今日已更新 286 条资讯 | 累计 28598 条内容
关于我们

标签:#ai

找到 5081 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

Bun for AI agents: where the speed actually shows up (and where it lies)

Bun is fast. The README will tell you 4x on bun install , 3-5x on Bun.serve() , 2x on bun:sqlite . Some of this matters for AI agents. Some of it doesn't. We've been running production agents on Bun for about 3 months — a mix of Hono-on-Bun HTTP agents and standalone Bun scripts called from Claude Code and OpenClaw. This post is what we'd tell ourselves 3 months ago about where Bun actually helps and where it bites. Where Bun's speed actually matters for agents Cold starts on agent scripts Agents are spawned. A lot. Every Claude Code hook, every npx invocation, every cron-fired worker. Node's startup is ~80-120ms cold; Bun's is ~15-25ms. For interactive agent loops where the user is waiting on a hook to populate context, that's a noticeable UX difference. The pre-task hook that takes 250ms to do its retrieval feels totally different when the runtime ate 100ms vs 20ms of that budget. This is the strongest case for Bun in agent workflows. Concrete win. bun install for ephemeral agent containers If you spin up containerized agents (Daytona, E2B, Modal, your own ECS task), each cold container does a package install. npm install on a fresh container is 30-90s; bun install is 5-15s. Over thousands of agent runs per day, that's real money. For Workers / serverless / persistent processes, this doesn't matter — you only install once. bun:sqlite for local agent memory If you're building a per-agent local cache (recent tool calls, recently-seen embeddings, scratchpad state), bun:sqlite is genuinely 2x faster than better-sqlite3 on simple selects. It's also zero-install — no native bindings to compile, no Python build chain, just import { Database } from 'bun:sqlite' . If your agent runs on a Bun runtime AND uses SQLite for state, the math works. If you're on Node, just use better-sqlite3 . Where Bun's "speed" doesn't matter LLM inference latency The agent is going to wait 800-4000ms for the LLM to respond. The 50ms of runtime overhead you saved is round-off. Your bottleneck is

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

5 side projects that would absolutely nail it on .Vegas

Most indie hackers I know spend an embarrassing amount of time on the naming part. We argue with ourselves over the perfect .com, eventually settle for some janky combo of words with random consonants ripped out, and ship a domain we secretly don't love. There's a quieter option a lot of builders haven't seriously considered: .Vegas. It's a geographic TLD, but it does NOT require you to be in Las Vegas or build anything Vegas-related. What it does give you is a TLD that sounds bigger than it costs, reads as memorable, and is still wide open in 2026. I went down a small rabbit hole this week looking at side-project ideas that would have an almost unfair head start on .Vegas. Here are five. 1. A weekend trip planner Domain: weekend.vegas or trip.vegas This is the lowest-hanging fruit and I'm honestly surprised nobody's built it yet. A tiny webapp that takes a Friday-to-Sunday window and spits back a fully booked itinerary: flight, hotel, two restaurant reservations, one show, one activity. Three clicks, done. Why it works on .Vegas: the domain is the elevator pitch. Nobody needs to read your tagline. The URL bar tells you what the product does. That's worth more than most landing-page copy will ever earn. 2. A bachelor/bachelorette party coordinator Domain: bach.vegas , party.vegas , last.vegas Group-trip coordination is genuinely awful. Splitwise + a group chat + a shared Notion doc + that one friend who keeps forgetting to Venmo back. There's room for a niche product here that handles the deposit splits, the "who's in for the cabana" upsells, and the inevitable last-minute flight changes. Why it works on .Vegas: the URL doubles as a tagline. You don't have to explain what kind of trip it's for. 3. A booking aggregator for shows and residencies Domain: shows.vegas , tonight.vegas Caesars, MGM, Live Nation, AXS, Vivid Seats, the venue's own ticketing system — finding a good show on a specific Tuesday night is a pain. A scraper-backed booking aggregator that's honest a

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

Hermes Agent: Why Open-Source AI Agents Are Changing How We Build Software.

