标签：#go

Keeping phones out of landfills and doing useful things is a good thing.

Governments are switching, but I’m not sure it makes a difference : …some municipalities, including Denver, Colorado, are ditching their Flock arrays. But keep in mind that if they’re only switching from Flock to another brand of license-plate readers, like Axon, it’s like a gambling addict trying to kick the habit by switching from FanDuel to DraftKings. […] Despite what you may read on the Flock website, Axon cameras are pretty effective when it comes to hoovering up personal details that can go far beyond your license plate numbers. That means a municipality that opts for Axon cameras instead of Flock units won’t necessarily reduce the amount privacy its citizens lose through their use...

The screwup shows how tricky it can be to stop web crawlers from making ostensibly private conversations with AI chatbots entirely too public.

This is a submission for DEV's Summer Bug Smash: Clear the Lineup powered by Sentry . Project Overview Staxa is a multi-tenant deployment platform I am building solo under Stackforge Labs. The backend is a single Go binary ( staxad ) using the chi router, with about 60 API endpoints, running on K3s on a Hetzner CAX21 ARM64 server that costs around $11/month. Each tenant gets an isolated Kubernetes namespace with their own app container, a PostgreSQL 16 or MySQL 8 database, a subdomain with automatic SSL, and resource quotas. Container builds run through Buildah, and the frontend is Next.js (App Router) with shadcn/ui and Clerk for auth. Bug Fix or Performance Improvement The symptom: POST /api/v1/tenants/{id}/deployments/{depId}/rollback accepted a deployment ID in the URL path and then completely ignored it. Whatever version you asked for, you got the most recent successful deployment instead. The route was wired up correctly in internal/api/router.go:149 : r . Post ( "/tenants/{id}/deployments/{depId}/rollback" , srv . handleRollbackDeployment ) But handleRollbackDeployment never called chi.URLParam(r, "depId") . It read {id} for the tenant and stopped there. How I found it: I was auditing my published API docs against the actual handlers, endpoint by endpoint. When I got to the rollback entry I went to write down what {depId} did, went to the handler to confirm, and found nothing reading it. The docs described an ID that the code never looked at. The worst part is that it returned 202 Accepted and then performed a real, successful rollback. Just not the one you asked for. There was no error to notice, no failed request in any log. The frontend had been passing the deployment ID into the URL since it was written ( src/lib/api.ts ), so the UI always believed the parameter was honored. Root cause: the handler created a rollback deployment row with no reference to any target, and the worker independently decided what to restore. In internal/worker/pipeline.go , runRo

Here's what the rumor mill tells us Google might be preparing for its next Pixel launch.

Every log has a story خب، روز سوم الان که دارم این لاگ رو می‌نویسم، روز تقریبا تموم شده و امروز از اون روزهایی بود که حس خوبی داشت اگر بخوام بهش نگاه کنم، می‌تونم بگم یکی از روزهای خوب ۱۴۰۵ بود البته امیدوارم بهترینش نباشه چون هنوز کلی برنامه داریم، کلی چیز هست که باید ساخته بشه و کلی روز بهتر قراره بیاد یک پیام غیرمنتظره دیروز ساعت 17:54 یک پیام دریافت کردم راستش آن لحظه خیلی آماده جواب دادن نبودم من معمولا پیام کسی را بی‌جواب نمی‌گذارم، حتی اگر ناراحت باشم یا فاصله‌ای ایجاد شده باشد اما بعضی وقت‌ها آدم نیاز داره سکوت کنه چند دقیقه، چند ساعت یا حتی بیشتر نه برای نادیده گرفتن، فقط برای اینکه بتونه با ذهن آرام‌تر و بی کینه تر جواب بده تایم نهار تصمیم گرفتم بخونم و جواب بدم هر چی نباشه اون کسی بود که موقع اعتراضات حالم رو پرسید حتی وقتی راجع به اون روز جمعه نکبت بار شنید با خطرات اون روزا برای عیادت من اومد ای کاش اون روزا بجای ساچمه تیر میخوردم ای کاش بعد دیدن اون کشتار من هم زنده نمی موندم شاید غریبه باشیم شاید دلخور باشم ولی خب هرگز خوبی ادم ها رو فراموش نمیکنم پیام طولانی بود خیلی طولانی و این دقیقا چیزی است که همیشه دوست داشتم آدم‌هایی که من را می‌شناسند می‌دانند که خودم هم معمولا جواب‌های کوتاه نمی‌دهم به نظرم نوشتن زیاد همیشه به معنی زیاد حرف زدن نیست گاهی یعنی برای توضیح دادن، برای فهمیده شدن و برای احترام گذاشتن وقت گذاشتی و این پیام هم همین حس را داشت نه فقط دفاع از خودت بلکه تلاش برای فهمیدن و توضیح دادن مرور خاطرات بعد از خواندن پیام، چند سال گذشته دوباره مرور شد بعضی آدم‌ها و بعضی روزها، حتی بعد از گذشت زمان، یک گوشه از ذهن باقی می‌مونن سال‌هایی که گذشت از ۱۳۹۹ تا ۱۴۰۲ سال‌هایی پر از تغییر، تجربه و اتفاق‌های مختلف پونه فرزانگان اختیاریه خب خیلی گذشته احساس پیری میکنم سال ۱۴۰۳ ارتباط کمتر شد و هر کسی مسیر خودش رو دنبال کرد تو کنکورت و من هم درگیر درد و دل با این باینری ها بودم اردیبهشت ۴۰۴ اتفاق‌هایی افتاد که شاید بهتر باشه فقط به عنوان تجربه به اون نگاه کنیم نه چیزی که هر روز دوباره مرور شه گاهی گذشته رو نمیشه تغییر داد و خب هممون اشتباه میکنیم بعد دوباره رسیدیم به یک نقطه جدید از ۴فروردین تا ۲۰ اردیبهشت امسال خب بازم شاید همون طوری که امروز گفتی هردو یه

