Polymarket reportedly paid creators to post deceptive videos about fake bets
Many of those videos were reportedly filmed on “near-perfect copies” of the Polymarket website, while featuring trades and winnings that were not real.
找到 4490 篇相关文章
Many of those videos were reportedly filmed on “near-perfect copies” of the Polymarket website, while featuring trades and winnings that were not real.
Originally published on Mohamad Alsabbagh's Blog . AI coding assistants are excellent at compressing known work into fast drafts. That speed is the preface boost : routine implementation arrives almost immediately. The hidden risk is that teams begin treating the model's first plausible answer as architecture. Because LLMs are trained and aligned around historically common patterns, they can pull engineering teams toward Generative Monoculture : less diverse solutions, narrower exploration, and fewer designs shaped by the exceptional constraints of the system in front of them. Give the same prompt to three engineers using the same assistant and you often get the same shape back: a tidy service layer, a familiar API boundary, a conventional retry wrapper, and code that looks clean enough to merge. That answer is useful. It may even be the right answer for ordinary work. The danger is what happens when ordinary work becomes the default posture for extraordinary constraints. Large Language Models are not neutral architecture engines. They are probabilistic systems trained over historical work and tuned toward answers people tend to reward. Used well, that makes them extraordinary accelerators. Used passively, it creates an optimization paradox: teams gain immediate implementation velocity while becoming anchored to a consensus baseline that may be too average for the actual system. 1. The Default Is a Local Optimum Wu, Black, and Chandrasekaran define Generative Monoculture as a narrowing of model output diversity relative to the diversity available in the training data. That matters because software architecture is rarely a search for the most common answer. It is a search for the answer that fits the exact failure modes, latency envelope, team topology, regulatory constraints, and operational reality of a system. The model's default is often a local optimum: a solution that is statistically likely, syntactically polished, and broadly acceptable. That can be excellent
Part 1: Self-hosting on Jetson Orin Nano 👽 Jetson Orin Nano Web Server Follow-up...
Learn how to organize React projects for scalability, maintainability, and team collaboration. Introduction As React applications grow, one challenge consistently emerges: project organization . A folder structure that works perfectly for a small side project can quickly become a nightmare when multiple developers contribute to a production-scale application. Whether you're a junior React developer preparing for interviews, a mid-level frontend engineer looking to improve code maintainability, or a technical recruiter trying to understand modern React development practices, understanding scalable React folder structures is essential. In this guide, we'll explore the most popular React folder organization strategies, their pros and cons, and the structure many modern engineering teams use to build scalable applications. Why React Folder Structure Matters A well-organized React project provides several benefits: Faster onboarding for new developers Easier code maintenance Better scalability as features grow Reduced code duplication Improved team collaboration Cleaner separation of concerns Many React applications start simple: src/ ├── App.jsx ├── Home.jsx ├── Login.jsx └── Dashboard.jsx This works initially, but as the project grows to dozens or hundreds of components, finding and maintaining files becomes increasingly difficult. Common React Folder Structure Approaches 1. Type-Based Folder Structure One of the earliest and most common approaches is organizing files by their type. src/ ├── components/ ├── pages/ ├── hooks/ ├── services/ ├── utils/ ├── assets/ └── contexts/ Advantages Easy to understand Suitable for small projects Quick setup Disadvantages Components folder can become enormous Related files are spread across multiple directories Harder to maintain in large teams For example, a user profile feature might have files located in: components/UserProfile.jsx hooks/useUser.js services/userService.js pages/ProfilePage.jsx Finding all files related to one feat
We all know the grind of working with data, even with AI tools: every experiment starts with re-explaining everything, every iteration needs you to prompt, wait, review, correct, and repeat. And the moment you close the session, everything learned is gone. It makes us the bottleneck, and this hinders human-AI collaboration... So I built 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐒𝐜𝐢, an autonomous agent purpose-built for DS/ML, and tested it on Kaggle. I enrolled in a recent competition, ran the agent with no hints, no guidance, while ironing my shirts. In one shot, it landed AUC 0.95, a top-30% finish out of 3K+ teams and 36K+ submissions using hashtag#Anthropic's Claude Sonnet 4.6. (More on this in README) The top-1 outperformed this agent by merely 0.004, but at the cost of massive manual effort even while using popular AI tools. The needed a dozen model families, deep learning, 400-feature notebooks, AutoML sweeps across many libraries, and 186 models ensembled carefully. Essentially a few weeks worth of effort and time!! OpenDataSci abstracts away all the complexity and has so much to offer for DS/ML automation: → Owns the entire development lifecycle from EDA to final evaluation → Plans, codes, and executes autonomously in a secure local sandbox → Self-reviews and corrects before anything reaches you → Remembers your data across sessions, gets smarter each run → Runs parallel experiments and ensembles → Has advanced context management for token efficiency and quality → Ships with predefined skills for DS/ML, so it knows how to do things right → Bring your own knowledge: out-of-the-box support for custom skills → Works with any major LLM provider (hashtag#Anthropic, hashtag#OpenAI, hashtag#Bedrock, hashtag#VertexAI, hashtag#Ollama, hashtag#vLLM, and any OpenAI-compatible server). This and so much more!! You set the goal. It does the work. No data science knowledge required. 🔗 https://github.com/f4roukb/open-data-sci 📦 pip install open-data-sci Spin it up on your data and see what it achieves!
