of a Skill as "a block of text instructions for an agent." SkillLens decomposes this into a three-stage lifecycle : Stage 1: Experience Generation Target model M runs training tasks, producing an experience pool of trajectories (both successes and failures) ↓ Stage 2: Skill Extraction Extractor model E distills the experience pool into a structured skill document — procedural knowledge under a fixed budget ↓ Stage 3: Skill Consumption The same target model M, equipped with the extracted skill, is evaluated on held-out test tasks Notice there are two distinct roles in this chain: the Extractor (distills knowledge from trajectories) and the Target (consumes knowledge to improve task performance). SkillLens's central insight is that these two roles are independent — a strong task executor is not necessarily a strong extractor, and vice versa . Two New Metrics: EE and TE To separate thes

Top API Gateways for AI Applications and Agentic Workflows (2026 Developer Guide) Hadil Ben Abdallah Hadil Ben Abdallah Hadil Ben Abdallah Follow May 28 Top API Gateways for AI Applications and Agentic Workflows (2026 Developer Guide) # ai # api # apigateway # backend 49 reactions Comments 6 comments 10 min read

This is a submission for the [GitHub Finish-Up-A-Thon Challenge] What I Built LeadBotX is an AI-powered lead generation platform prototype designed to simulate how modern businesses can automatically discover, filter, and manage high-quality leads using intelligent automation workflows. This project is not just a simple frontend demo — it represents a revived college-level concept that I initially started earlier but left incomplete due to time constraints and complexity. For this challenge, I revisited the idea and transformed it into a fully structured SaaS-style frontend system with improved UI, better workflow representation, and a more realistic product-like experience. The main goal of LeadBotX is to visually demonstrate how an AI-based lead generation system works end-to-end in a real-world SaaS environment. Tech Stack This project was built using modern frontend technologies: React.js → Component-based UI structure CSS3 → Custom responsive styling system AOS (Animate On Scroll) → Smooth scroll animations Lucide Icons & React Icons → UI iconography GitHub Copilot → Assisted in code generation, debugging, and UI improvements Demo Source Code: https://github.com/Khushisingh-dev/LeadBotX Production Landing Page: https://lead-bot-x.vercel.app/ Before (Initial Version)- After (Final Version)- The Comeback Story This project originally started as a college-level concept during my development learning phase. At that time, I built only a basic structure and initial UI, but I was unable to complete it due to time limitations and complexity of the idea. It remained an unfinished project for a long time. When I came across this challenge, I decided to revisit LeadBotX and transform it into something more meaningful and complete. Instead of just polishing the UI, I focused on: Rebuilding the structure into a proper SaaS layout Improving workflow clarity and user journey Enhancing UI/UX consistency across all sections Making the product feel like a real-world AI tool prot

How RAGScope Knows Which Chunks Your LLM Actually Used Your retriever fetched 10 chunks. Your LLM only used 3. RAGScope shows a precision score of 30 out of 100. The question every new user asks: how does it know? There is no OpenTelemetry attribute that says "this chunk was in the context window." RAGScope infers it — and the way it does this is the most consequential piece of engineering in the whole tool. There Is No "In Context" Attribute in OTel The OpenTelemetry semantic conventions for generative AI ( gen_ai.* ) define attributes for model, input/output tokens, and retrieved documents. They do not define anything like gen_ai.chunk.reached_llm or gen_ai.retrieval.used_document_ids . When your RETRIEVER span fires, you get a list of documents. When your LLM span fires, you get a prompt and a completion. The two spans are connected by a parent-child trace relationship — but there is no attribute that maps which retrieved documents appear in which prompt. This gap matters. A reranker might drop 7 of your 10 chunks. Your application code might apply a token budget and truncate 4 more. From the trace alone, you cannot tell. RAGScope needs this information to compute the precision sub-score — the highest-weighted metric at 40% of the overall score. Getting it wrong would make precision meaningless. The Substring Match — How assembleContext Works RAGScope's answer is in src/enrichment/pipeline.ts , in a function called assembleContext : function assembleContext ( chunks : RagChunk [], llmSpans : ParsedSpan []): RagChunk [] { const llmPrompts = llmSpans . map (( s ) => s . prompt ). filter (( p ): p is string => !! p ); if ( llmPrompts . length === 0 ) return chunks ; let position = 0 ; return chunks . map (( chunk ) => { if ( ! chunk . content ) return chunk ; const inContext = llmPrompts . some (( p ) => p . includes ( chunk . content ! )); if ( inContext ) { return { ... chunk , inContext : true , contextPosition : position ++ }; } return { ... chunk , inContext :

