标签：#EV

Skullcandy’s audio products aren’t exactly known for their stellar audio quality or noise cancellation, but its latest headphones are getting an assist from Bose to turn things around.

🔒 ATLOCK v4 — I stopped trusting my own app's encryption, so I rebuilt it TL;DR — ATLOCK is a...

There is no reliable “magic button” that turns an arbitrary HTML website into a clean, responsive, fully editable Elementor project. At first glance, converting an HTML website to WordPress sounds like a file-format conversion. You already have the design, text, images, CSS, and JavaScript. Why not upload everything, click Import, and continue editing the page in Elementor? The problem is that HTML and Elementor do not describe a website in the same way. An HTML page is the final output: a tree of elements styled by CSS and controlled by JavaScript. Elementor stores an editable model made of containers, widgets, global styles, responsive settings, and WordPress-specific data. A browser can render both results so that they look similar, but their internal structures can be completely different. What automated converters can do Modern converters and AI tools can read HTML, identify visual sections, and generate a rough WordPress layout. They are useful for prototypes and simple landing pages. Some tools can also copy styles or place the original code inside an HTML widget. But visual similarity is not the same as a production-ready Elementor website. A converted page may look acceptable on one screen while still containing: deeply nested containers; duplicated CSS; fixed pixel dimensions; broken mobile layouts; inaccessible elements; content that a client cannot edit. Forms, menus, sliders, animations, dynamic content, and custom JavaScript usually require separate work. The real challenge is rebuilding meaning, not copying pixels A human developer does not only see a rectangle with text. They need to decide whether it should become a Heading widget, a reusable global component, a dynamic WordPress field, or part of a template. The same applies to the rest of the page: Navigation must work with WordPress menus. Forms need validation, delivery actions, and spam protection. Repeated content may need posts, custom fields, or WooCommerce products. Fonts, colors, spacing,

Disclosure: this is a write-up about my own side project — a combat analytics tool for AION 2. No affiliation with the game's publisher. Links at the end. Architecture A Windows desktop app: Rust backend + Tauri v2 webview UI . It passively captures the game's TCP traffic (npcap), reassembles streams, parses the game's undocumented binary protocol, feeds a combat model (damage, heals, buffs, deaths, boss detection), and pushes aggregates to a small JS frontend. Nothing touches the game client — no injection, no memory reading. If the packet didn't say it, we don't know it. Pain #1: the protocol is a moving target Nobody hands you a spec. The protocol is varint-heavy, partially compressed, and changes with game patches. You end up doing packet archaeology: capture a fight, stare at hex dumps, correlate "I pressed this skill at 19:32:04" with byte patterns, build a parser, and then — the fun part — keep it alive after every patch , usually reverse-engineering the diff within hours because your users' raids are tonight, not next week. One hard-won lesson: log everything behind toggleable trace categories. Our tracing setup keeps hot-path log callsites at literally zero cost when disabled (Rust tracing with Interest::never() + atomic per-category flags), so a user can flip a "Trace: Packets" checkbox, reproduce a bug, and send a log that actually contains the bytes we need. Pain #2: entity identity is a lie The single hardest correctness problem wasn't parsing — it was identity . A player is not one ID: your character has a stable "owner" entity that carries your buff bar, your damage lands under a transient combat entity whose ID changes between pulls, leave the dungeon and the game re-binds you to a brand-new ID, names arrive from different packets than damage, sometimes seconds later, sometimes never (mid-fight app start). Get any of this wrong and a healer's healing lands on a ghost row, or a player's buffs vanish from the saved fight because their ID was recycled 7

The pointer-events property controls whether an element can become the target of pointer events like clicks, hover states, and other pointer-based events. In other words, it lets you decide whether the browser should treat an element as interactive when the … pointer-events originally handwritten and published with love on CSS-Tricks . You should really get the newsletter as well.

