标签：#EV

When looking for a Property Management System (PMS) dashboard for a hotel project, I noticed most existing solutions look like they were built in 1998. I decided to code a modern, premium dashboard from scratch using pure HTML and vanilla CSS. I focused on two main design trends: Dark Mode and Glassmorphism. Here is a breakdown of how I approached the design, along with some CSS snippets you can use in your own projects. The Dark Mode Color Palette Instead of using pure black (#000000), I used a deep slate blue for the background. This reduces eye strain for hotel staff working night shifts and feels much more premium. `css :root { --bg-dark: #0f172a; /* Deep slate / --surface-dark: #1e293b; / Slightly lighter surface / --accent-gold: #facc15; / Premium gold for CTAs */ --text-main: #f8fafc; } body { background-color: var(--bg-dark); color: var(--text-main); }` The Glassmorphism Effect For the statistics cards (like Revenue and Occupancy Rate), I used a subtle glass effect to make them pop off the dark background without looking flat. `css .stat-card { background: rgba(30, 41, 59, 0.7); backdrop-filter: blur(12px); -webkit-backdrop-filter: blur(12px); border: 1px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.08); border-radius: 16px; padding: 24px; transition: transform 0.3s ease; } .stat-card:hover { transform: translateY(-5px); }` The Result By combining these modern design tokens with a clean CSS Grid layout, the dashboard feels incredibly sleek. It tracks live bookings, room statuses, and RevPAR seamlessly. Want the full code? If you are a developer, agency, or freelancer building a SaaS or a booking system, you don't have to start from scratch. I've packaged the complete, fully responsive HTML/CSS template. You can see the design and grab the source code here to save yourself 20 hours of coding: 👉 Download the Lumina PMS Template Happy coding! Let me know if you have any questions about the CSS architecture in the comments.

Every sprint starts with optimism. The board is clean, the story points are perfectly balanced, and the team is ready to ship. Then, Tuesday happens. The CEO wants a "quick favor." A major client finds a critical bug in production. The marketing team urgently needs a landing page tweak. By Thursday, your pristine sprint board is buried under a mountain of "urgent" tickets that were never discussed in planning. This is Unplanned Work , and it is the silent killer of engineering velocity. Why Unplanned Work is So Dangerous It’s not just that unplanned work takes time. The real damage comes from context switching . When a developer is deeply focused on building a new feature, forcing them to stop, spin up a local environment for a different repository, debug a legacy issue, and then try to return to their original task destroys their flow state. A "10-minute quick fix" actually costs the company an hour of lost productivity. When this happens multiple times a week: Deadlines Slip: The tasks you actually committed to get pushed back. Burnout Increases: Developers feel like they are working hard but accomplishing nothing. Trust Erodes: Management wonders why the team can't stick to a timeline. How to Protect Your Team You cannot eliminate unplanned work completely. Bugs will happen, and production will break. But you can manage it. 1. The "Firefighter" Rotation Instead of letting unplanned work disrupt the entire team, assign one developer per sprint to be the "Firefighter" (or Batman/Support). Their only job for that sprint is to handle urgent bugs, ad-hoc requests, and unblock others. The rest of the team is completely shielded. 2. The 20% Buffer Rule If you have 100 hours of developer capacity, never plan 100 hours of feature work. Always leave a 20% buffer specifically for unplanned tasks. If no fires start, you can pull from the backlog. If fires do start, your deadline isn't destroyed. 3. Track the "Ghost" Tickets The worst kind of unplanned work is the kind that h

You merge the PR. The build passes. The code does what you expected it to do. You move on. That is review for most engineers. A final read. A feeling that things looked right before the branch closed. I did it the same way for years. Three phases had already run before this one. Think had scoped the work, Plan had written the requirements, Build had shipped a diff that matched the plan exactly. I trusted that the chain held. I had never actually checked. Then I ran the Review phase, and checking turned out to mean something specific: not does this work, but does this requirement hold up, and what is my evidence. I went in expecting to approve it or send it back. The phase gave me three answers instead: covered, partial, missing. I found out what they meant one requirement at a time, starting with the one I almost got wrong. I had been giving impressions, not verdicts The notification scheduler used a queue to manage dispatch. Every call to the external provider went through it. The provider was never exposed directly. The requirement said the provider must be notified. It was notified, exactly the way I had pictured it. I almost called it covered and moved to the next line. The Review phase stopped me there. But the requirement said must be notified , not how. The queue had introduced a call order and a timing the requirement never anticipated. Nothing was broken. Something had changed shape, quietly, and nobody had written that shape down. I sat with that for longer than I expected to. Not because the code was wrong. Because I could not immediately tell you whether the change mattered. The same pass gave the shim from Plan a different verdict on the same page: covered. Mapped to the requirement it existed to satisfy, no gap between what was promised and what was in the diff. One requirement held exactly the shape it was given. The other had quietly grown a new one. Same review. Same pass. Two verdicts. Partial is not a softer word for broken. It is the verdict for