Most apps don't just call one API endpoint. They call a whole chain of them. For example, you might log in, get a token, and then pass that token to another service. Tracking these multi-step chains can get messy quickly. To help fix this, the OpenAPI Initiative created the Arazzo Specification . It gives us a standard way to link different endpoints into clear workflows. But writing these workflow files by hand in a regular text editor is tough. It is very easy to lose track of how data moves from one step to the next. That is why I built Arazzo Visualizer for VS Code. It is a free, open-source extension that makes the Arazzo spec visual and easy to use. Live Interactive Graphs The extension reads your workflow files and turns them into interactive maps on the fly. See Data Flow: Look at exactly how data moves between steps. Catch Errors Early: Spot broken paths before you even run your code. Clean Layouts: Navigate large workflows without getting lost in thousands of lines of text. Built-In Workflow Runner Seeing the map is great, but testing it is even better. The tool has a step-by-step runner built right into your editor. Run a single step or execute the whole chain. See real-time data payloads and HTTP headers. Watch requests happen live to pinpoint bugs fast. Give it a Try The project is fully open source, and you can grab it or check out the code using the links below: Download: Install it directly from the VS Code Marketplace . Source Code: Check out the repository, report bugs, or contribute on GitHub . Deep Dive: Read my full technical breakdown and design on Medium . If you are working with API chains, I would love for you to try it out. Drop your feedback in the comments below! Note: Arazzo v1.1.0 is out with official AsyncAPI support. I am currently updating the VS Code extension to support these new features. Stay tuned for future updates!

I used to deploy Node.js apps on EC2 and manage servers like it was my second job. Port configs. PM2 restarts. Nginx rewrites. SSL renewals. Then I ran my first AWS Lambda function. 80% of that work is gone. Here's what Lambda actually does that nobody explains clearly: → You write a function → AWS runs it ONLY when triggered → You pay for milliseconds of execution → It scales from 1 to 1,000,000 requests without you touching anything As a full-stack developer in Bahrain, preparing for my AWS Developer Associate exam, this is the shift that changes how you think about backend architecture. Not "how do I manage a server" but "what should happen when this event fires." That mental model switch took me a week to fully get. I'm documenting everything as I study. Drop a 🔥 if you want me to share my Lambda notes weekly.

Throughout my software development career, especially over the last 20 years, I've constantly sought a balance between system and software aspects. One of these balancing points is the issue of application size. On one side, I have an engineering instinct that says, "Every kilobyte matters, every excess is a cost," while on the other, a pragmatic perspective that argues, "Delivering value-adding functionality to the user as quickly as possible is essential." Navigating between these two extremes has been a significant part of my career. So, should we really fight for every kilobyte? Or should we prioritize functionality? This is a gray area that varies depending on the project's context, target audience, and even deployment model. In my experience, there's no clear-cut answer to this question, but the best results can be achieved by asking the right questions and making conscious trade-offs. In this post, I'll share my thoughts and observations from different fields on this topic. The Harsh Realities of Size in the Mobile World The importance of size in mobile applications is undeniable. Especially in markets like Turkey, where mobile internet is widespread but not always fast or unlimited, app size directly affects download rates, user experience, and even how long an app stays on a device. Years ago, while developing my own Android spam application, I experienced this reality repeatedly. The smaller I made the app, the higher the download and installation rates became. For example, at one point, my app's main package was around 12MB. After several rounds of optimization (cleaning up unnecessary resources, code compression with ProGuard, optimizing native libraries), I managed to reduce this size to 7MB. This 40% reduction directly reflected in my Play Store download statistics. This difference was critical, especially for users with low-bandwidth connections or those using capped mobile data. Some users even provided feedback stating they refrained from downloadin

By Takeshi Yokoyama — Onecarat Labs Hi. I'm Yokoyama, and I build a local-first AI text editor as a side project, along with a few other experimental tools. Working on them, I keep running into the same question about where the web is going. This post is one observation, plus a small experiment I built to test it — including a Chrome extension you can actually try. The short version: I think websites will increasingly be read through AI agents, reshaped per reader, on the fly. And once that happens, there's a clear gap between sites that are easy for an AI to read and sites that aren't. What's starting to happen Until now, people read websites as websites. You open the top page, follow the menu, read the body, click a button — tracing the path the maker designed. As local AI and AI agents become normal, that breaks. People stop opening the page directly. They tell an AI what they want — "Can I try this quickly?" , "I just want to check it's safe" , "Just the gist" — and the AI reads the web and reshapes it into the form that reader wants. What the reader receives is no longer the layout the maker built. This isn't speculation. The idea that AI generates the interface for the reader already has a name — Generative UI — and it's one of the hottest areas in frontend right now, with Google, Vercel and others building toward it. But notice who's holding the pen in almost every version of that story: the site , or an AI embedded in an app — something under the maker's control. What I'm looking at is one step past that: a local AI, in the reader's own hands, reshaping any site into that person's preferred form — with no involvement from the maker at all. The initiative moves from the maker to the reader. The part that nags at me as a builder I build software too. So this shift nags at me. A site carries its maker's intent and rights. The order things appear in, what gets emphasized, the tone. Design, copy, flow — all of it is deliberate. Having an AI quietly reorder, rewri