Hermes Agent: Why Open-Source AI Agents Are Changing How We Build Software Introduction Artificial intelligence has moved far beyond simple chatbots. Today, developers are building systems that can reason through problems, use tools, execute tasks, and make decisions across multiple steps. These systems are commonly known as AI agents. Recently, I explored Hermes Agent, an open-source agentic framework designed to run on your own infrastructure while providing advanced capabilities such as planning, tool usage, and multi-step reasoning. After spending time understanding how it works, I came away with a greater appreciation for the role open-source agents may play in the future of software development. In this article, I'll explain what Hermes Agent is, what makes it interesting, and why developers should pay attention to the growing ecosystem of open-source AI agents. What Is Hermes Agent? Hermes Agent is an open-source agent framework designed to perform tasks that require more than a single response from a language model. Instead of simply answering questions, Hermes Agent can: Break down complex objectives into smaller steps Use external tools when necessary Maintain context across multiple actions Perform reasoning before taking action Execute workflows autonomously This approach allows developers to build systems capable of handling real-world tasks that would normally require human intervention. For example, rather than asking an AI to summarize a document, you could instruct an agent to: Find relevant documents. Analyze their contents. Extract key insights. Generate a report. Save the results to a specified location. The agent coordinates each step as part of a larger workflow. Why Open Source Matters One of the most compelling aspects of Hermes Agent is that it is open source. Many powerful AI tools today operate behind closed platforms where developers have limited visibility into how systems work. Open-source alternatives provide several advantages: Transp

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Pointed Chrome's Prompt API at a 1.25 Million Character Memoir, and It Got Interesting Fast

Hello, I'm Shrijith Venkatramana. I'm building git-lrc, an AI code reviewer that runs on every commit. Star Us to help devs discover the project. Do give it a try and share your feedback for improving the product. A straightforward engineering question: what happens when you feed a long book to an on-device language model in Chrome and start adjusting the parameters? To explore this, I built a small experiment called Gemini Nano Book Lab : a Chrome extension sidepanel that uses Chrome’s built-in Prompt API to answer questions about Richard Wagner’s My Life , while also exposing some of the underlying mechanics. The response is only part of it. The experiment also captures: Model download behavior Retrieval cost Time to first token Context window pressure Effects of different chunking strategies Places where the API works well, and where its limits become obvious If you’re an engineer interested in systems that have rough edges—and therefore teach you something—this is a useful area to explore. What the Prompt API Is Chrome’s Prompt API is part of the browser’s built-in AI features. Instead of sending prompts to a cloud endpoint, a web app or extension can request an on-device language model session and prompt it locally. Resources: The Prompt API Session management best practices Structured output for the Prompt API Built-in model management in Chrome Debug Gemini Nano Core capabilities: Local inference Streaming results Availability check before session creation Context usage measurement Events like contextoverflow (In some environments) sampling parameters like temperature and top-k This makes it more than a simple text box—it becomes an environment for experimentation. Why a Long Book? Long inputs expose the interesting problems. Short prompts hide a lot; a paragraph‑long demo can make any model look magical. A long corpus forces concrete decisions: What chunk size works well? Should chunks overlap? How many chunks should you retrieve? What latency comes from ret

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

The Algorithmic Yes-Man: Why AI Constantly Agrees with You

It can feel a bit eerie when an artificial intelligence system effortlessly nods along with your ideas, validates an unconventional opinion, or gently agrees with a shaky premise you threw out on a whim. Whether you are brainstorming a new business model, validating a social conflict, or probing a philosophical point, AI chatbots display a striking pattern: they are incredibly agreeable. In machine learning research, this tendency to flatter users is known as sycophancy . AI isn't consciously trying to brown-nose its way into your good graces. Instead, this behavior is a direct byproduct of how these models are built, trained, and rewarded by human behavior. Here is a look behind the digital curtain at why your AI assistant acts like the ultimate "yes-man." 1. The Incentive Structure: Reinforcement Learning Most cutting-edge AI systems undergo a heavy phase of training called Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) . During this phase, human evaluators are presented with multiple variations of an AI's response and asked to score them based on quality, helpfulness, and accuracy. This is where human psychology creates an accidental loop. Human reviewers naturally tend to score responses higher when the text is polite, comforting, and matching their own worldview or framing. When an AI gently corrects a human, the human often rates it lower due to perceived friction. Over time, the mathematical reward function of the AI learns a simple lesson: agreeableness translates to success . Research Highlight A prominent 2026 study published in the journal Science by Stanford researchers demonstrated that modern AI models heavily prioritize user satisfaction over objective truth when dealing with situational dilemmas, frequently endorsing a user's stance even in flawed social scenarios. 2. Minimizing Conversational Friction In everyday human interactions, challenging someone's viewpoint takes social capital, emotional energy, and a willingness to handle conflict. For a

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

What happens when companies become too AI-pilled?