We have all been riding the massive vibe coding wave lately. It feels like pure magic to sit back, tell an AI assistant what to build, and watch a full application appear out of thin air. But if you have ever tried to take that exact same web workflow and deploy a smooth, native app onto an iPhone or Android, you know exactly where the frustration sets in. Are you a vibecoder who loves to build applications and you have built many websites? You have built and deployed many websites. Now you really want to make a mobile application that could disrupt the market and go really viral. Have you heard of FlutterFlow ? Have you tried using it? If the answer is no, then I will tell you about FlutterFlow and then you can decide whether you want to check it out and vibe code mobile applications. I will share the app that I created as well. What is FlutterFlow anyway? Have you ever tried building mobile applications and heard of Flutter and Dart? If you haven't, you should definitely check them out. When I was in college looking for a path to choose whether to pursue app development or web development. I explored both options. While exploring app development, I used and built applications using Flutter, an open-source framework created by Google, which uses a programming language called Dart. While Flutter itself is built by Google, FlutterFlow is an independent, visual low-code platform founded by ex-Google engineers. Today, many of us are familiar with AI vibe-coding tools like Cursor and Claude, which allow us to generate code for websites using conversational prompts. FlutterFlow, however, operates differently than vibe-coding: instead of writing code through chat prompts, it provides a visual, drag-and-drop canvas where you can build and design native mobile applications visually while it automatically generates clean Flutter code in the background. I recently had the opportunity to attend a workshop held by the FlutterFlow team and there, I was blown away by the magic of

The company has been gaining traction in Europe.

A former software manager claims Wisk rushed software testing ahead of a crucial 2025 flight test.

It only works for a few divisions thanks to a lot of added materials.

You've probably written a CommandExecutor before. Everyone who's touched Bukkit has. Declare the command in plugin.yml , implement onCommand , cast args[0] to whatever you need, hope nobody fat-fingers the input. It compiles. It runs. It's confusing to debug. And it's the wrong way to do it in 2026. # plugin.yml commands : punish : description : Opens the punishment GUI usage : /punish <player> public class PunishCommand implements CommandExecutor { @Override public boolean onCommand ( CommandSender sender , Command command , String label , String [] args ) { if (!( sender instanceof Player staff )) return true ; if ( args . length < 1 ) return true ; Player target = Bukkit . getPlayer ( args [ 0 ]); if ( target == null ) { sender . sendMessage ( "Player not found." ); return true ; } // ... open the GUI return true ; } } Tie it together in onEnable() with getCommand("punish").setExecutor(new PunishCommand()) , add a separate TabCompleter implementation to handle suggestions, and you're done. Seems perfectly fine... totally not confusing at all... (if you understood any of that, you're doing better than I am :P) This implementation has many issues... like Bukkit.getPlayer(args[0]) only matching an exact, currently-online name. No selectors. No partial matching. You write all of that yourself or not at all. Tab completion lives in a second method you keep in sync with parsing by hand. Change one, forget the other, and tab completion starts "lying" to your players (a problem that has taken me HOURS to solve in the past... i'm getting flashbacks ;-;). And the tree itself is static, fixed in plugin.yml . Want /report to take a severity argument only when severities are configured? You can't say that in plugin.yml and you end up with a tangled mess that is almost never clean (either to you, or the players). Paper ships Mojang's Brigadier (the same framework vanilla Minecraft uses for everything) through a lifecycle hook: LifecycleEvents.COMMANDS . You register a tree of