A walkthrough of the architecture decisions behind Flacron Gamezone a production full-stack app built with Next.js, Express, PostgreSQL, and Redis. When a client approached me to build a live football match discovery platform, the requirements sounded straightforward on the surface: show live scores, let users subscribe, handle authentication. But the moment you start thinking about how those pieces connect in production, straightforward gets complicated fast. This is the story of how I designed the backend for Flacron Gamezone — what decisions I made, why I made them, and what broke along the way. Table of Contents The Problem With "Just Building It" The Architecture: Four Distinct Layers Why This Matters to a Client The Bug That Taught Me Something Real The Full Stack at a Glance What I'd Do Differently The Problem With "Just Building It" The easiest version of this app is a single Express file: one route handler that queries the database, formats the data, and sends a response. I've seen this pattern in tutorials everywhere. It works for demos. It falls apart in production. The problems are predictable: you can't test business logic without hitting the database, a change in one feature quietly breaks another, and the moment a second developer joins the codebase, nobody knows where anything lives. I wanted to build something I could actually be proud to show an employer or a client. That meant committing to a proper layered architecture from day one, even on a project this size. The Architecture: Four Distinct Layers The entire Express backend is organized into four layers. Each layer has one job and talks only to the layer directly below it. Route → Controller → Service → Repository Here's what each one actually does. Routes are just maps. They declare that POST /api/v1/subscriptions exists, attach the auth middleware, and hand off to the controller. No logic lives here. Controllers handle the HTTP boundary. They extract data from req.body or req.params , call th

From specialized motors to the use of machine learning algorithms, Turkey’s billion-dollar hair-transplant industry is the result of a constant process of innovation.

Hey! I'm a CS student and I got tired of not being able to compare MLX inference engines properly — every benchmark out there is either made by the engine's own developers, runs on an M3 Ultra nobody has, or just shows tok/s with zero context. So I built mlx-Chronos — a small open source CLI tool that runs a standardized benchmark protocol on your Mac and lets you submit your results to a shared community leaderboard. What it measures: Cold and cached TTFT (Time to First Token), with a proper methodology — unique prompts per trial, cache priming, no interleaved phases Throughput (tok/s), with mean/stddev/min/max across repeated trials Engine process RSS and system RAM peak, sampled continuously during inference Thermal state and hardware info Supported engines: oMLX, Rapid-MLX, mlx-lm, Ollama (MLX backend) The leaderboard is basically empty right now since I only have an M2 8GB. Would love results from M3 Max, M4, M4 Ultra, or anything with more RAM — that's where things get actually interesting. → Leaderboard: https://igurss.github.io/mlx-chronos → GitHub: https://github.com/igurss/mlx-chronos → Install: pip install mlx-chronos It's early, the methodology is documented (there's a methodology.md if you want to pick it apart), and I'm 100% open to feedback, contributions, and getting told what I'm doing wrong. The goal is just to have one place where you can compare engines on your specific hardware instead of trusting someone else's numbers. submitted by /u/igor__004 [link] [留言]

I've recently been getting reacquainted with frontend dev after having spent the last few years focusing mostly on design. I plan to do a combination of both again from now on. The last full-time job I was at we used drag-and-drop website builders that seem to be all the rage these days. I gotta say it was a truly painful experience. The websites we would handover would be a complete mess, clients would have to edit columns, widgets, layouts themselves which just felt like a recipe for disaster. We would often have to duplicate various widgets such as image sliders, one of mobile and one for desktop. I'd then have to explain to clients that they needed to update them twice, with the same content. Also, a lot of times I'd have to set up HTML widgets because of how limited the software was, so I'd also have to explain to clients that they'd sometimes need to edit actual code when simply updating content on their site. But the concerning thing is, I've had a number of other job interviews at marketing agencies lately and it seems like EVERYONE is doing the same thing. I also sometimes hear on podcasts people describing default WordPress as being 'old fashioned', as though the future of web dev is just doing everything with these hideous website builders WTF 🤮 Are these people mainly just taking the basic / shitty web dev projects while leaving the proper ones to those who know how to do it properly? or have a lot of developers lost out on work because of these? submitted by /u/Weekly_Frosting_5868 [link] [留言]