Somewhere right now a guy at a bar is making a stranger sign an NDA on a napkin. For an app idea. Just sit with that. That napkin is going in a drawer. The drawer is a graveyard. Quick tour. Exhibit A: bro we should open a bar Two beers in, you're suddenly a hospitality mogul. Picking a name. Arguing about taco night. By the time the check comes, the bar is already dead. It died of "let's talk about this again soon," which never happens. Exhibit B: bro we should start a band A guitar shows up at a party. Someone says "we should actually start something." One rehearsal happens. In a garage. A neighbor complains. The band dies before it has a name or a single original song. RIP. Exhibit C: the app idea, may it rest in your Notes app The big one. Open your Notes app, it's a cemetery. "App that reminds you to text people back." Dead. "Tinder but for gym buddies." Dead. These ideas didn't fail. They never even got born. Why none of these make it out alive The ideas aren't even bad. Some are genuinely good. The problem is ideas are free and easy to say out loud. Building one makes it real, and real things can fail in public with your name on them. Saying "we should open a bar" costs nothing. Actually opening one costs $400,000, a liquor license, and every Saturday for five years. Guess which one people actually do. Building also got way easier, which makes this worse. You don't need a technical cofounder anymore. You can describe an app to a chat box and watch a prototype show up before your coffee's cold. The wall that used to stop people is mostly gone. People are still standing where it used to be, out of habit. A small ceremony for the ones we lost HERE LIES: "the app idea I had in the shower" born: tuesday died: tuesday, when I got out of the shower HERE LIES: "our band" born: one guitar, one party died: one noise complaint HERE LIES: "the bar we were gonna open" born: 1:47am died: 1:48am, checked the bill Two graves that still have a heartbeat Here's the part nobody
If you've worked with Angular Material, you know theming can be one of the trickiest parts of the library — especially after the move to Material 3. Token-based theming, custom palettes, dark mode, component-level overrides... there's a lot going on under the hood. I built a full course to break it all down, and I'm excited to announce it's now completely free . What's in the course Angular Material Theming System is a deep, practical walkthrough of Angular Material's theming API for Material 3. By the end, you'll be able to: Build and customize themes from scratch Apply themes at the application level Override and extend themes for individual components Work confidently with Angular Material's theming tokens and APIs It's 46 lessons and roughly 4.5 hours of content, all hands-on and example-driven. Where to find it 🎥 Watch on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOjtJUnDeEIyaeUs_jrxylnD2IxSb3Ku7 📝 Read the article version: https://angular-ui.com/courses/angular-material-theming/ 💻 Full source code on GitHub: https://github.com/Angular-UI-com/angular-material-theming If you're building with Angular Material and theming has ever felt like a black box, give it a watch. I'd love to hear your feedback in the comments. If this helped you, consider checking out Angular Material Blocks — a library of pre-built Angular Material + Tailwind components, available via a simple CLI.
Siri’s AI overhaul may have grabbed the headlines at WWDC, but some of Apple’s most useful AI features are arriving elsewhere in iOS 27.