The latest Puppet Enterprise releases are out and this one has a huge load of improvements, fixes, and security patches included! Puppet Enterprise (PE) 2025.11 released! The full PE 2025.11 release notes are always the best way to get a full detail on what has changed, but here are some highlights of PE 2025.11! Certificate Authority (CA): Database-backed Storage This new optional feature adds support for storing CA data in a PostgreSQL database instead of the file system. This improves performance and reliability and introduces API-driven capabilities and enhanced backup and recovery handling. PostgreSQL 17 Supported PE-managed installations will automatically upgrade from verson 14 to 17 as part of the upgrade process, or you can update yourself before upgrading to PE 2025.11 Infra Assistant Goes GPT-5 GPT-5 series models are now running under the hood of Infra Assistant, improving the quality of responses and the consistency for queries. Advanced Patching Enhancements The advanced patching feature now has improvements across a variety of areas New puppet_run_concurrency setting allows you to get better performance out of patch group enrollment Improved validation of scheduled and immediate jobs to reduce risk of unintended or skipped executions. Cron scheduling has better user experience and improved validation across features. New configurable option to enable Puppet to run after patch jobs to refresh pe_patch facts New Endpoints for Classifier and Activity Service APIs The Classifier API introduced new tags , add-tags and remove-tags endpoints to manage node group tags. The Activity service API now has subscriptions endpoints to create subscriptions, list subscriptions, or fetch/delete a specific subscription. Agent Platform Updates, Resolved Issues, and Security Fixes The macOS 26 platform is now supported for both ARM and x86_64, while support has been removed for Ubuntu 18.04 and Ubuntu 20.04. Nearly 60 CVEs were addressed in this release, along with many r

The company announced a new slate of executive hires meant to help turn things around, as Gravity SUV sales are not taking off as expected.

We are so excited to finally announce the winners of the GitHub Finish-Up-A-Thon Challenge, our...

The company delivered more than 480,000 EVs globally, seemingly thanks to geographic expansion and cheaper versions of the Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck.

Why Our AI Agent Still Stumbles on Full-Stack Apps We've all been there. You're riding high on the AI hype, picturing your agent effortlessly spinning up features, leaving you free for higher-level architectural decisions. You feed it a prompt like, "Build me a simple user profile page with authentication, connected to a database, using Next.js and TypeScript." You hit enter, grab a coffee, and expect magic. More often than not, what you get back is… well, it's something . It might be syntactically correct, perhaps even impressive in parts. But when you try to integrate it, to make the pieces talk to each other harmoniously, it often feels like trying to connect a square peg to a round hole. The agent struggles, and frankly, so do we trying to fix its output. The Seams, Not Just the Parts: Why Full-Stack is More Than Sum of Its Halves In my experience, AI agents, especially Large Language Models, are fantastic at generating code for isolated problems. Need a React component? A SQL query? A utility function? They'll often nail it. But a full-stack application isn't just a collection of frontend, backend, and database parts. It's the intricate, often implicit, contracts between them. Think about a modern Next.js application. It’s a beautifully complex dance: Server Components vs. Client Components: This paradigm shift fundamentally changes where state lives, where data is fetched, and how interactivity is handled. An AI might generate a useState hook inside a Server Component, completely missing the architectural intent. Data Fetching Strategies: getServerSideProps , getStaticProps , route handlers , fetch directly in Server Components – each has specific implications for caching, performance, and where your data lives at runtime. An AI might pick an inefficient or incorrect strategy based on a simplified prompt. Type Safety Across Boundaries: TypeScript is a lifesaver, but defining types that perfectly mirror your database schema, API responses, and frontend state re

The company now expects to ship a few thousand more vehicles by the end of 2026 than it previously expected, after launching its R2 SUV last month.