Let’s kick off June — and the beginning of summer — with some fresh inspiration! Artists and designers from across the globe once again tickled their creativity to welcome the new month with a new collection of desktop wallpapers. Enjoy!

submitted by /u/Early_Mail9268 [link] [留言]

I used these two prompts on all AI apps to figure out who to vote for in the CA primaries: If you were running for governor of California, what will your big policies be ⁠Out of the candidates that are running in June election, who aligns closest to those policies Gemini, claude, chatgpt all ranked Matt Mahan (Democrat) as #1 Grok chose Steve Hilton (Republican) thoughts on AI use for voting decisions? submitted by /u/No_Mall_7299 [link] [留言]

Agent Memory: Short-Term, Long-Term, and Episodic Main Thumbnail Image Prompt: A human brain cross-section illustration in neon tones on dark background. Three regions clearly demarcated and labeled. The hippocampus region glows blue, labeled "Episodic Memory: what happened." The prefrontal cortex glows orange, labeled "Working Memory: what I'm doing now." A network of distributed nodes glows green, labeled "Semantic Memory: what I know." Arrows show information flowing between regions. Scientific but accessible, the memory architecture made neural and visual. Memory Architecture Diagram Image Prompt: Four storage boxes arranged vertically on dark background. Top: "In-Context Window (Working Memory)" — fastest, smallest, temporary, shown as RAM chip icon. Second: "External Vector Store (Semantic Memory)" — fast retrieval, persistent, shown as cylinder with search icon. Third: "Key-Value Store (Episodic Memory)" — structured facts, shown as database icon. Bottom: "Fine-Tuned Weights (Procedural Memory)" — slowest to update, most permanent, shown as brain with lock. Arrows showing read/write speeds between boxes. Clean, technical, the hierarchy is the insight. Memory Retrieval Flow Image Prompt: A query arrives at an agent on the left. Four parallel arrows go right to four memory sources: conversation history (short chat bubbles), vector database (semantic search visualization), structured database (table icon), model weights (brain icon). Each source returns relevant items. A "Memory Fusion" box on the right combines the results. The agent sees an enriched context. The retrieval from multiple stores is the architecture. Every conversation with an LLM starts from zero. You explain your project. You explain your preferences. You explain your constraints. You spend five minutes providing context. You come back tomorrow. You do it all again. The model remembers nothing between sessions. The context window closes. The state is gone. Every interaction is the agent's first

Most robot foundation model demos are hard to interpret because the impressive number usually comes after task-specific fine tuning. Wall-OSS-0.5, a new open-source VLA release from X Square Robot, is interesting because the report tries to measure what the pretrained checkpoint can do before that extra adaptation step. The setup is a 4B vision-language-action model built around a 3B VLM backbone plus action-generation components. According to the report, the pretrained checkpoint was evaluated on a 17-task real-robot suite without task-specific fine tuning. Four tasks crossed 80 task progress: block sorting, fruit sorting, ring stacking, and a held-out deformable task, rope tightening. The part that seems more important than the raw score is the framing. In language models, nobody would accept only a fine-tuned downstream score as evidence that pretraining worked. With robots, that has been much harder because the evaluation is physical, slow, embodiment-dependent, and expensive. A real-robot zero-shot suite is a useful step toward asking the same question directly: does pretraining itself produce executable behavior, or is it mostly a better initialization? The method is also trying to solve a specific training problem. Continuous action losses are useful for execution, but the paper argues they do not send a strong enough learning signal into the VLM backbone by themselves. Their recipe combines action-token cross entropy, multimodal cross entropy, and flow matching in one stage, using the discrete action-token path as a gradient bridge into the backbone while flow matching handles continuous actions at deployment time. For reference, the code is at https://github.com/X-Square-Robot/wall-x , the paper is at https://x2robot.com/api/files/file/wall_oss_05.pdf , the project page is https://x2robot.com/oss#resources , and the Hugging Face org is https://huggingface.co/x-square-robot . The caveat is obvious but important. Zero-shot still does not solve the hardest man

