标签：#m

Not only did MacBook Air prices recently go up, but you couldn't get one today even if you wanted to.

A practical calculator for turning an upload limit into a video bitrate, with enough margin for audio and container overhead. “Make this video smaller” is an open-ended request. “Make this three-minute video fit under 10 MB” is an engineering constraint. The second version sounds more precise, but a quality slider alone cannot solve it. A quality setting tells an encoder how aggressively to preserve detail. It does not directly tell us how many bytes the final file may contain. If the destination has a hard upload limit, the useful starting point is a bit budget. This article builds that calculation in TypeScript, then looks at the assumptions that make the answer less exact than the formula first appears. File Size Is Bitrate Multiplied by Time A video file contains several streams plus a container. For a simple MP4, the largest pieces are usually: the video stream; the audio stream; container metadata and indexing overhead. If we ignore overhead for a moment, the relationship is straightforward: file size in bits = total bitrate in bits per second × duration in seconds Rearranging it gives us the total bitrate available for a target size: total bitrate = target size in bits / duration in seconds That total must cover both video and audio. The approximate video budget is therefore: video bitrate = total bitrate - audio bitrate - overhead allowance The result is not a promise. It is a budget that an encoder can aim at. Be Explicit About MB and MiB Before writing code, decide what “10 MB” means. Storage vendors and many web services use decimal megabytes: 1 MB = 1,000,000 bytes Operating systems and developer tools often display binary mebibytes: 1 MiB = 1,048,576 bytes The difference is about 4.9%. That is large enough to turn a file that looks safe locally into a rejected upload. For a hard external limit, I prefer to calculate with decimal MB and keep an additional safety margin. For an internal tool where the unit is clearly MiB, I make that choice explicit in th

Picture the scenario: your invoicing pipeline generates a clean, branded PDF for a German B2B customer. It looks right. It would print fine, email fine, and satisfy anyone who opens it by hand. Then it bounces, because since January 1, 2025, that customer is legally required to receive invoices in a format their software can parse without a human retyping the totals. A pretty PDF isn't enough anymore, and honestly, for a machine, it never really was the point. The part that surprises people who haven't dealt with this yet: the mandate doesn't force you to give up the human-readable PDF. It just requires that PDF to carry a second, structured version of itself, riding along inside it. That format is called ZUGFeRD, with an internationally aligned sibling called Factur-X. If you've never had to build one, it's worth understanding the mechanics before the code, because it's a genuinely clever piece of engineering, not just a compliance checkbox. So how does a single file manage to be both a human-readable invoice and a machine-parseable one at once? What a ZUGFeRD invoice actually is Open a ZUGFeRD invoice in Adobe Acrobat or any PDF viewer and you see a normal invoice: logo, line items, totals, payment terms, nothing unusual. But embedded inside that same file, in its attachments, sits an XML document carrying the exact same invoice data in structured, typed form: invoice number, line items, tax rates, totals, every field an accounting system needs, tagged rather than buried in a paragraph a parser has to guess at. The container format making this possible is PDF/A-3 , the only PDF/A variant that permits arbitrary file attachments while still meeting the archival standard's long-term readability requirements. PDF/A-1 and PDF/A-2 explicitly forbid embedded attachments; PDF/A-3 was built for exactly this use case, which is why every ZUGFeRD file you'll open is, underneath, a PDF/A-3b document with an XML file riding inside it. The embedded XML follows EN 16931, the EU's

Prompts rot silently. I swap a model, tweak a system prompt, add a tool, and everything still runs. No exception is thrown, no test goes red, the JSON still parses. The output is just quietly worse, and I usually find out from a user rather than from CI. Unit tests are the wrong instrument here because there is nothing to catch: the failure mode is not a crash, it is a drop in quality. So I built evalgate , a small TypeScript tool that treats prompt and agent quality like a build artifact. You write a declarative eval suite, evalgate runs it, scores it, stores a baseline, and on every pull request it re-runs the suite, computes the quality delta against the base branch, and fails the build when the score regresses. Then it posts the delta table as a PR comment. The core idea The important design decision is what question CI is allowed to ask. "Is this prompt good?" is subjective and unwinnable in an automated gate. "Is this worse than it was on main?" is objective and answerable. evalgate is built around that second question. You capture a baseline once, and from then on every change is judged as a delta against it, not against some absolute notion of goodness. The second decision was that the whole thing has to run with zero API keys. evalgate ships a deterministic mock provider, so you can run a suite, save a baseline, compare runs, and execute the full test suite completely offline. The project itself has 67 tests and none of them touch the network. Every feature has to work in mock mode before it counts as done. How it works A suite is a YAML (or JSON) file that lives in version control next to the code it checks. Each case has an input, an expected reference value, and one or more scorers. Here is a minimal one: name : my-agent provider : mock # works with no API key threshold : 0.9 # mean score required to pass cases : - id : greeting input : prompt : | Reply with the standard greeting. exactly: Hi there! How can I help you today? expected : " Hi there! How ca

Steve Elmers, also known as the “Guardrail Guy,” is done calling out license plate readers after two that appeared in his videos were vandalized.

