今日已更新 154 条资讯 | 累计 29607 条内容
关于我们

标签:#ha

找到 11225 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

Show HN: Open-weight OCR got so cheap I had to share it

This was not supposed to become a product. When PaddleOCR-VL-1.6 dropped, independent benchmarks put it at the top of document parsing models. I had to try it. I needed a provider, but there simply isn't one ready for production that I would trust. So i set one up myself. I assumed that even after getting it running, serving a vision-language model would be expensive. It turns out the opposite is true. Once I had it running properly, the cost was absurdly low. At proper GPU utilization, the cost

2026-07-25 原文 →
AI 资讯

Decided is not done: taking stock before adding more

The first session ended at post 10. The design did not. I came back to it and, before writing a single new decision, asked the least glamorous question a solo project can ask itself: how far along is this, really, and what would it take to call it ready for someone else to review in depth? The answer was more useful than I expected, because it forced a distinction I had been blurring: a settled mechanism is not a hardened design . The fork: promote now, or hold and harden Composition was already reconciled into the binding docs. Coherence had seventeen recorded decisions covering the whole load-bearing core: binding, determinism, precedence, persona content, gender, explainability, detection, activation, the explicit accessor, and a second entity proving the abstraction generalizes. It was tempting to call that reviewable and promote it too. A: promote coherence into the binding docs now. 17 decisions, self-consistent, composition already went. Looks done. B: hold. The mechanism is settled, but the seams between features are not. Harden first, promote second. I took B. The tell was that I could not yet answer a reviewer's most obvious question, "what happens when a composed child is itself a person," without pointing at an open fork. A design you cannot stress at the seams is decided, not done. What "hardened" actually means The value of taking stock was turning a vague "almost there" into a concrete, finite list. Three passes stand between the current state and an in-depth review: 1. Cross-feature interaction pass. Where correctness bugs hide once two features exist. Composition x coherence is done (next post). Uniqueness, null-probability, and locale remain. 2. Surface-enumeration pass. Collect every public member the design has accumulated into one list to accept or cut. Public surface is locked, so this is the gate that matters most. 3. Consistency re-read. Read all the decisions straight through for contradictions and stale cross-references, the kind that creep

2026-07-25 原文 →