Originally published on productize.life . Quick answer: gstack is an open-source (MIT) skill set that Garry Tan, president of Y Combinator, builds with every day. It turns Claude Code into a team of 23 specialists, CEO, engineers, designers, QA, and a release engineer, forcing every change through a multi-lens review before shipping. The point is not speed; it is taste written into software. Last week I was going through a repo that collects skills for coding, several of them. Most share one theme: helping AI write code in a systematic way, and faster. But one made me stop longer than the rest, called gstack, for two reasons. One: its owner, Garry Tan, president and CEO of Y Combinator, took the stack he actually builds with every day and opened it for free. Two: it does not sell "code faster," it sells "review before you ship." Once I actually opened it, it was not just a toolbox but one of the clearest examples of an idea I have been interested in for a while. On the day AI can write code very fast, the bottleneck of the work is no longer speed. I will tell it in three parts, starting with what it is , then what gstack believes , and closing with lessons for people who build products, not just people who write code . Terms, gathered here in one place agentic coding letting an AI agent run the coding work in its own steps, from planning to writing to review to shipping, not just autocompleting a line at a time. skill a packaged set of instructions an AI agent (like Claude Code) can call, like a shortcut that wraps one way of doing one thing. review lens reviewing one piece of work from several roles, for example as a CEO, an engineer, a designer. taste the sense and judgment of what is good and what is bad, what to build and what not to ship. The part that is still human. Part 1: What gstack is Garry Tan describes gstack in the README plainly, as the way he works. "It turns Claude Code into a virtual engineering team: a CEO who rethinks the product, an eng manager

Stop Treating Databases Like Dumb Storage! A Modern Approach to Data Layer Optimization Introduction In the rapidly evolving landscape of cloud-native applications, the database often remains the last bastion of outdated architectural thinking. Too many development teams, even in 2026, treat their databases as little more than dumb storage – a simple receptacle for data. This oversight invariably leads to an insidious problem: what was once perceived as a cost-saving cloud server rapidly transforms into an expensive, resource-hungry bottleneck that devours compute cycles, memory, and, most critically, developer sanity. The knee-jerk reaction to performance woes—throwing more hardware at an unoptimized SQL database or poorly designed NoSQL schema—is not scalable backend design; it's procrastination. This approach might temporarily mask symptoms, but it fundamentally ignores the root cause, leading to spiraling costs and increasing technical debt. Modern backend design demands a paradigm shift: treating your data layer as a strategic, highly optimized component rather than a generic storage utility. The path to true scalability, resilience, and cost-efficiency begins with intelligent data management from day one. Architectural Walkthrough: Embracing Smart Data Strategies Instead of "sharding your problems" through reactive, unguided horizontal scaling, embrace smart data partitioning . This isn't just about distributing data; it's about strategically organizing it to align with your application's access patterns and business domains. 1. Smart Data Partitioning & Query Patterns: Imagine an e-commerce application. Instead of sharding all orders data uniformly, consider partitioning by a natural business key, like customer_id or product_category . This ensures that common queries (e.g., "get all orders for customer X") are localized to a single partition, minimizing cross-partition operations. // Conceptual Service for Order Management class OrderService { private final

The conversation around Agentic AI often focuses on one goal: making agents more autonomous. More tools. More reasoning. More planning. More independence. It sounds like progress. But is more autonomy always the right answer? As software engineers, we rarely optimize for "more." We don't build distributed systems when a monolith is sufficient. We don't introduce microservices because they're fashionable. We choose architectures that balance capability with complexity. The same principle applies to AI agents. The question isn't "How autonomous can my agent be?" It's "How autonomous should my agent be?" Autonomy Is a Design Decision When people talk about autonomy, they often think of it as a feature that an agent either has or doesn't have. In reality, autonomy is a design decision. Every time we allow an agent to make another decision on its own, we are increasing its responsibility. That responsibility comes with benefits, but it also introduces new engineering challenges. More autonomy means the agent can adapt to situations that weren't anticipated during development. It can make progress toward a goal without being guided through every step. At the same time, it becomes harder to predict, validate, debug, and trust. Autonomy isn't free. Thinking in Terms of an Autonomy Spectrum Instead of treating autonomy as a binary concept, it helps to think of it as a spectrum. At one end are systems that simply generate responses. They have no authority to take action. As autonomy increases, agents begin suggesting actions, invoking tools, planning multiple steps, and eventually deciding how to achieve a goal with minimal human involvement. The important observation is that every step along this spectrum increases both capability and complexity. That's why the objective shouldn't be to reach the highest level. It should be to stop at the level your problem actually requires. More Autonomy Isn't Always Better Imagine building an internal HR assistant. Its primary responsibil

The Bublue BuVortex V5 ditches conventional skimming for a vortex-powered design that’s fascinating to watch, even if it’s severely impractical.

I ripped open $892 worth of Pokémon packs on my phone in under 15 minutes and walked away with 62 cents. My adrenaline rush felt like the future of gambling.

Your comments on a dangerous rule putting politicals in charge of science can matter.