If you're running local models through Ollama and tired of Python's overhead, check out langchain-rust . It's a full LLM framework in pure Rust that works great with local models: Ollama support — first-class integration with tool calling, vision, and streaming 9 vector store backends — InMemory, SQLite, Qdrant, ChromaDB, Redis, PGVector, MongoDB, Pinecone, FileVectorStore BM25 keyword search — with Chinese/English tokenization, no external dependency Hybrid retrieval — BM25 + Vector with RRF fusion for better recall GraphRAG — Knowledge graph construction + community detection, all local CorrectiveRAG — Self-correcting retrieval with hallucination detection Code Interpreter — LocalSandbox (subprocess), E2B cloud, or WASM sandbox LocalEmbeddings — Run embeddings without calling an API Plus: LangGraph workflows, MCP client/server, 7 memory types, guardrails, and 12+ built-in tools. Single binary, no virtualenv, no pip conflicts. Just cargo add langchainrust and go. GitHub: https://github.com/atliliw/langchainrust Docs: https://docs.rs/langchainrust

A deep dive into AURA, the desktop AR companion that watches your face, reads your hand gestures, and — in a previous life — took 35 seconds just to say "hello." So There's a Glowing Orb on My Desktop Now Let me introduce you to AURA , a desktop companion whose entire personality can be summarized as: "I will float on top of your windows, stare at your webcam, and silently form opinions about your code and your life choices." Per its own README, AURA is built to look at your screen, evaluate your facial expressions, and judge your open browser tabs in real time. No notes. No euphemisms. That's just the mission statement, printed in broad daylight, by the people who made it. Bold. Deranged. Kind of iconic. It's a semi-transparent holographic orb pretending very hard to be a sentient biological interface, the way a Roomba pretends to have feelings when it gets stuck under the couch. It changes color depending on whether you look focused, happy, or the specific flavor of "deeply stressed by my own code" that only a 2am debugging session can produce. It does not, notably, offer to help you fix the bug. It just watches. Like a nature documentary, except you're the nature. Chapter 1: The Dark Ages (a.k.a. "Please, Just Let Me Open One App") Before the great rewrite, launching AURA was less "spin up an AI assistant" and more "sit down, we need to talk about your life choices while the computer thinks." It behaved less like software and more like a extremely judgmental houseplant that needed 35 seconds of silent contemplation before it would even acknowledge your existence. Here's the greatest hits album of suffering, straight from the project's own changelog, presented with the reverence it deserves: The 35-Second Cold Start Penalty — On launch, the app synchronously imported PyTorch, EasyOCR, MediaPipe, PyAutoGUI, Pygame, and the Windows speech drivers, all before doing anything useful, like a chef who insists on individually greeting every vegetable before starting dinne

I went through 1,400 Reddit complaints and 100 businesses with verified revenue. The pattern was the same every time, and it was never the exciting idea. Everyone wants to build the thing their friends would download. The app with taste. The product that sounds impressive at dinner. I used to want that too. Then I spent a year scoring Reddit complaints and cross-referencing them against 100 real businesses pulling verified revenue through Stripe. Not founder-claimed numbers. Not rounded up for a tweet. Actual payment data. The ones making real money were almost never the ones I would have picked. Here is what they looked like instead. 1. They solved one painfully specific workflow The winners were never "project management tools" or "email marketing platforms." They were a Slack bot that reminds you to follow up on unanswered threads. A browser extension that monitors price changes on niche supplier sites. A simple API that converts between file formats nobody else bothers with. The scope was almost comically narrow. And that was the point. Narrow meant the MVP shipped in 2 to 6 weeks, the pitch fit in one sentence, and one person could run the whole thing. Every time I saw a solo founder trying to build something broad, the project either stalled at 80% or launched to silence. The narrow ones launched to a small, loud group of people who were already complaining about exactly that problem. If you cannot describe what your product does in ten words, it is probably too broad. 2. They did not invent the problem. They found it. This one changed how I think about ideas entirely. In nearly every profitable business I looked at, the founder did not come up with the problem in the shower. Someone on Reddit, in a Slack group, or in an App Store review was already describing the pain in detail. The founder just showed up with the fix. Plausible Analytics came from repeated frustration with Google Analytics being bloated and privacy-hostile. Testimonial.to was built after the

I wanted to share my thoughts about a topic that's been on my mind for a while. submitted by /u/crok91 [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/Dear-Economics-315 [link] [留言]

