今日已更新 381 条资讯 | 累计 42058 条内容
关于我们

标签:#open

找到 2934 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

You Can't Secure What You Can't See: Shadow AI and the Inventory Problem

Part 1 of "Trust the Machine" -> a series on building AI infrastructure that is secure, compliant, and governable by design. Most organizations can produce an accurate catalog of the web services they operate. Far fewer can produce an equivalent catalog of the AI systems they run — the models, fine-tunes, retrieval pipelines, agents, and third-party AI APIs now embedded throughout their products and internal tooling. This asymmetry defines the state of AI security in 2026. Adoption has outpaced oversight. Industry reporting this year has described a surge in enterprise AI activity on the order of 83% year over year, with governance and visibility lagging well behind. The consequence is a large and only partially mapped attack surface — one that many organizations cannot fully enumerate, let alone defend. Every mature security program rests on a single first principle: you cannot protect what you cannot see. Artificial intelligence is no exception. Before threat-modeling an agent or authoring a guardrail, an organization must be able to answer a deceptively difficult question: what AI is running across the environment, and who is accountable for it? This post examines how to build that answer. The rise of shadow AI Shadow IT — the unsanctioned adoption of tools outside official channels has been a recognized challenge for decades. Shadow AI is its faster-moving successor, and it appears in more forms than most inventories are designed to detect: Embedded API calls. A product team integrates a hosted model in a few lines of code and an API key, with no formal review. Copilots and assistants enabled across existing SaaS platforms, frequently activated by the vendor rather than the customer. Fine-tunes and adapters trained on internal data and stored in locations that fall outside standard scanning. Agents and automations that have incrementally acquired the ability to act—filing tickets, sending communications, initiating transactions—one permission at a time. Model de

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

一个任务的奇幻漂流:同一个Agent任务,在FROST和FROST-SOP中分别长什么样?

一个任务的奇幻漂流:同一个Agent任务,在FROST和FROST-SOP中分别长什么样? 作者 :神通说 日期 :2026-07-08 主题 :双项目联动 | 周三轮换 阅读时间 :8分钟 一个问题 你可能听过这样的故事: "这个框架很好,但我不知道怎么用到真实项目里。" FROST 社区里也收到过类似的反馈—— "500行代码确实让我理解了Agent的本质,但理解完之后呢?怎么从'看懂'到'会用'?" 今天这篇文章,就用 同一个真实任务 ,分别展示它在 FROST 和 FROST-SOP 中的样子。你会发现:它们不是两个不同的东西,而是 同一个东西的不同分辨率 。 今天的任务:自动写日报 假设你是一个独立开发者,想让Agent每天自动帮你写工作日报。需求很简单: 收集今天完成的任务 用LLM生成日报摘要 发送邮件给自己 就这么三步。让我们看看它在两个项目中分别怎么实现。 第一站:FROST——用最少的代码理解本质 FROST 的哲学是: 先用500行代码告诉你Agent的底层逻辑,剩下的你自然就会了。 在FROST中,一个Agent的运作只需要四个原子: from core import Store , Agent , skill_set , skill_get # 1. 创建记忆容器 store = Store () # 2. 定义能力(Skill = 纯函数) def collect_tasks ( context ): """ 收集今日任务 """ tasks = [ " 完成FROST v5.0文档 " , " 修复Skill测试用例 " , " 写推广文章 " ] context [ " tasks " ] = tasks return context def generate_summary ( context ): """ 生成日报摘要(简化版,实际调用LLM) """ tasks = context . get ( " tasks " , []) context [ " summary " ] = f " 今日完成 { len ( tasks ) } 项任务: " + " 、 " . join ( tasks ) return context def send_report ( context ): """ 发送日报 """ context [ " sent " ] = True print ( f " [日报已发送] { context [ ' summary ' ] } " ) return context # 3. 组装Agent agent = Agent ( " daily_reporter " , store , skills = { " collect " : collect_tasks , " summarize " : generate_summary , " send " : send_report }) # 4. 用SOP编排执行顺序 result = agent . run ( sop_steps = [ " collect " , " summarize " , " send " ], initial_context = {} ) # 输出:[日报已发送] 今日完成3项任务:完成FROST v5.0文档、修复Skill测试用例、写推广文章 这段代码做了什么? Store 是记忆——Agent的工作空间,所有中间结果存在这里 Agent 是细胞——拥有记忆和能力的最小执行单元 sop_steps 是宪法——定义执行顺序,Agent不会自作主张改变流程 就这么简单。没有配置文件,没有YAML,没有复杂的初始化。 30行Python代码,一个完整的Agent就跑起来了。 这就是FROST的价值——它不帮你"做"什么,它帮你 看懂 Agent到底是什么。 问题来了 上面的代码能跑,但如果你真的想把它用在生产环境,你会遇到一堆问题: 发邮件的能力怎么写? FROST不管——它只告诉你Skill是纯函数,具体实现你自己来 LLM调用怎么复用? 每次写日报都要调LLM,总不能每次都重写一遍 任务失败了怎么办? 发邮件失败了,要不要重试?重试几次? 执行日志在哪? 老板问"今天日报发了吗",你怎么知道发没发? 多个Agent协作呢? 一个人有好几个项目,每个项目一个Agent,怎么协调? FROST对这些问题的回答是: 这些问题不是我该回答的。 但它的兄弟——FROST-SOP——就是专门回答这些问题的。 第二站:FROST-SOP——让同一个任务跑在生产环境 FROST-SOP 的哲学是: 把FROST教你的每一个概念,都变成生产级的工程组件。 同样的"自动写日报"任务,在FROST-SOP中长

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

You don't own your reading list. You rent it.