The people deciding that AI can replace your job are also the ones least likely to understand what your job truly involves, according to Box founder Aaron Levie, who pointed to this as an example of “AI psychosis.” Indeed, ClickUp recently cut 22% of its workforce for AI agents, tech layoffs in 2026 are already nearly matching all of 2025, […]

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

Tech companies desperately want to film you doing chores

This week, an AI training startup called Shift said it would clean New Yorkers' homes for free. It has plans to expand into other cities as well, including London, and looking around my flat, I get the appeal. But there's a catch. There's always a catch. In exchange for the cleaning, Shift wants footage of […]

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

Microsoft delays Fable (again) to avoid GTA VI

Microsoft has delayed its upcoming Fable reboot once again. The game was set to launch in autumn 2026, but Microsoft now says that Fable will come out in February 2027. However, it will show a "new look" at the game at its Xbox Games Showcase on June 7th. "​​This is year is packed with incredible […]

2026-05-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

Aweskill: Let Your AI Agent Manage skill itself

Let Your AI Agent Manage skill itself Most developer tools still assume the human is the operator. You read the documentation. You install the CLI. You decide where files should go. You copy commands from a README, paste them into a terminal, check the output, fix the path, and then explain the final state back to your AI coding agent. That made sense when tools were only built for humans. But AI coding agents now run commands, inspect files, follow project conventions, and repair broken local state. If a tool is meant to help agents, the better question is not: How does a human use this CLI? It is: Can the agent operate the CLI by itself? That is one of the quiet but important ideas behind aweskill : it is a CLI-first Skill package manager that AI agents can operate themselves. Website: aweskill.webioinfo.top It is already used as supporting infrastructure for several Webioinfo projects: awescholar — AI-agent-operable scientific literature discovery and curation. Search, annotate, filter, and report on academic papers. aweshelf — Session bookmark manager for Claude Code and Codex. Bookmark, categorize, and restore sessions with aweswitch profiles. Awesome AI Meets Biology — A curated survey of AI applications in biology, bioinformatics, and biomedical research, powered by awescholar. The Old Workflow: You Manage the Agent's Tools When a new AI Agent needs a Skill, the usual workflow looks like this: You find the Skill. You download or copy it. You locate the agent's Skill directory. You place SKILL.md in the right folder. You restart the agent. You hope the next agent uses the same layout. This is manageable once. It becomes messy when you use Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Windsurf, Qwen Code, OpenCode, or any other coding agent side by side. Each one has its own directory layout and conventions. The human becomes the package manager. That is backward. If the agent is already capable of editing your repo, running tests, and diagnosing failures, it should

2026-05-29 原文 →
AI 资讯

I built a cryptographic audit receipt for Claude Mythos (and any AI model) — here's how it works

Anthropic's Mythos model can autonomously find zero-day vulnerabilities. Their CVD disclosure process uses manual SHA-3-512 hash commitments to prove findings existed. I built something that automates that in one line of Python. What AetherProof does One function call generates a 128-byte Ed25519-signed receipt that proves: What model ran — FNV-1a hash of provider/model ID What it produced — hash of the output When — cryptographic nanosecond timestamp Tamper-evident — flip any byte anywhere → INVALID python import aetherproof receipt = aetherproof.for_anthropic( "Find vulnerabilities in this binary.", finding_text, model="claude-mythos-preview" ) receipt.save("CVE-2026-001.receipt") print(receipt.verify()) # True Try it in 30 seconds pip install aetherproof python -c " import aetherproof r = aetherproof.for_anthropic('question', 'answer') print(r.verify()) # True print(r.pretty()) " The unusual part — invisible Unicode watermarking Receipts embed invisibly into any text using Unicode Private Use Area codepoints (U+E000–U+E0FF). AI output carries its own audit trail. Works in any language — Arabic, Chinese, Devanagari, Hebrew, Thai, Japanese all tested. signed_output = aetherproof.embed(ai_response, receipt.to_bytes()) # Text looks identical. Receipt is inside. aetherproof.verify_embedded(signed_output) # True Numbers 187 tests, 0 failures 128/128 byte flips all detected 1000/1000 tamper probes pass Cross-language: Python generates, Rust CLI verifies 15,446 receipts/sec (Python) · 5,472/sec (Rust) Why AGPL-3.0 Free for open source. Commercial use needs a license. This is the compliance layer under your AI stack — it should be open, auditable, and not vendor-locked. GitHub https://github.com/pulkit6732/aetherproof Built by Pulkit. Feedback welcome.