If you had a Roomba, especially in the early days of the robot vacuum, it was in many ways a fairly unsophisticated machine. It would just bump around your house, looking for something to suck up, until its battery died or its (way too small) tank filled up. Not that it mattered, though. You probably […]
Most dashboards are built the same way: the user lands on the page, data loads, and then... it sits there. Stale. Until the user hits refresh or you set up an awkward polling interval that hammers your server every few seconds. There's a better way. WebSockets give you a persistent, two-way connection between your Angular app and your server — meaning your dashboard updates the moment new data exists, with zero wasted requests. In this article we'll build a complete real-time dashboard in Angular from scratch — WebSocket service, Signal-based components, auto-reconnection, and production-ready patterns. How WebSockets Differ From Regular HTTP Before writing any code, it's worth understanding what makes WebSockets special. Regular HTTP: Client → "Give me data" → Server Client ← "Here's your data" ← Server [Connection closes] WebSocket: Client ←→ Server [Connection stays open] Server → "New data!" → Client (anytime) Server → "More data!" → Client (anytime) Client → "Send this" → Server (anytime For a real-time dashboard showing live metrics, user activity, or financial data — the WebSocket model is a natural fit. The server pushes updates the moment they happen. No polling, no refresh button, no stale data. Project Setup For this article we'll build a dashboard that shows three live metrics: active users, requests per second, and server CPU usage. Start with a fresh Angular 22 project: ng new realtime-dashboard --standalone cd realtime-dashboard ng serve RxJS ships with Angular so no extra dependencies are needed — webSocket from rxjs/webSocket handles everything. Step 1 — Define Your Data Model Start with a clear TypeScript interface for the data your server will push: // core/models/dashboard.model.ts export interface DashboardMetrics { activeUsers : number ; requestsPerSecond : number ; cpuUsage : number ; timestamp : Date ; } export interface MetricAlert { type : ' warning ' | ' critical ' ; metric : string ; value : number ; message : string ; } export type Dashb
Over three posts I built three fine-tuned models for the same banking-intent task — full fine-tuning a 270M model , LoRA on 1.5B , QLoRA on 7B . They all landed around the same accuracy. Which raises an honest, slightly uncomfortable question: if a 270M model on my laptop already worked, why reach for a 7B model at all? The answer most "bigger is better" content skips For this task — you wouldn't. A good engineer picks the smallest model that clears the bar , not the biggest one available. The small model is cheaper to serve, runs in milliseconds, and you fully own it. Choosing the 7B here would be over-engineering. Reaching for a bigger model isn't a flex. It's a response to a requirement the small one can't meet. Here are the four cases where small stops being enough: 1. The task is genuinely hard Banking77 is easy — 77 fixed labels, short clean queries. Small models saturate it. But ask for reasoning ("which of these three issues is the primary one?"), open-ended generation (write the reply, don't just classify), or real nuance, and there's a capability floor that more parameters buy. No amount of fine-tuning gives a 270M model abilities it doesn't have. 2. You have little data I had ~10,000 labeled examples — plenty for a small model. With 50, a small model can't learn the task, but a 7B model already "knows" banking concepts from pretraining and only needs a nudge. Bigger models need less task data because they bring more prior knowledge. 3. You need one model for many tasks This is the quiet superpower of LoRA/QLoRA. A single frozen 7B base can host dozens of swappable adapters — intent classifier, reply writer, summarizer, sentiment — all from one ~5GB footprint in memory. The 270M is single-purpose. This is why companies serve hundreds of fine-tunes from one base model. 4. Accuracy compounds at scale 93% means 7 in 100 queries misrouted. At 10M queries/month, that's 700,000 mistakes. If each costs a support escalation, the 2–3 points a bigger model buys can
Every weekday a single, opinionated rule for senior C#/.NET engineers using Cursor. Here's the full week in one read — canonical posts live on the Agentic Architect blog . 7 daily senior rules Rule 14: Sealed By Default Sun 21 Jun Mark every class sealed unless inheritance is explicitly planned. Stops Cursor inventing accidental inheritance hierarchies "for flexibility." Small but measurable virtual-call perf wins too. → Permalink on the blog Rule 13: Strongly-Typed IDs Sat 20 Jun OrderId as record struct OrderId(Guid Value) beats raw Guid everywhere. Stops the AI passing a CustomerId where an OrderId was expected — a bug the compiler can't catch with primitive obsession but catches instantly with domain primitives. → Permalink on the blog Rule 12: IOptionsSnapshot Over Raw Config Fri 19 Jun Business code should never call IConfiguration directly. Strongly-typed IOptions or IOptionsSnapshot bindings only. The AI loves to "just grab the config value" — refuse it and force a settings class with validation attributes. → Permalink on the blog Rule 11: Rethrow, Don't throw ex Thu 18 Jun throw ex resets the stack trace. throw preserves it. Cursor gets this wrong about 40 percent of the time when generating catch blocks. Rewrite any naked throw ex to throw unless the exception has been explicitly wrapped. → Permalink on the blog Rule 10: AsNoTracking for Reads Wed 17 Jun Every read-only EF Core query should call AsNoTracking. Add a rule that recognises query methods returning DTOs (not entities) and inserts the call. Cursor never does this by default and your read perf degrades silently across releases. → Permalink on the blog Rule 9: Scoped Capture in Singleton Tue 16 Jun The single most expensive .NET runtime bug: a Singleton holding a Scoped service. Cursor cheerfully writes this without warning. Audit constructor parameters of any class registered as Singleton — if any are typically Scoped (DbContext, repositories, MediatR sender), flag it before merge. → Permalink on
