标签：#RAM

submitted by /u/Adventurous-Salt8514 [link] [留言]

Updating old codebases usually means hours of re-configuring environments, fixing broken dependencies, and hunting for lost secrets. In this walkthrough, we use Cursor IDE and the new Auth0 plugin to automatically resurrect a 2-year-old Python Flask application. Watch how AI seamlessly sets up the Auth0 CLI, generates environment variables, and configures our authentication tenant from scratch. What You'll Learn How to install and navigate the Auth0 plugin within Cursor IDE. Using AI prompts to automate Auth0 tenant creation and Flask secret key generation. Navigating the Auth0 CLI device authorization code flow inside an AI environment. Troubleshooting AI prompt timeouts and natively restarting development servers via Cursor. Resources & Links 🐙 GitHub Repo 💻 Auth0 Plugin in Cursor Marketplace 🔐 Auth0 Python/Flask Docs 📖 Auth0 CLI

Last week my feed filled with screenshots of MiniMax H3 benchmark results, and every post seemed to reach a different conclusion about whether the release mattered. I have been through enough launch-day hype cycles to know that a public leaderboard does not predict how a model will behave on my team's actual error logs. So I treated the H3 discussion as a trigger for a controlled experiment instead of as evidence that we should switch tools. This article walks through a lightweight, reproducible smoke test you can run on a free model tier before you commit to a new model. It focuses on code-generation and debugging tasks because those are the areas where a strong vendor benchmark often hides the biggest day-to-day failures. The goal is not to rank MiniMax H3 against every other option; the goal is to create a baseline you can rerun whenever a new model appears. We can run this workflow on MonkeyCode's free model access and free server option, which removes the cost of a quick initial evaluation. Disclosure: This article was prepared as part of MonkeyCode's product outreach. The idea is to use that free capacity for a time-boxed, reproducible test rather than for unstructured prompt tinkering. Why a public benchmark can mislead you A vendor benchmark is usually a point-in-time measurement with a specific harness, sampling strategy, and temperature setting. When a model scores high on a general coding benchmark, it tells you very little about the three failure modes that actually break your work: internal tool calls, long-context edits, and boundary handling in your language stack. I prefer to start with a fixed set of five tasks that I can run in about 30 minutes on any model endpoint. Each task returns a machine-readable result, so the output can be diffed across runs and across models without relying on my memory of how good a response felt. The smoke test harness The Python script below sends five prompts to a generic HTTP endpoint and records latency, output leng

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

Deterministic rules safeguard hard metrics, but what about architectural intent? Discover how agentic fitness functions combine AI agents and versioned rubrics to evaluate complex, judgment-heavy concerns—such as boundary fidelity, semantic contract drift, and stale ADR assumptions. Elevate evolutionary architecture governance with continuous, calibrated feedback loops. By Hemant Kumar Mahato, Łukasz Sieczkowski, Vijayasenthilkumar Kuppusamy

submitted by /u/benjoffe [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/codebytom [link] [留言]

I don't star GitHub repositories just because they are popular. A repository earns a star from me when I can see myself returning to it later. Maybe it solves a real engineering problem. Maybe it introduces a new architecture. Maybe the code teaches me something. Or maybe it represents where AI development is heading. I've been spending a lot of time exploring AI repositories around agents, workflows, RAG, MCP, browser automation, model training, and API development. These are seven repositories that stood out to me recently. Not because you need all seven. But because each one represents an important direction in AI development. 1. OpenAI Cookbook Repository: https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook If you're building with the OpenAI API, this is one repository I would keep bookmarked. The OpenAI Cookbook contains practical examples and guides covering common API development tasks, with many examples written in Python. What I particularly like is the implementation-first approach. Instead of spending hours reading theoretical explanations, you can study working examples and adapt them to your own application. It's useful for: API integration Structured outputs Embeddings Agents Evaluations Multimodal applications For beginners, it can also serve as a bridge between understanding an AI concept and actually implementing it. 2. LangChain Repository: https://github.com/langchain-ai/langchain LangChain remains one of the most important repositories in the LLM application ecosystem. But I don't recommend it simply because it is popular. I recommend understanding it because it exposes you to the building blocks behind modern AI applications. Models. Tools. Retrievers. Agents. Integrations. Structured outputs. If you're serious about AI engineering, studying how these components fit together is valuable even if you eventually choose another framework. 3. LangGraph Repository: https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph This is probably one of the repositories I would recomm