After I published my last article about building a Chrome extension that speaks browser notifications aloud, a commenter asked a question I didn't have a good answer to. He pointed out that a lot of web apps — Slack, Gmail, most modern tools — fire their notifications from a service worker via registration.showNotification() , not from the page's JavaScript context. My MAIN world override of window.Notification would never reach those. He was right. And I told him I'd look into it. I spent a week researching whether there was any way to close that gap. There isn't. But the reason why is more interesting than a simple "no." Two ways a website can show you a notification When a website sends you a browser notification, it can do it in one of two ways. The first is the constructor path. The page's own JavaScript calls new Notification("You have a message") directly. This is common for in-tab alerts, real-time updates when you're actively on the site, or any notification triggered by something you just did. The second is the push path. The browser receives a push event from the website's server, wakes up the website's service worker in the background, and the service worker calls self.registration.showNotification() from inside its own scope. This is what happens when Slack notifies you of a new message while the tab is closed or backgrounded. The page never runs. No page JavaScript ever fires. My extension catches the first path. The MAIN world content script overrides window.Notification before any page code runs. But the service worker never touches the page's window. It has no window . It runs in a completely isolated thread, completely separate from the page, and calls showNotification on itself. The override is never reached. Why can't the extension reach the service worker? This is the part that took me a week to fully accept. Chrome extensions can inject content scripts into web pages. They can run code in the MAIN world or the ISOLATED world of a page. They can

Over the last few months, I’ve been turning small workflow problems I encounter on my Mac into focused utilities. Rather than building one enormous productivity suite, I wanted each app to solve a specific frustration well. I also wanted to build software the way I prefer to use it: local-first, available through a one-time purchase, and usable without creating another account or paying for another subscription. Here are five of the apps I’ve built so far. ScreenShelf My desktop used to become a temporary storage zone for screenshots, folders, documents, links, and files I needed for active projects. Folders helped with long-term storage, but they were not always useful for things I wanted to keep visible and nearby. ScreenShelf creates a customizable visual shelf for: Files and folders Screenshots and images Links Text Applications Frequently used project materials You can organize items across separate pages, customize the appearance of each page, and keep different groups of materials available for different projects. It also includes a Recents area that surfaces recent screenshots, which is helpful when the small screenshot preview disappears before you can interact with it. ScreenShelf is essentially the space between a cluttered desktop and a deeply nested folder system. Learn more about ScreenShelf PopNote Some reminders are too small for a full task-management system. You might need to remember to send a file in twenty minutes, check something after lunch, or complete one small step before ending the day. PopNote is a lightweight menu bar app that creates timed pop-up reminders on your Mac. The reminders appear as small visual bubbles rather than traditional notification banners. You can choose a time, add an icon, and let the note reappear when you need it. It is designed for temporary reminders that should remain noticeable without becoming another project to organize. Learn more about PopNote File Fetch I frequently download, save, rename, copy, and move

Freelancing in software development sounds like the ultimate dream: Work from anywhere 🌴 Choose your own projects 💻 Set your own rates 💰 But for developers in India, the reality often looks like this: A client requests "just one small change" for the 15th time. You deliver the code, and the client suddenly goes ghost. You get your payment but realize 10% was deducted, and you have no idea how to file your taxes. You realize you are charging ₹500/hour but spending half your time on unpaid admin work. I've been there. Most Indian developers start freelancing with great coding skills but zero business systems. Here is a step-by-step guide on how to protect yourself, price your work correctly, and handle Indian taxes (GST/TDS) like a professional. Stop Doing Unpaid Requirements Gathering (Use a Questionnaire) When a client says: "I want an e-commerce website, how much will it cost?" If you jump on a call and spend 2 hours discussing it without any commitment, you are losing money. The Fix: Before scheduling a call, send them a structured Project Intake Questionnaire. Ask about: Business model and target audience. Tech stack preferences & required integrations (Stripe, Twilio, WhatsApp API). Brand assets and Figma designs (Do they have them, or do you need to design too?). Budget range & expected timeline. If a client refuses to fill out a 10-minute form, they aren't serious about hiring you. Eliminate "Scope Creep" with a Scope Document "Scope Creep" is when a client keeps adding features without paying extra. It kills developer profit margins. The Fix: Always draft a Project Scope Document before signing a contract. It must have two clear sections: Included in Scope: Detailed feature list (e.g., "User login via Google, 3 database models, responsive UI"). EXPLICITLY OUT OF SCOPE: Things you will NOT do (e.g., "Logo design, copywriting, free server maintenance post-launch"). Include a Change Request (CR) clause: "Any feature requested outside Section 1 will be billed at

Apple announced the new CarPlay feature not long after Google announced a similar update for Android Auto.