This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here. Reading OpenAI’s account last week of how some of its models broke their containment and hacked into the computer systems of Hugging Face, another AI company, was the first time I got…

The government says destroying his own data during an airport interrogation was illegal.

Google’s AI Overviews now appear in 43% of searches, underscoring how quickly AI-generated answers are becoming the default way people discover information online.

Manually checking what technologies power a website works once or twice. After that it gets slow, repetitive, and impossible to scale. Modern developers skip the manual step and detect tech stacks in code instead. Your program reads a response, pulls out the signals, and tells you what's running. No DevTools, no guesswork. This guide shows how that detection works and how to build it in Go with the open-source tooling ProjectDiscovery maintains. External resources: github.com/projectdiscovery/wappalyzergo projectdiscovery.io If you're new to the concept, start with technology fingerprinting for developers to understand the signals behind detection. What does "programmatic detection" mean? Programmatic detection just means letting software identify technologies instead of a person doing it by hand. Your application does five things: Sends a request Reads the response Extracts signals Matches fingerprints Outputs technologies No browser, no manual inspection. The same pipeline shows up in recon platforms, developer tooling, automation pipelines, and security workflows. Read detecting website technologies using Go first if you want the foundational walkthrough. Why developers prefer automated detection Manual workflows fall apart as systems grow. Scripted detection holds up because it's fast, consistent, and drops straight into a pipeline. Speed: scan hundreds of targets in minutes. Consistency: scripts don't skip clues a tired human would. Automation: pipe results straight into the rest of your tooling. Intelligence: raw HTTP turns into something you can act on. Building a fingerprint engine yourself means reimplementing years of pattern work. A mature library like wappalyzergo saves you those hundreds of hours. How programmatic fingerprinting works Most detectors run the same four-stage pipeline. Step 1: Fetch the target Send an HTTP request and keep the headers and body. Step 2: Extract signals Look for the clues a stack leaves behind: response headers, cookies, scr

Yet another Israeli mass surveillance company : Made by Israeli surveillance company Cognyte, the tech simulates a mobile phone tower, which forces nearby phones to connect to it. That enables cops to keep tabs on any phones in the vicinity ­ whether they’re owned by a suspect in a case or not. Cognyte’s contract with the state of Texas reveals that the simulator, called FalcoNet, can be concealed within the vehicles, hidden in a backpack for on-foot missions or attached to a helicopter. It’s the same technology as the infamous Stingray, one of the original cell-site simulators made by defense giant L3Harris...

The Go pod is running in production. CPU limit set to 2, metrics look reasonable. But under load, P99 latencies spike intermittently with no obvious cause. No errors, no goroutine leaks, just latency blowing up on traffic bursts. The root cause is usually invisible: GOMAXPROCS equals the number of CPUs on the physical node, not the container limit. Your Go app thinks it has 32 CPUs when it only has 2. The Linux kernel handles the gap in its own way — CFS throttling. What GOMAXPROCS reads (and what it ignores) By default, the Go runtime computes GOMAXPROCS via runtime.NumCPU() , which reads the number of CPUs available at the OS level. On a 32-core Kubernetes node, that returns 32 — regardless of what resources.limits.cpu says in your pod spec. Kubernetes CPU limits are enforced through Linux cgroups (v1 or v2). Cgroups are transparent to processes: a pod with limits.cpu: "2" doesn't see two virtual CPUs, it sees all the node's CPUs and gets suspended when it consumes too much. The Go runtime, historically, never read cgroups. It trusted the physical core count. package main import ( "fmt" "runtime" ) func main () { // Inside a pod with limits.cpu: "2" on a 32-core node fmt . Println ( runtime . NumCPU ()) // → 32 fmt . Println ( runtime . GOMAXPROCS ( 0 )) // → 32 } CFS throttling: how the kernel slows you down The Linux CFS (Completely Fair Scheduler) enforces CPU limits via two cgroup parameters: cpu.cfs_quota_us (allowed CPU time) and cpu.cfs_period_us (measurement window, 100 ms by default). A pod limited to 2 CPUs gets at most 200 ms of CPU time per 100 ms window. When Go spawns 32 OS threads for 32 parallel goroutines, those threads compete for physical CPUs. Once their combined usage exceeds the cgroup quota within the current window, the kernel suspends all threads in the cgroup until the next window starts. That's throttling: a complete application freeze lasting anywhere from a few milliseconds to several tens of milliseconds. A handful of these per second