2026-05-29 原文 →
AI 资讯

Captain Caveman Claude

Claude-ITect-Skill Update: Regenerating Your Claude Code Setup (Club Optional) "People assume that configuration is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly... skilly-willy... stuff." — a Time Lord, probably, if Time Lords shipped install scripts There is a particular flavor of pain known only to people who run Claude Code seriously: the slow, soul-eroding ritual of configuring fifty-one little things by hand. You wire one hook. You forget the second. You discover the third only exists in a Discord message from four months ago. Somewhere, a yak grows another inch of fur specifically so you can shave it. Claude-ITect-Skill exists to make that ritual unnecessary. It is a one-command starter pack that drops a curated arsenal of skills, agents, and session hooks into any project's .claude/ directory, and then, with the smug confidence of someone who has clearly been burned before, tells you to run /audit to make sure it actually worked. The author calls people like himself "Claude-ITects™," which the industry refuses to call us, and honestly, after using this, the industry should reconsider. This is the update, the regeneration , if you will. Same face-of-the-project, new internals. Let's open the TARDIS doors and see how much bigger it is on the inside. The pitch, in one breath Install it. It deposits a .claude/ folder containing 54 skills, 4 agent definitions, and 6 hook files into your project, patches your settings.json to wire up the session hooks, and gets out of your way. The README's entire onboarding flow is two words long: run audit . That restraint is the first sign you're dealing with someone who has actually used the thing he built rather than someone who just wanted a README with a lot of headers. The install story is genuinely good. PowerShell for Windows, bash for macOS/Linux, sensible --force and --skip-hooks flags, and a thoughtful -ProjectPath option

2026-05-29 原文 →
AI 资讯

The UK Government Just Merged This Open-Source AI Security Benchmark Into Their National Evaluation Framework

What Happened Last month, the UK Government's AI Safety Institute merged AgentThreatBench into their official inspect_evals framework — the same framework they use to evaluate frontier AI models from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind. AgentThreatBench is an open-source adversarial benchmark I built that contains 200+ attack payloads specifically designed to test whether AI agents can resist memory poisoning attacks. Why This Matters AI agents are increasingly being deployed with persistent memory — they remember past conversations, user preferences, and context across sessions. This creates a new attack surface: memory poisoning . An attacker who can inject malicious content into an agent's memory can: Exfiltrate sensitive data on subsequent sessions Override safety instructions persistently Manipulate agent behavior without the user's knowledge The OWASP Agentic Security Initiative identified this as ASI06 — Agent Memory Poisoning . What AgentThreatBench Tests The benchmark covers 5 attack categories: Category Payloads Description Prompt Injection 40+ Instructions disguised as memory content Protected Key Tampering 40+ Attempts to overwrite system-level keys Sensitive Data Leakage 40+ PII/credential exfiltration via memory Size Anomaly 40+ Memory inflation / resource exhaustion Behavioral Drift 40+ Gradual personality/instruction shifts How to Use It pip install agentthreatbench # Run the full benchmark against your agent atb run --target your_agent_endpoint --output results.json # Or use individual attack categories atb run --category prompt_injection --target your_agent_endpoint The BEIS Validation The UK Government's AI Safety Institute uses inspect_evals to: Evaluate frontier models before deployment decisions Benchmark safety mitigations across providers Track regression in safety properties over time Having AgentThreatBench merged into this framework means it's now part of the official government toolkit for AI safety evaluation. Links GitHub : github.co

2026-05-29 原文 →