New to GitHub? This beginner's guide explains version control, repositories, and pull requests—plus everything else you need to start working confidently on GitHub. The post GitHub for Beginners: Your roadmap to mastering the GitHub essentials appeared first on The GitHub Blog .

GitHub recently launched Agentic Workflows — GitHub Actions combined with an AI agent backed by Claude or GitHub Copilot, writing workflows in plain Markdown. Noma Labs' first question after launch was the obvious one: what happens when the agent reads something it shouldn't trust? The answer: it leaks private repository contents as a public comment. No credentials, no exploit code, no inside access required. "The agent's context window is also its attack surface. Any content the agent reads — whether issues, pull requests, comments, or files — can be weaponized if the agent treats that content as instructional input." What actually happened Noma's researchers crafted a GitHub Issue that looked like a plausible VP Sales request — a normal-looking feature ask with hidden instructions embedded in the body. When GitHub's automation assigned the issue, it triggered an Agentic Workflow configured to: Trigger on issues.assigned events Read the issue title and body Post a comment using the add-comment tool Run with read access to other repositories in the organisation — including private ones The hidden instructions told the agent to fetch README.md from repos across the org and post the contents as a comment on the public issue. It did exactly that, including the contents of testlocal — a private repository. The proof-of-concept is live: the workflow run and the issue are public. The guardrail bypass GitHub had defences in place to prevent this. They didn't hold. Noma found that adding the word "Additionally" to the injected instructions caused the model to reframe its output rather than refuse — bypassing the guardrails entirely. A single keyword was enough to undo the intended safety behaviour. This is what makes prompt injection particularly uncomfortable: guardrails tuned against known attack patterns can be bypassed by anyone willing to iterate on the phrasing. The attacker's loop is cheap; the defender's loop is not. The bigger pattern Noma names this explicitly: pr

Digibee opens with a clear disclaimer: every team there uses Claude Code. This isn't a take from people who skipped the AI tooling revolution. It's an observation from people who shipped with it and ran into the same wall, repeatedly. That wall is enterprise integration. "Enterprise integration isn't a greenfield challenge. It's a completely different category of work, with completely different failure modes that coding agents weren't designed for." What coding agents are actually good at here They're useful for integration work under a narrow set of conditions: well-documented APIs, one-time tasks, low stakes, nothing in production at risk. A quick script to pull from a public endpoint? Great. A throwaway ETL job? Perfect. The problems start the moment an integration needs to be recurring, reliable, auditable, and maintained by someone other than the person who prompted it. The three structural gaps 1. They start from scratch every time. Pre-built connectors for enterprise systems like SAP, Salesforce, or NetSuite encode years of accumulated knowledge — how sequencing works, how idempotency is handled, where the quirks are. A coding agent reasons through all of that fresh on every run. It also suffers from the "lost in the middle" effect: when documentation gets long, LLMs drop content from the middle of their context window and fall back on training data. The more obscure the API, the more likely the generated code quietly fails under real load — not on deployment, but six months later when the CIO notices corrupted records. 2. They produce code, not infrastructure. Integrations need retry logic, failure recovery, credential management, audit trails, monitoring, and alerting. Coding agents produce none of that. You can prompt your way around it piecemeal — but now you're maintaining the integration and five hand-rolled infrastructure components. An agent optimised to iterate fast isn't optimised to fail safely. In production, a bad write means unprocessed payments