In Part 2 , LoRA let me fine-tune a 1.5B model by freezing it and training tiny adapters. But the frozen base still sat in memory in 16-bit (~3GB). Now I wanted to go to Qwen2.5-7B — and hit a wall that LoRA alone doesn't solve. The problem A 7B model is ~15GB in 16-bit precision. A free-tier T4 GPU has 16GB. It would barely load, with no room left to actually train. The QLoRA insight QLoRA asks the question that naturally follows from LoRA: the base is frozen and only ever read — so why store it in full precision? So you quantize the frozen base to 4-bit (NF4, a format tuned for how neural-net weights are distributed) and run the LoRA adapters on top in normal precision. The base shrinks dramatically; the trainable part stays small and precise. from transformers import BitsAndBytesConfig bnb_config = BitsAndBytesConfig ( load_in_4bit = True , bnb_4bit_quant_type = " nf4 " , # NormalFloat4 bnb_4bit_use_double_quant = True , # quantize the quant constants too bnb_4bit_compute_dtype = torch . float16 , # dequantize to fp16 for the matmuls ) model = AutoModelForCausalLM . from_pretrained ( MODEL_ID , quantization_config = bnb_config , device_map = " auto " ) Each flag earns its place: load_in_4bit — store frozen weights in 4 bits instead of 16. nf4 — a 4-bit type matched to the bell-curve distribution of neural-net weights (better than plain int4). double_quant — quantize the quantization constants too, for a bit more savings. compute_dtype — dequantize to fp16 for the actual matmuls, so storage is 4-bit but compute stays precise. The moment it clicked One line of output: loaded in 4-bit. footprint: 5.44 GB I downloaded 15.2GB of weights and they sat in memory as 5.44GB. A model that couldn't be loaded for full fine-tuning was now training on a single consumer GPU — with room to spare. (The download is still 15GB; bitsandbytes quantizes on the fly during load.) The QLoRA-standard recipe Two more pieces beyond Part 2's LoRA setup: prepare the quantized model for trainin
Organizing notes by topic sounds logical until you have notes on PostgreSQL in five different folders and cannot find the one that matters for today's problem. The issue is not discipline. The issue is that topic-based organization asks the wrong question. "What is this about?" is useful for libraries. For engineers, the better question is "What am I doing with this?" That is the premise of PARA. PARA is a simple four-bucket system created by Tiago Forte as the organizational backbone of his Building a Second Brain framework. The idea is that all information can be sorted into four categories: Projects, Areas, Resources, and Archives. Each category represents a different level of actionability, and that distinction drives where every note lives. This guide applies PARA to engineering work specifically — codebases, documentation, learning material, and the tension between active project work and long-term reference. The Problem With Topic-Based Organization Most engineers organize knowledge the way they organize code: by domain. databases/ postgresql/ redis/ api/ rest/ graphql/ devops/ kubernetes/ terraform/ That structure makes sense when you are browsing. It breaks down when you need something for a specific task. You remember a useful note about database migration safety, but it could be in databases/postgresql/ , devops/deployments/ , api/versioning/ , or nowhere because you saved it somewhere temporary. Topic folders force you to decide where knowledge belongs before you understand its context. PARA delays that decision — instead of asking what something is about, it asks what you are currently doing with it. The Four Buckets Projects A project is active, time-bound work with a defined outcome. For engineers, projects are things like: Migrate billing service to queue v2 Upgrade PostgreSQL from 14 to 16 Write architecture decision record for auth service redesign Implement rate limiting on public API Publish article about distributed tracing Every project has a c
Wooting’s 60HE v2 isn’t just a terrific Hall Effect keyboard. It’s a fantastic keyboard period.
Stainless-steel pans may lack nonstick coatings, but they’re unfussy, they sear well, and they’re built for a lifetime of hard work.
Sure, anyone can use OpenAI’s chatbot. But with smart engineering, you can get way more interesting results.
Network-attached storage (NAS) provides accessible shared space on your home network. After testing, these are my favorite NAS devices.
Hello, I'm Maneshwar. I'm building git-lrc, a Micro AI code reviewer that runs on every commit. It is...
With Apple raising prices soon, you can save a lot of money by buying a used handset or upgrading an older device—safe in the knowledge that it'll last longer than ever.