The Principle of Least Privilege: Operational Speed's Security Cost While developing a production ERP, delayed shipment reports were always a headache. One of the main reasons behind incomplete reports was the complexity of privilege layers in the system and, often, excessive permissions granted. In this post, I will delve into the costs we pay when we stretch security boundaries in an effort to gain operational speed. The principle of least privilege is more than just a security concept; it's critically important for operational efficiency and system stability. In this article, I will explain the impact of the principle of least privilege on operational speed, the security risks it entails, and how I've tried to strike this balance with concrete examples from my practical experience. My goal is to move beyond superficial definitions and dive deep into this topic based on my real-world field experiences, providing actionable insights to readers. Why Does the Principle of Least Privilege Seem to Hinder Operational Speed? The general tendency is to provide instant access to all relevant tools and data to speed up a task. This can be appealing, especially in an emergency or before a critical delivery. However, the Principle of Least Privilege (PoLP) advocates the opposite: a user or system component should have the absolute minimum privileges required to perform its task. This might initially seem to slow down operational processes. For example, a development team having unlimited SELECT rights to a production database might facilitate running an urgent query. However, the same developer could accidentally run UPDATE or DELETE commands, causing serious damage to the system. Such an incident, instead of speeding up a query in the short term, could lead to hours of downtime and data loss. This is where the long-term risk posed by operational speed, which PoLP is thought to hinder, becomes apparent. Another example is a system administrator frequently using the sudo su co

You've seen this before. You ask your AI agent: "Find ∫ x·e^x dx" It confidently replies: e^x + C , complete with a plausible-looking derivation. You nod. Then you check — the correct answer is (x−1)·e^x + C . It was wrong by a mile, and you almost shipped it. This is the fundamental problem with AI math today: LLMs can talk, but they can't verify their own work. They sound convincing while being catastrophically wrong. And the more complex the problem, the better the hallucination. Math.skill changes that. It's an open-source mathematical reasoning skill for AI agents — install it, and your agent stops guessing and starts verifying. What Makes It Different Typical AI Math Plugin Math.skill Workflow Prompt → LLM → answer Prompt → 7-step pipeline → ≥2 verifications → answer Verification None Answer blocked if verification fails Open problems Might hallucinate a "solution" Honestly says "this is unsolved" Error recovery No mechanism Auto-backtrack, fix, recompute, re-verify The core differentiator: a verification engine that runs at least 2 of 11 independent checks on every answer. No answer leaves the pipeline unverified. Period. The 7-Step Pipeline Every problem flows through this: Step What Happens Why It Matters 1. Parse Extract conditions, goals, variables, implicit domain constraints Catches misread problems before they waste your time 2. Model Build formal representation: equation, function, matrix, probability space, etc. Prevents building the wrong mathematical structure 3. Select Choose the optimal method from 30+ strategies Avoids brute-forcing when elegance exists 4. Solve Step-by-step with mathematical justification at every transformation Full traceability — nothing hidden 5. Verify Apply ≥2 of 11 independent verification methods The differentiator — catches what LLMs miss 6. Correct If verification fails: backtrack to last known-good step, fix, recompute, re-verify No "doubling down" on wrong answers 7. Deliver Exact answer (not approximate), domain con

The Moment I Realized I Didn't Really Know JavaScript I was 2 months into learning JavaScript. I could use .map(), .filter(), .reduce() like any bootcamp grad. I felt confident. Then my instructor asked me one question: "How does .reverse() actually work?" I froze. I had used it hundreds of times. But I had no idea what was happening inside. I was a user, not a builder. That was the day everything changed. The 01EDU Difference: Build Tools, Not Just Use Them Most coding courses teach you to use built-in methods. 01EDU does something different. They disable the built-in methods. Then they say: "Now build it yourself." No .split(). No .join(). No .indexOf(). No .slice(). Just you, a text editor, and your brain. What I Built in 2 Weeks (Without Using Built-ins) Here are the JavaScript methods I re-created from scratch: Method What I Learned abs() Math is logic, not magic multiply(), divide(), modulo() Arithmetic is repeated addition/subtraction indexOf(), lastIndexOf(), includes() Searching is just looping and comparing slice() Negative indexes count from the end reverse() Arrays and strings are both indexed collections join() Building strings step by step split() Parsing is character-by-character inspection round(), floor(), ceil(), trunc() Decimals are just numbers between whole numbers Each function took hours of thinking, failing, debugging, and finally — understanding. The Most Painful Lesson: Loops The first time I tried to build repeat() without using .repeat(), I wrote an infinite loop. My computer froze. I had to force restart. That failure taught me more than any working code ever could. I learned to trace each iteration mentally. I learned to check my exit conditions. I learned to respect the loop. You don't truly understand loops until you've crashed your computer with one. What 01EDU Taught Me That No Bootcamp Could I learned how computers think, not just how to write code When you build .split() from scratch, you understand string parsing at a deep level.