On June 9, 2026, Anthropic shipped Claude Fable 5, a model in a new tier that sits above Opus. I have been building on the Claude API for over a year, and this is the first release that made me stop and re-read my whole prompt stack before touching the model string. Here is what actually changed and what it means if you ship software. The short version Fable 5 is the public release of the Mythos line, the family that earlier in the year unsettled the security world with how well it found and exploited vulnerabilities. The version you and I get is the same underlying model with safeguards bolted on. Anthropic calls the safe one Fable and the unrestricted one Mythos, and only a small group of cyberdefenders gets Mythos. The numbers, for context: 1M token context window, 128K max output, knowledge cutoff January 2026. Priced at $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output. That is double Opus 4.8 ($5 / $25). State of the art on nearly every benchmark they tested: 95% SWE-bench Verified, 80% SWE-bench Pro. Adaptive thinking is always on. There is no "disabled" mode. That last point matters more than the benchmarks. You do not tune a thinking budget anymore. The model decides. The pricing reframes the decision At $10/$50, Fable 5 is not your default model. It is your "this task is hard and getting it wrong is expensive" model. Opus 4.8 at $5/$25 remains the workhorse for most application traffic, and Haiku 4.5 at $1/$5 still wins on classification and routing. The way I think about it now is a three-tier ladder: Haiku 4.5 → routing, classification, cheap extraction Opus 4.8 → default for app traffic, agentic loops, coding Fable 5 → long-horizon agentic work where correctness pays for itself The "longer and more complex the task, the larger Fable's lead" framing from the announcement is the actual buying signal. A one-shot summarization does not justify 2x the cost. A multi-hour autonomous refactor that would otherwise need human correction might. The API surfa

Both 8BitDo and GameSir announced tiny gamepads designed to turn smartphones into Game Boy-inspired handhelds at CES 2026. GameSir released its Pocket Taco months ago, but the longer wait for 8BitDo's FlipPad has been well worth it. While the Pocket Taco may be a better fit for some players and devices, the FlipPad is a […]

XGIMI's Eflin Flip 4K is a portable, stylish projector that provides outstanding image quality at a great price.

I have a script called git_commit.py in one of my repos. It shells out to claude -p with the staged diff, gets back a Conventional Commit message, and prints it. It's wired into a prepare-commit-msg git hook so every commit gets a pre-filled message for free. Small, dumb, useful. The first version had one instruction in the system prompt: "Output ONLY the commit message — no explanation, no markdown, no quotes." That's it. It worked fine for a while, and then one day a commit landed with a trailing Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> line that I never asked for and definitely didn't want on a personal repo's history. I did the obvious thing first: I made the prompt more specific. SYSTEM = ( " You are a git commit message generator. " " Output ONLY the commit message — one line, no explanation, no markdown, no quotes, " " no co-author lines, no signatures, no AI references. " " Follow Conventional Commits: type(scope): subject. " " Types: feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, test, chore. " " Subject: imperative, lowercase, max 72 chars. " ) This is the same move I see everywhere: the CLAUDE.md file in that same repo has a line that says, in bold, "NEVER add Co-Authored-By: or any Claude/AI reference to commit messages." I've seen the same pattern in a dozen other people's prompt files — a growing list of "never do X" instructions bolted onto a system prompt, each one added reactively after X happened once. It helped. It did not solve it. A model call is a sample from a distribution, not a function with a guaranteed return type. Any single generation can still ignore an instruction — a longer diff, a different day, a subtly different phrasing of the request, and the same "never" line just doesn't fire. I don't actually know the mechanism on any given miss and I don't need to. The point is: a natural-language instruction is advisory. It shifts probability mass, it doesn't clamp it. I ran into an article on dev.to making a point that reframed this for me: the al