When building a Polymarket bot, the first version can be surprisingly small: market data ↓ strategy ↓ order That's enough to demonstrate an idea. It isn't enough to prove that the idea works. Once you care about realistic execution, the architecture becomes more interesting. Market Data ↓ Data Validation ↓ Signal Engine ↓ Risk Engine ↓ Execution Engine ↓ Trade Events ↓ Analytics This separation is what allows me to test the strategy independently from the infrastructure. 1. Don't backtest the API call One mistake I see in trading-bot development is mixing the strategy with execution. For example: if ( signal ) { await placeOrder (); } This is convenient for a prototype. But how do you test the strategy without sending an order? Instead: const signal = strategy . evaluate ( marketState ); const decision = riskEngine . check ( signal , portfolio ); if ( decision . allowed ) { await executionEngine . submit ( signal ); } Now each component can be tested independently. 2. Model execution separately A backtest shouldn't assume: signal price === fill price Instead, the execution simulator should model things such as: signal price spread slippage available liquidity fees latency Then: expected PnL ↓ execution model ↓ realistic PnL estimate The difference can be substantial. Polymarket's CLOB exposes order-book data and executable prices, making the order book an important part of any execution-aware strategy. 3. Separate in-sample and out-of-sample data Don't optimize and evaluate on the same dataset. A simple structure: Dataset ├── Train └── Test The strategy is developed using Train . Parameters are frozen. Then Test is used only for evaluation. For time-series trading, I prefer chronological splits rather than random shuffling: Past ───────────────────────> Future [ Training ][ Validation ][ Test ] This better represents the actual information flow of a trading system. 4. Measure more than win rate Win rate is useful, but insufficient. I want to measure: trades wins los

Every programmer wants to improve. We all dream about becoming the person who can look at a...

"our work got checked by an external reviewer." That's what Fable said after I brought Gemini...

During a routine morning triage of my open-source project, git status showed a modified file I had no memory of touching: extension/background.js , last modified 24 hours earlier, sitting next to a fresh background.js.bak someone had thoughtfully left behind. Nobody broke in. I run several AI coding sessions in parallel against the same machine, and one of them — working on a completely different task, automating a GoHighLevel workflow — had hit a limitation in my browser automation tool, fixed the tool itself , verified the fix, and then moved on with its actual job. It never committed. It never told anyone. It just left better code in my working tree and walked away. The diff was good. That was the problem. The change itself was a real feature. My query_all tool (it queries DOM elements across a page) stopped at the main frame: if the elements you wanted lived inside a cross-origin iframe, you got back a clean, confident, empty array. The uncommitted diff added an execAcrossFrames() helper that runs the query in every frame and merges the results, plus x / y / frame fields on each returned element. I verified it the way you'd verify anything: syntax check passed, and the full test suite — all 82 tests — ran green with the change in place . So: useful feature, my own repository, every signal green. Everything about the situation said commit it . I didn't. I wrote it up in my project log, left the file untouched, and set an explicit deadline: if it's still sitting there uncommitted in three days, evaluate it properly — upstream it or revert it and file an issue. Not "leave it and see," which is how working trees rot. A quarantine with no release date is just a junk drawer. Why quarantine green code? Two reasons, and neither is paranoia. First: authorship isn't verification. The session that wrote this code had context I didn't have. Maybe it was mid-iteration and the diff was half of a plan. Maybe the .bak file meant it intended to roll back. Committing someone's wo

So here's what happened: i Tested DeepSeek vs Qwen vs Kimi vs GLM — Here's the Winner Okay, so I've been on this absolute rabbit hole for the past few weeks, and I have to share what I've found. You know how everyone's been talking about GPT-4o and Claude, but there's this whole other universe of Chinese AI models that are honestly punching way above their weight? Yeah, I went deep into it. Let me walk you through what I learned. If you've ever stared at a pricing page wondering which model to actually use for your side project, your startup's chatbot, or that one client who's been asking about cheaper alternatives — this is for you. I spent hours testing DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, and GLM through Global API's unified endpoint, and I'm going to break it all down for you. No fluff, no marketing speak, just what actually works. Why I Even Started Looking at Chinese Models Let me be honest with you — I was skeptical at first. My mental model was "Western models = good, Chinese models = questionable." Then a friend who runs a SaaS startup told me he cut his API bill by 80% by switching to DeepSeek for non-critical workloads. Eighty percent! I had to see for myself. The thing is, China's AI scene has exploded in the last couple of years. You've got four major players — DeepSeek from High-Flyer (幻方), Qwen from Alibaba (阿里), Kimi from Moonshot AI (月之暗面), and GLM from Zhipu AI (智谱) — and each one has its own personality, if you will. Some are great at coding, some are reasoning beasts, and some just refuse to break the bank. I figured the best way to compare them was to actually run the same prompts through all of them and see what happens. That's exactly what I did, and here's how it went. The TL;DR (For the Impatient Folks) I'll give you the punchline upfront because I know some of you are skimming: DeepSeek V4 Flash — absolute champion of price-to-performance at $0.25/M output Qwen — widest range of models, from $0.01/M all the way up to $3.20/M Kimi — the reasoning specialis