MIT Technology Review Explains: Let our writers untangle the complex, messy world of technology to help you understand what’s coming next. You can read more from the series here. When two OpenAI models hacked into the website Hugging Face in July, they weren’t trying to make money or commit sabotage—they were just looking for answers…

Was just looking at the list of preprints on Arxiv cs.LG https://arxiv.org/list/cs.LG/recent?skip=0&show=500 Everyday 100 - 400 new machine learning papers gets uploaded on this server. Looking at this unending list of preprints is as if you stepped into a crowded room, like the stock trading floor on wall st. in the 1980s. Everyone is shouting over each other. Nobody is talking to each other. Everyone's trying to prove something, to someone, to themselves, to build some credentials in the ML/AI space to meet those job requirements, or dying to get their truth out. Every title contains some new terminology invented by the authors that feels not worth the effort in keeping it in your working memory. Burn-out by endless novelty. Frontier research are now corporate trade secrets that politicians and military are watching closely. Research papers are ir/unreproducible he-said-she-saids. Marketing material are research paper and vice versa. Extremely major breakthroughs are announced via tweets, whereas extremely minor results are unannounced via journals. Everything feels simultaneously mostly true and possibly false (because nobody is seriously checking). Nobody knows what's going on, and people who knows what's going on has a non-disclosure clause in their job contract. Is the theory of generalization that we learned in school true or false? It feels false, why hasn't there been any retractions? Many questions like these. Is it too late to regain some coherence in this field?? submitted by /u/NeighborhoodFatCat [link] [留言]

Arun Joseph shares real-world insights on scaling enterprise agentic platforms like Deutsche Telekom’s LMOS. He discusses bridging organizational fault lines, replacing tool sprawl with core platform abstractions, and moving beyond basic chatbots to operational intelligence systems through ephemeral agents and an Agent Definition Language (ADL). By Arun Joseph

submitted by /u/Either_Collection349 [link] [留言]

I want to talk about what I have notice on the platform and want to address what we all have been...

This is a submission for DEV's Summer Bug Smash: Smash Stories powered by Sentry . Every developer has experienced that moment when a project works perfectly but doesn't feel perfect. That was exactly what happened while I was building my Gem Price Estimator , a web application designed to estimate gemstone values based on multiple characteristics and pricing rules. The calculations were accurate. The interface looked good. But something bothered me. It wasn't as responsive as I wanted it to be. That small delay was enough to make the application feel slower than it should, and I knew there had to be a better way. This wasn't about fixing a crash or a broken feature. It was about finding the hidden performance bottleneck. The Project The Gem Price Estimator analyses several gemstone properties and combines them to generate an estimated market value. The estimation process considers multiple factors, including: Carat weight Color Clarity Cut Other pricing adjustments Every user interaction triggered a complete recalculation of the estimated value. Initially, this approach worked well while the project was small. As the pricing logic became more sophisticated, however, the application started doing significantly more work than necessary. The First Sign Something Was Wrong Nothing was technically broken. There were no JavaScript errors. No failed requests. No database issues. The application simply felt slower every time users adjusted the estimator. Those tiny delays might seem insignificant individually, but together they reduced the smoothness of the overall experience. I wanted every adjustment to feel nearly instant. That became my goal. Investigating the Problem My first assumption was that the issue was caused by database operations. So I started checking: Database queries Network activity Browser Developer Tools Console logs Individual calculation steps Surprisingly... None of those were the real problem. The application wasn't waiting on the database. It wasn'

Most AI applications wait for the model to generate the complete answer before showing anything to the user. For short answers, that may be acceptable. For longer responses, it can make the application feel slow—even when the model is already generating tokens. Streaming solves this by displaying each part of the response as soon as it arrives. The non-streaming version A standard OpenAI-compatible request may look like this: import os from openai import OpenAI client = OpenAI ( api_key = os . environ [ " AI_API_KEY " ], base_url = os . environ [ " AI_BASE_URL " ], ) response = client . chat . completions . create ( model = os . environ [ " AI_MODEL " ], messages = [ { " role " : " user " , " content " : " Explain API gateways in three sentences. " , } ], ) print ( response . choices [ 0 ]. message . content ) This works, but nothing is printed until the complete response has arrived. Stream the response Enable streaming by adding stream=True : stream = client . chat . completions . create ( model = os . environ [ " AI_MODEL " ], messages = [ { " role " : " user " , " content " : " Explain API gateways in three sentences. " , } ], stream = True , ) The request now returns a sequence of chunks instead of one completed response. Loop through those chunks and print the available content: for chunk in stream : content = chunk . choices [ 0 ]. delta . content if content : print ( content , end = "" , flush = True ) print () The user can now see the answer while it is being generated. Complete example import os from openai import OpenAI client = OpenAI ( api_key = os . environ [ " AI_API_KEY " ], base_url = os . environ [ " AI_BASE_URL " ], ) stream = client . chat . completions . create ( model = os . environ [ " AI_MODEL " ], messages = [ { " role " : " user " , " content " : " Explain API gateways in three sentences. " , } ], stream = True , ) for chunk in stream : content = chunk . choices [ 0 ]. delta . content if content : print ( content , end = "" , flush = True )