Previously, I wrote about How I Processed 666K Pages Of Flattened PDFs into a Full Text Search Engine called the Apario writer . Upon on the conclusion of the last segment, I was able to optimize the compilation time of the original collection of data by rewriting the sidekiq Ruby pipeline script into a dedicated Go Application. Regardless of what compiling the PDF assets would look like, I still needed to serve those assets - and that's where the writer did little to nothing to actually address the OPEX of the project from 2020. Given the size of the data set, the 666K pages ended up compiling into a directory of ~1.13TB in size. This was held in storage that was distributed across several high volume storage dedicated servers on OVH behind MinIO . This provided an S3 compatible API directly. What I Know About OPEX OPEX or Op erational Ex pense is how you describe a spending of money that is used explicitly for the operations of the business versus a capital expense. Hardware was considered a CAPEX or Cap ital Ex pense. So when Bit Fry Game Studios needed their DevOps pipeline upgraded for the 9 hour game builds into a 30 minute private enterprise cloud build, it required a CAPEX investment of $69K plus trust in me in order to achieve a -$15K/month OPEX savings. Annualized over a hardware lifecycle, over $472K can be recovered from OPEX by making a small CAPEX expense up front. One of the first projects that I ever worked on was in PHP and MySQL on Ubuntu 8.04 . It was to balance the budget of a department that had ACME Bucks so to speak. It required me to write a finance module, fully tested, that managed Blue , Green and Black dollars. Blue dollars were for OPEX. Green dollars were for CAPEX. Black dollars were for external vendors where money left the company (versus moving between departments). Black depreciated instantly - meaning 100% of it was paid immediately. Blue dollars were borrowed over a 12 month pay-back period. Green dollars were borrowed over a 36

On the latest episode of Equity, we discussed why Moonshot AI's Kimi seemed to panic Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

By Suvankar Chakraborty | Principal Engineer — IAM, Modern Workplace Management & IT Operations The Collaboration Platform That Became a Governance Nightmare Microsoft Teams was deployed at extraordinary speed across the enterprise world. In most organisations I know, the deployment timeline went something like this: March 2020, global pandemic, remote work mandate, Teams switched on, everyone told to use it, governance deferred because there was no time. Five years later, the governance that was deferred in 2020 has still not been implemented in most of those environments. The result is predictable and consistent across industries: Teams sprawl at industrial scale. Hundreds of Teams that nobody owns. Channels for projects that ended three years ago. Guest users from partnerships that dissolved. Sensitive conversations in channels that include contractors who should not have visibility. Files shared in Teams chat — bypassing SharePoint governance entirely — on devices with no management policy. Meeting recordings stored in OneDrive folders that anyone with a link can access. Bot integrations that have permissions to read your Teams messages and access your calendar, approved by a user who clicked through an OAuth consent screen without reading it. In 13+ years of enterprise IAM and IT operations work, Teams governance has become one of the most consistently mismanaged areas of Microsoft 365. Not because it is technically difficult — the controls Microsoft provides are comprehensive. But because Teams sits at the intersection of IT, security, compliance, and the organisational culture of collaboration, and that intersection is where governance programmes go to die. This article is about why enterprises get Teams governance wrong, and what getting it right actually looks like — in specific, actionable, implementable terms. Why Teams Is a Governance Problem Unlike Any Other M365 Workload To understand the governance challenge, you need to understand what Microsoft Team