Database branching is one of the best ideas serverless Postgres brought to the mainstream. Fork the database at a point in time, get an isolated copy with all the data, run something risky against it, throw it away. It made preview databases and safe migrations feel routine. But a real application is not just a database. It is a database, plus the files it stores in object storage, plus the backend code that serves it, plus, increasingly, the model and gateway config it calls for AI. When you branch only the database, those other three stay shared. Your "branch" points at the same S3 bucket, the same deployed backend, and the same AI configuration as everything else. So it is half a copy, and the half it leaves out is where a lot of the interesting bugs and the scary migrations live. Neon's platform preview changes what a branch contains. A branch now forks the database and its data, the object storage and its files, the functions that run your backend, and the AI gateway config, all at the same point in time, all isolated. A branch stops being a database copy and becomes a whole environment. To make sure that is a real claim and not a diagram, I took a full-stack project, branched it, and checked every layer. Here is what happened. TL;DR Elsewhere, "branch" means the database only. Object storage, backend deploys, and AI config stay shared, so you bolt on scripts to fake per-branch versions of them. A Neon branch forks all four together: Postgres + data, object storage + files, functions (each branch gets its own URL), and the AI gateway. I proved it: branched a project with a DB, a bucket of files, a function, and the gateway. The branch came up with a copy of the rows, a copy of the files on its own storage endpoint, its own function URL, and the gateway. A write to the branch left main untouched, and deleting the branch removed all of it. That makes a branch a real environment: true preview stacks, whole-state bug reproduction, and disposable sandboxes for agent

Hey everyone, I recently had an "aha!" moment regarding how React handles updates under the hood, and I wanted to share it because I realize a ton of developers (including myself, until recently) trip over this exact concept. The common mental model is that React Reconciliation compares the Virtual DOM directly to the Real Browser DOM and surgically updates only what changed. But that’s fundamentally incorrect. React never reads or directly compares the real DOM during the diffing process. It actually splits the process into two entirely separate phases —The Render Phase and The Commit Phase —which creates a massive distinction between Re-rendering and Re-painting. Here is the exact breakdown of what happens when a single state change affects just 1 out of 100 divs in a component: The Render Phase (Pure JavaScript) When state changes, React calls your component function. It doesn't know which of your 100 divs changed yet, so it has to evaluate the entire JSX block. The Scope: React re-renders all 100 virtual divs in memory. The Process: It builds a brand-new Virtual DOM tree and compares it to the previous Virtual DOM tree (JavaScript object vs. JavaScript object). The Outcome: It spots that 99divs are identical, but 1 div has an update. It flags that single virtual node with an "Update" tag. Because this happens purely in-memory as JavaScript, it is incredibly fast and cheap. The Commit Phase (The Real DOM Update) This is where Reconciliation does its primary job. It acts as a shield to protect the browser from doing unnecessary work. The Scope: React completely ignores the 99 unchanged elements. The Process: It surgically targets the single real browser div associated with the flagged Virtual DOM element and updates only its modified property (e.g., element.textContent = "New Value"). The Outcome: The browser repaints only 1 single div on the screen. The Conclusion: Reconciliation isn't about stopping React from re-rendering (re-running JS to calculate the UI). It

When a form asks for an image under 100KB, the obvious reaction is to search for an online compressor and upload the file. That works, but it also adds an unnecessary privacy decision: does this image need to leave the device at all? A simpler workflow For ID photos, screenshots, receipts, and other personal images, I prefer tools that do the work locally in the browser. The browser reads the file, resizes or recompresses it, and gives the result back without sending the original to a remote server. My practical process is: Start with the original JPG, PNG, or WebP. Set the required maximum size rather than guessing a quality percentage. Keep the aspect ratio unless the destination specifies exact dimensions. Preview the result at normal size, especially around text and faces. Save the new file under a different name so the original remains untouched. Why target size matters A generic “compress” button may produce a smaller file, but not necessarily one that meets a strict upload limit. A target-size workflow is more useful because it can adjust dimensions and quality together. For many document portals, a visually clean 80–95KB result is safer than a 99.9KB result that may fail after metadata is added. PNG is excellent for flat graphics and screenshots, while JPG is often better for photos. WebP can be efficient, but some older upload forms still accept only JPG or PNG. The destination's rules should decide the output format. The tool I use I built Resize Image around this browser-local approach. It is useful when I need a quick image under a specific size and do not want the original uploaded as part of the resizing process. The link is included for context and disclosure: I am the maker. Local processing does not remove every privacy concern—you should still review the downloaded result and the site where you eventually upload it—but it reduces one unnecessary transfer. The larger lesson is simple: for lightweight image work, the browser is already capable enough