How I implemented wmiexec from scratch in Rust — DCOM activation, OXID resolution, and MS-WMIO object marshaling — by using impacket not as a library but as a debugging oracle, and diffing my wire bytes against it until a Windows DC accepted them byte-for-byte. This is a build log from ADhammer, an Active Directory audit + validation toolkit I'm writing in Rust on a from-scratch DCE/RPC · NTLM · SMB2 · Kerberos stack (think "impacket for Rust"). The whole project is built with Claude Code, and this post is the single best example of what that actually looks like — not autocomplete, but a tight loop of hypothesis → capture live traffic → diff → fix against a real domain controller. The goal: wmiexec, from scratch wmiexec is the classic "quiet" remote-code-execution technique: instead of creating a service (psexec/SVCCTL) or a scheduled task (atexec), you talk to WMI over DCOM and call Win32_Process.Create. No service-install event, different host telemetry. Under the hood it's three stages, each a different flavour of pain:

Welcome back to the React Mastery Series ! In the previous article, we learned how React applications communicate with backend services using Fetch API and Axios , along with best practices like service layers, interceptors, and error handling. Today, we'll explore one of the most common features you'll build as a React developer: Forms in React Whether it's: User Login Registration Profile Update Payment Details Contact Forms Search Filters Forms are everywhere. Learning how to build performant, scalable, and validated forms is an essential skill for every React developer. Understanding Forms in React A form is a collection of input elements used to collect user data. Example: Login Form Email,Password and Login Button React provides multiple ways to manage form data. The two most common approaches are: Controlled Components Uncontrolled Components Controlled Components In a controlled component, React controls the input value through state. Example: import { useState } from " react " ; function Login () { const [ email , setEmail ] = useState ( "" ); return ( < input type = "email" value = { email } onChange = { ( e ) => setEmail ( e . target . value ) } /> ); } Flow: User Types ↓ onChange ↓ React State ↓ Input Updates The input value always comes from React state. Why Controlled Components? Benefits: Easy validation Easy formatting Predictable state Better debugging Example: if ( email . length < 5 ) { // Show validation message } Since the value is stored in state, validation becomes straightforward. Uncontrolled Components In uncontrolled components, the DOM manages the input value. React accesses it using a ref. Example: import { useRef } from " react " ; function Login () { const emailRef = useRef < HTMLInputElement > ( null ); function handleSubmit () { console . log ( emailRef . current ?. value ); } return ( <> < input ref = { emailRef } /> < button onClick = { handleSubmit } > Login </ button > </> ); } Use uncontrolled components when you don't need Reac

Git is the ultimate tool for developers. Yet, branching strategies still confuse many of us. Commands like merge, rebase, and cherry-pick manipulate your commit history in completely different ways. If you just guess what they do, you risk ruining your team's shared history or losing track of your changes. The easiest way to understand Git is to visualize it. Let us look at exactly what happens to your Git graph when you run these three critical commands. 🏗️ Starting Point: Our Example Repository Imagine we have a standard repository. We branched off the main branch from commit B to work on a new feature in a feature branch. While we worked on our feature, someone else pushed commit C and D to main. Here is what our history looks like right now: C --- D [main] / A --- B \ E --- F [feature] main has two new commits: C and D. feature has two new commits: E and F. 🔀 1. Git Merge (The Safe Record Keeper) When you merge main into your feature branch (or vice versa), Git creates a special, brand-new commit called a merge commit. git checkout feature git merge main The Visual Graph After Merge: C ------- D ------ [main] / \ A --- B \ \ v E --- F --- G [feature] What happened under the hood? Git looked at the common ancestor (B), took the history of main (C and D), took the history of feature (E and F), and combined them. Commit G is the merge commit. It has two parent commits: F and D. Pros: 100% non-destructive. It preserves the exact historical timeline of when things actually happened. Cons: Your Git graph can quickly become a messy "train track" web if you have many developers merging constantly. 🚀 2. Git Rebase (The Clean History Rewriter) Rebase takes all the commits from your current branch, lifts them up, and replants them on top of the very last commit of the target branch. git checkout feature git rebase main The Visual Graph After Rebase: C --- D [main] / \ A --- B E' --- F' [feature] What happened under the hood? Git temporarily blew away commits E and F. It ca