Nota: ✋ This post was originally published on my blog wiki-cloud.co Introduction Artificial intelligence is evolving at an unprecedented pace and is transforming how people and businesses interact with technology. Over the past few years, much of the focus has been on generative AI models, which can create text, images, code, audio, and other types of content from natural language instructions. These capabilities have marked a significant and transformative shift in how we perform many tasks, allowing AI to move from a specialized technology to an accessible tool for millions of users. However, we are entering a new stage. Artificial intelligence models are no longer limited to simply answering questions or generating content. They can now be autonomous, understand objectives, analyze context, decide what steps to take, use tools, consult different sources of information, connect with APIs, execute actions, and collaborate with other specialized agents to complete more complex tasks. This evolution is giving rise to what is known as agentic artificial intelligence, an approach in which AI systems can act with a greater level of autonomy and actively participate in business, technical, and operational processes. Instead of simply offering a recommendation, an agent can search for information, validate data, coordinate different activities, and execute a sequence of actions aimed at achieving a specific goal. Within this new scenario appears Google Agent Development Kit , also known as Google ADK , is an open-source framework developed and designed by Google to facilitate the creation, evaluation, and deployment of artificial intelligence agents. ADK provides developers with a structure for defining agent behavior, connecting them to language models and external tools, managing sessions and memory, coordinating multi-agent systems, and evaluating their performance before deploying them to production. Thanks to this code-based approach, Google ADK allows you to build e

If you want to tweak your Android Auto settings, the software has a developer menu you can check out.

Part 1 documented the recurring snapback in practice. This note asks a narrower question: what does the observed pattern support, what remains a working hypothesis, and what changes should follow in the project? Status: Bounded project conclusion. This note separates observed behaviour, working hypothesis, and practical consequence. It is based on current project documents and interactions; it is not external validation or a universal claim about AI systems. What the evidence supports 1. The project already contains a stable relational model The working model is not generic “AI assistance.” It separates reasoning surfaces, uses bounded comparisons, permits two-way cognitive pressure, and keeps final acceptance authority with the human. Reciprocal cognitive contribution, asymmetrical governing authority. 2. Concrete project work preserves the structure better than public abstraction At the concrete level, instructions such as: Review this proposal against that architecture. preserve the distinction between the object being reviewed, the surface applying pressure, the evidence, and the authority that may accept a change. When the same structure was compressed into general prose, generated explanations repeatedly returned to a simpler one-way model of either human control or transferred AI authority. That is an observed pattern in this development process. 3. Public explanation is a separate reasoning surface A README, article, summary, or portfolio page is a projection of the model, not the model itself. It cannot be assumed to reproduce the internal structure faithfully merely because that structure is present in context. The explanation must be reviewed against the model it represents: Does this explanation preserve the actual authority, review, evidence, and state-transition structure? 4. Annoyance was useful boundary data The irritation indicated that the generic rendering was no longer merely an imperfect exploration. It was colliding with an internal frame that

Hey Techie 🌸 Before I continue my go series, I wanted to share a personal project that I'll be working on alongside my learning. What is IRIS? IRIS is an adaptive accessibility companion meant to help people with invisible disabilities navigate the media in ways preferable to them. Most websites and systems are one-size-fits-all and do not take user preferences into account in depth. The assumption is that every user views technology the same way, and that's not true at all. This is where IRIS shines her glory. The goal of creating IRIS is that it adapts to the user's needs rather than the user adapting to it. She will be able to personalise things like text-to-speech, colour themes, layouts, and other accessibility features based on their needs. As I continue learning Go and backend development, I'll also be sharing the progress of building IRIS, from designing the database and API to developing the backend and, eventually, the complete application. I look forward to sharing my progress and the challenges I will face and having discussions with you, my dear techie friends 🌸

I went looking for a simple answer to a simple question: How do you give an agent access to Google Calendar? Not a demo. Not a screenshot. A real agent, running unattended, with enough access to be useful and enough guardrails that it won’t turn into a security incident. While researching OpenClaw setups, I found a thread on r/openclaw where someone asked what looked like a tiny question: what do I need to add Google Calendar to OpenClaw? One reply said: "Look into gog cli." That answer is way more revealing than it looks. Because the hard part usually isn’t Google Calendar itself. The hard part is everything hidden behind the phrase "connect Google" . And if you’re building agents in n8n, Make, Zapier, OpenClaw, or a custom OpenAI-compatible loop, auth is only half the problem anyway. Once the workflow runs 24/7, you also need to think about retries, quota limits, caching, and how many LLM calls the thing is quietly making in the background. That’s where a lot of teams hit the same wall: the integration works, but the operational shape of it is bad. Security is fuzzy. Request volume is noisy. And AI costs get weird fast if every poll and retry triggers more model calls. The demo version is lying to you If you’ve used something like n8n Cloud, you’ve seen the polished version: Click Google Calendar Sign in Approve access Done That flow is real inside a managed product. But the minute you leave the managed garden — self-hosted n8n, OpenClaw, a custom MCP server, a Python worker on Ubuntu, or your own app using the OpenAI SDK against an OpenAI-compatible endpoint — you inherit the boring parts. Now "connect Google" actually means: create a Google Cloud project configure the OAuth consent screen choose the right OAuth client type enable the Google Calendar API pick the right scopes store credentials safely handle refresh tokens deal with quota errors later That’s not setup trivia. That’s infrastructure. One user in that same OpenClaw discussion realized it immediately: