今日已更新 55 条资讯 | 累计 24714 条内容
关于我们

标签:#an

找到 1841 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

Keeping Android Background Services Alive Against OEM Aggression

We have all been there: you build a utility app that relies on precise location or time-based triggers, only to find that it works perfectly on your Pixel but dies silently on a Samsung or Xiaomi device. When I started building Muffle, an app designed to automate sound profiles based on prayer times and GPS, I realized that standard AlarmManager usage wasn't enough to survive aggressive battery optimizations. The Problem with OEM Kill-Switches Modern Android versions enforce strict background execution limits. If your app isn't a high-priority foreground service, OEMs will frequently kill your process to save a few milliwatts of battery. For Muffle, if the process dies, the user misses their silent profile trigger, which defeats the entire purpose of the app. I had to move away from relying on a long-running background service and rethink my architecture entirely. Moving to WorkManager with Expedited Jobs Instead of a persistent service, I transitioned the core logic to WorkManager . By utilizing ExistingPeriodicWorkPolicy.UPDATE , I ensure that the scheduling remains consistent even across reboots. However, WorkManager alone can be delayed by Doze mode. To combat this, I implemented setExpedited(OutOfQuotaPolicy.RUN_AS_NON_EXPEDITED_WORK_REQUEST) for critical profile switches. This tells the system that the work is time-sensitive. kotlin val workRequest = PeriodicWorkRequestBuilder(15, TimeUnit.MINUTES) .setConstraints(Constraints.Builder().build()) .setExpedited(OutOfQuotaPolicy.RUN_AS_NON_EXPEDITED_WORK_REQUEST) .build() Leveraging Foreground Services with Notifications For features requiring immediate precision—like geofencing—I had to accept that a persistent notification is non-negotiable. To keep the app from being perceived as 'spammy,' I designed the notification to be low-priority, showing only when a profile is actively being managed. I also had to handle the onTaskRemoved callback in my Service implementation. By calling startService again with a sticky

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Is this solar e-bike a good idea or sophisticated e-waste?

I like the idea of a solar-powered electric bike, but I don't think anyone should buy the new Phosgo Go5 - not yet, anyway. This "world's first AI solar e-bike" promises to "eliminate range anxiety," and is sold by a new brand out of China hoping to make a big splash by selling direct-to-consumer through […]

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Presentation: Rust at the Core - Accelerating Polyglot SDK Development

Spencer Judge discusses the architectural pattern of building a shared core in Rust with language-specific layers on top. Drawing from his work on Temporal's SDKs, he shares lessons on navigating FFI boundaries, bridging async concepts, and managing memory safely. He explains the limitations of native extensions and how emerging tech like WebAssembly can streamline cross-language architecture. By Spencer Judge

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

What Europe’s heat wave means for the power grid

It’s been hard to look away from headlines about the European heat wave this week. Temperatures are breaking records across the continent, and the weather is threatening lives, shutting down schools, and in one particularly ironic case, forcing the cancellation of a London Climate Action Week event about extreme heat. As the summer ramps up…

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Beyond Vibe Coding: Top AI Builders for Real Data and Workflows

Typing a prompt and getting a beautiful user interface in 30 seconds feels like magic. But the moment you add real users, process payments, or try to handle relational data, that magic often turns into a debugging nightmare. Many founders are hitting the "80% wall." Rapid AI code generators excel at creating stunning prototypes. They build the "dining room" perfectly, but they struggle to architect the "kitchen"—the secure, scalable backend required to run a business. Relying entirely on black-box, AI-generated code leaves non-technical founders with massive "comprehension debt." You end up owning a product that your business relies on, but that you cannot read, debug, or maintain when something inevitably breaks. Getting a prototype is easy; building software is hard. This article breaks down the top AI app builders on the market, separating rapid UI generators from the structured, full-stack visual platforms capable of handling relational databases, complex user permissions, and deterministic workflows. The "Vibe Coding" Trap vs. Real Application Architecture There is a fundamental difference between front-end UI generation and back-end reality. Visual components like buttons, layouts, and animations can be generated probabilistically. However, back-end architecture requires strict, predictable rules. When founders use text prompts to generate entire full-stack applications, they accumulate comprehension debt. If an AI writes thousands of lines of code you do not understand, your startup has a bus factor of zero. Real users frequently report spending weeks building with AI generators, only to realize they have no idea what state their application is actually in. To build an AI app without coding that actually scales, you need a relational database. Relying on flat JSON files or unstructured document stores often leads to the "overwrite trap," where simultaneous user actions silently delete each other's data. A native relational database, like PostgreSQL, enforces

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Monorepo Dependency Security — Vulnerability Scanning Across Packages

A monorepo can look like one repository, but security teams should treat it as many applications living under one roof. One repo may contain 10 frontend packages, 5 backend services, 3 shared utility libraries, 2 mobile apps, and one root lockfile that does not tell the full story by itself. Monorepo dependency security means scanning the root dependency graph, every workspace package, shared libraries, lockfiles, and generated SBOMs. If you scan only one file, you may miss the vulnerable package that ships in production. Why Monorepos Create Unique Vulnerability Challenges Monorepos centralize multiple packages, apps, services, and libraries inside one repository. This improves code sharing, dependency alignment, refactoring, CI caching, and cross-team collaboration. It also creates a security problem: one repository can contain many different dependency trees, owners, deployment targets, and risk profiles. A typical JavaScript or TypeScript monorepo may include apps/web , apps/admin , apps/api , packages/ui , packages/auth , packages/logger , and packages/config . Each package may have its own package.json . Some packages are deployed to production. Some are internal libraries. Some are build-only tools. Some are used by every app. A vulnerability in one package can affect one app, many apps, or the whole repo depending on how dependency relationships are structured. The biggest issue is shared code. If packages/auth depends on a vulnerable version of jsonwebtoken , every application that imports packages/auth may be affected. If packages/ui uses a vulnerable utility such as lodash , every frontend app that consumes that UI package may inherit the same risk. If a build tool dependency is compromised, the risk may appear during CI/CD rather than runtime. Real CVEs show why this matters. CVE-2021-23337 affected lodash through command injection in template handling. CVE-2022-31129 affected moment through inefficient parsing that could cause denial of service. CVE-202

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

A Practical Guide to Decomposing Legacy Java Monoliths

How to Decompose a Legacy Java Monolith Without Disrupting Business Operations The Java monolithic applications have been supporting businesses for years. In these applications, the entire business logic, presentation layer, and data access layer are bundled into a single unit. These architectures are functional but hard to scale, maintain, and improve due to changing business needs. An expert Java app development company helps growing organizations in addressing this issue through Java modernization services. Instead of developing a whole software application from scratch, firms can transform their software in stages with the right boundaries. The biggest challenge here is to determine where to make those cuts in a bundle. Poorly chosen service boundaries create operational complexity issues and long-term maintenance problems. Understanding how to identify seams in the monolith application helps in achieving modernization successfully. Let's take a look at what contributes to the success of monolith decomposing and how organizations can approach it wisely. Why Organizations Are Modernizing Legacy Java Monoliths The legacy Java monolith applications were built during a time when monolithic architecture was common. They were optimized for easy deployment and centralized management. But today, businesses require flexibility. This is due to challenges such as Slow release cycles Increasing maintenance costs Limited scalability Complex dependency management Difficult onboarding new developers Growing technical debt These issues have increased the demand for software architecture modernization in business sectors. Modern architecture gives the following advantages to the teams: Deploy features independently Scale services individually Improve system resilience Accelerate development cycles Support cloud-native environments The objective of architecture modernization is to create a technical foundation that supports future business growth. Understanding business goals of

2026-06-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Optimizing Geofence Transitions: Battery Efficient Background Logic in Android

We have all been there: a meeting starts, and suddenly your phone rings. I built Muffle to automate silent profiles, but the biggest hurdle wasn't the UI—it was making sure the app didn't destroy the user's battery while monitoring GPS coordinates. The Trap of Continuous Location Updates Early prototypes used LocationManager with frequent updates. This is the fastest way to get your app uninstalled. Keeping the GPS radio active in the background forces the device to wake the CPU constantly, leading to significant battery drain. To solve this, I moved away from active polling and shifted to the GeofencingClient API. Leveraging GeofencingClient for Passive Monitoring Instead of calculating distance from a point every few seconds, I transitioned to system-level geofencing. By defining circular regions around locations like the office or a mosque, the OS handles the monitoring at the hardware abstraction layer. kotlin val geofencingRequest = GeofencingRequest.Builder() .setInitialTrigger(GeofencingRequest.INITIAL_TRIGGER_ENTER) .addGeofences(geofenceList) .build() This approach allows the OS to do the heavy lifting. The app stays in a dormant state until the location provider signals a transition. The kernel only wakes the app when the device enters or exits the radius. The Trade-off: Precision vs. Power Using GeofencingClient means accepting a slightly slower trigger time compared to raw GPS polling. Sometimes, there is a delay of a few seconds as the device wakes from a deep sleep state. For a utility like Muffle, this is a fair trade-off. Users prefer their phone to silence five seconds after entering a building rather than finding their battery dead by noon. To mitigate the delay, I combined geofencing with a secondary intent service that performs a final check once the geofence trigger hits, ensuring that we aren't just reacting to a momentary GPS jitter. Final Thoughts By offloading the monitoring to the platform's native geofencing API, I was able to keep Muffle

2026-06-25 原文 →