I recently discovered that Pony 's still alive. I had discovered Pony a few years ago while browsing tech forums. Its focus on memory safe & lock-free MT was interesting. I kept up with the weekly development for a brief period but then kind of forgot about the language until recently when I rediscovered it when I was chatting about Crystal's MT . I just wanted to share the latest blog post here in case someone else remembers this language. Looks like the development has been progressing steadily. Which is impressive because the project lacks any big sponsors . submitted by /u/Bassfaceapollo [link] [留言]

var is one of the ways to create a variable in JavaScript. A variable is a place to store a value, like a name or a number. var is mostly seen in old JavaScript code, written before 2015. Today most people use let and const instead, but it still helps to know var , especially when reading old code. Creating a Variable var name = " Abishek " ; var age = 22 ; console . log ( name ); console . log ( age ); Here, name stores "Abishek" and age stores 22 . We Can Change the Value var age = 22 ; age = 23 ; console . log ( age ); The output is 23 . The value inside age got updated. We Can Also Create it Again We can create the same variable a second time with var , and JavaScript does not give an error. var name = " Abishek " ; var name = " Abi " ; console . log ( name ); The output is Abi . It just overwrites the old value. It Works Across the Whole Function A block is a small part of code inside { } , like an if statement. var does not care about these small blocks, it only cares about the function. function test () { if ( true ) { var x = 10 ; } console . log ( x ); // works fine } test (); Even though x was created inside the if part, we can still use it outside the if , as long as we are inside the function. Hoisting console . log ( x ); var x = 10 ; You might expect an error here, but the output is undefined . This is because JavaScript moves the var declaration to the top before running the code. This is called hoisting. Why var Isn't Used Much Now Most people use let and const instead of var , because var can cause confusing bugs like accidental redeclaration and hoisting. let is used when the value can change, and const is used when it should not change. In Short var was the first way to create variables in JavaScript. It can be changed, redeclared, and it works across the whole function instead of one block. Once you understand var , let and const become easier to learn.

submitted by /u/esiy0676 [link] [留言]

Quieres que tu app hable español e inglés. Buscas cómo, y el ecosistema te empuja a gettext o Babel: ficheros .po , un paso de compilación a .mo , herramientas de extracción. Potente, sí. Pero para una app pequeña o mediana es un peaje que no querías pagar — solo necesitabas un t() honesto. Lo resolví tantas veces que lo empaqueté: dotkey-i18n , Python puro, sin dependencias. Tus traducciones son JSON que cualquiera puede editar: // locales/es.json { "login" : { "welcome" : "Hola, {name}" , "submit" : "Entrar" }, "menu" : { "reports" : "Informes" , "settings" : "Ajustes" } } from dotkey_i18n import Translator tr = Translator ( " locales " , default_lang = " es " ) tr . t ( " login.welcome " , name = " Juan " ) # "Hola, Juan" tr . t ( " menu.reports " , lang = " en " ) # "Reports" Tres detalles que marcan la diferencia Claves con notación de punto. t("login.submit") navega el JSON anidado. Agrupas las cadenas por pantalla o módulo sin claves planas kilométricas. Fallback al idioma por defecto. Si una clave falta en el idioma pedido, se busca en el idioma por defecto antes de rendirse. Tus traducciones pueden ir incompletas —la vida real— sin dejar huecos en blanco en la interfaz. Nunca revienta la interfaz. Una clave que no existe devuelve la propia clave (un marcador visible, no una excepción a mitad de render). Una interpolación con un campo que falta devuelve el texto sin formatear. Un JSON corrupto se trata como vacío. Nada de esto tumba la pantalla. Agnóstico del framework El idioma actual entra por un lang_getter inyectable, así el mismo Translator sirve en NiceGUI, Flask, FastAPI o un script suelto: # NiceGUI: idioma desde la sesión del usuario tr = Translator ( " locales " , default_lang = " es " , lang_getter = lambda : app . storage . user . get ( " idioma " )) # Flask tr = Translator ( " locales " , lang_getter = lambda : session . get ( " lang " )) La prioridad es clara: lang= explícito → lang_getter() → idioma por defecto. De dónde viene Salió del servic

Time zones look like a tidy grid of whole hours. They aren't. I read the standard UTC offset of all 162 cities, countries and regions on our World Clock straight from the IANA database (via Intl ) — and the real shape is lumpy, with quarter-hour outliers and a near-even split over whether clocks move at all. The quirk, in one line: Kathmandu keeps its clocks 5 hours 45 minutes ahead of UTC — the only :45 offset on the board, and one of 11 places out of 162 that don't sit on a whole hour. Nearly half the rest never move their clocks at all. The clocks that don't sit on the hour Most of the world rounds to a whole hour from UTC. A handful don't: Offset Places UTC+3:30 Tehran (Iran) UTC+4:30 Kabul (Afghanistan) UTC+5:30 India — New Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Hyderabad UTC+5:45 Kathmandu (Nepal) UTC+9:30 Adelaide, Darwin (Australia) Half-hour and quarter-hour offsets are a reminder that a time zone is a political decision, not an astronomical one — which is exactly why date code should read the IANA database rather than dividing longitude by 15. Nearly half never change their clocks Daylight saving feels universal if you live in North America or Europe, but it isn't. Of the 162 places tracked, 87 (54%) shift their clocks and 75 (46%) never do . The whole of East Asia, the Gulf, most of Africa, India and much of South America keep one fixed offset year-round — Tokyo, Singapore, Dubai, Nairobi and New Delhi never spring forward. Where the clocks crowd together Offsets aren't evenly populated. Four of them carry nearly half the board: Offset Places Who's there UTC−5 25 US Eastern — New York, Toronto, Miami, Boston UTC+1 21 Central Europe — Paris, Berlin, Rome, Madrid UTC−6 14 US Central — Chicago, Dallas, Mexico City UTC+2 12 Eastern Europe & Africa — Athens, Cairo, Johannesburg The full set spans 22 hours , from Honolulu at UTC−10 to New Zealand and Fiji at UTC+12. Reproduce it Every number here is printed by one dependency-free Node script that reads each place's

💬 Following up on the story about the release of Qwen3.8-Max , I finally tried it on real-world tasks. Specifically, for building AI consultants for text channels (messengers) in my favorite programming language — Go . Spoiler: it’s really good, especially for such a low price per 1M tokens ! 😍 As a result, I built 2 demo Telegram bots, where GPT-4.1-mini acts as the brains 👇 1️⃣ A bot for qualifying a customer and booking a car repair appointment , which asks for details about the vehicle and the issue, answers questions about service pricing, and schedules a convenient visit time. 2️⃣ A bot for calculating kitchen pricing for furniture companies , which уточняет kitchen parameters through guiding questions, calculates the cost, sends the final estimate, and books the client at the company office for a detailed design session. Before implementation, of course, I wrote a detailed spec for each of these bots and connected MCP Context7. I also had to make 1–2 corrective prompts for code style and some business-logic details... but otherwise, Qwen3.8-Max worked fully autonomously in the engineering loop (questioning itself at every stage and adjusting its own reasoning and code). Token usage (input + output) totaled ~12.8 million , across about 400 API requests to the Chinese model. That’s seriously impressive! For comparison, I ran the same task through DeepSeek V4 Flash Latest: with similar output results, it used over 15 million tokens. By the way, the whole development process was done in the next-gen AI IDE Kodik , by our local guys — ArchiTech AI . Highly recommend downloading and trying it. Not an Ad! I’ve been using it for over a month now, and it’s truly a very high-quality product, especially in the era of account bans from Anthropic and OpenAI 😏 ...and soon, a local model called Qwen3.8-27b is also expected to drop, which Alibaba has promised to release any day now... that’s definitely something that can make the big AI model vendors nervous! 😉 And if you ne

submitted by /u/TechnologySubject259 [link] [留言]