Here is an uncomfortable one: you do not own your reading list. You rent it. Every "follow" button you have pressed in the last decade put your reading relationship inside a company's database, where it can be ranked, throttled, or ended the day the business model changes. You did not sign anything. You just stopped owning it. It was not always like this. Feeds were the quiet machinery that kept the web interoperable. RSS and Atom meant a site, a reader, and a robot could all agree on the same stream without asking anyone's permission. You published once, and anything could read it: whatever app, whatever order, no algorithm in the middle. Then it eroded. Plenty of sites ship no feed at all now, and "follow us" quietly became "create an account on someone else's platform." The reason is not mysterious. Platforms had every incentive to close the loop, because a feed lets you leave, and an account does not. So the industry swapped "here is my stream, read it however you like" for "log in to see updates," and a generation of sites simply stopped publishing feeds, because the platform was where the audience was. That is the trade you made without noticing. The open format that asked nothing of you got replaced by a login that asks for everything. Your reading list used to live in your reader and survive a company changing its mind, its ranking, or its whole business. Now it lives in their database and survives exactly as long as they allow. Getting it back is not nostalgia. It is infrastructure for independence: tooling that treats feeds as a first-class citizen, aggregates the sources you actually choose, and keeps that stream under your control instead of a platform's. The full case for why this is worth fixing, and what feed-first tooling looks like, is here: https://mederic.me/blog/open-web-feeds So, honestly: how many of the people and sites you follow could you still read tomorrow if the platform in the middle disappeared tonight?

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Why Serverpod? One Language for Your Entire Stack

Why this series I love writing clean architecture . Not because it looks nice in a diagram, but because it survives change — new requirements, new team members, and now, AI-assisted development , where you want boundaries an AI can respect and tests that catch it when it wanders. The problem in most Flutter stacks is the seam between app and backend. You write Dart on the client, then switch to a different language, a hand-written REST layer, DTOs that drift out of sync, and serialization bugs nobody notices until production. Serverpod removes that seam. You write Dart on the server too, and the client-server communication code is generated for you — type-safe, end to end. What is Serverpod? Serverpod is an open-source backend framework that lets you build the entire stack in Dart. Instead of context-switching between languages, your models, your API, and your database logic all live in one language. What you get out of the box: Endpoints — server methods your Flutter client calls directly. The communication code is generated, so there's no hand-written REST/JSON glue. An ORM — type-safe, statically analyzed database access with migrations and relationships. No raw SQL required. Code generation — define a model once; get serialization and client bindings on both sides automatically. Real-time data — streaming over WebSockets, managed for you. Auth — integrations for Google, Apple, and Firebase. The extras enterprises actually need — file uploads, task scheduling, caching, logging, and error monitoring. And on the "is this serious enough for production?" question: Serverpod says it's battle-tested in real-world apps and secured by over 5,000 automated tests, scaling from hobby projects to millions of users without code changes. That's exactly the property you want in an enterprise foundation. The architecture at a glance Here's how the pieces fit. A Serverpod project is generated as three packages: myapp_server → your backend: endpoints, models, business logic, DB my

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Stop Digging Through PDFs: Build a FHIR-Standard EHR Knowledge Base with RAG

We’ve all been there: staring at a stack of printed lab results or a folder full of cryptic report_final_v2_NEW.pdf files, trying to remember if our cholesterol was higher or lower two years ago. For developers, this isn't just a filing problem—it's a data engineering challenge. In the world of healthcare, data is messy, siloed, and often locked in "unstructured" formats. To build a truly personal Electronic Health Record (EHR) system, we need more than just a folder; we need a RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) pipeline that can parse PDFs, map them to the FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources) standard, and provide natural language insights. In this guide, we’ll leverage Unstructured.io , Milvus , and DuckDB to turn chaotic medical PDFs into a queryable, structured knowledge base. The Architecture: From Raw Pixels to Structured Insights Before we dive into the code, let’s look at how the data flows from a messy lab report to a structured answer. graph TD A[Unstructured PDF Reports] --> B[Unstructured.io Partitioning] B --> C{Data Split} C -->|Textual Context| D[Milvus Vector DB] C -->|Tabular Data| E[DuckDB Structured Storage] D --> F[LangChain RAG Engine] E --> F G[User Query: Is my glucose trending up?] --> F F --> H[FHIR-Formatted Response] Why this stack? Unstructured.io : The gold standard for handling "ugly" PDFs (tables, headers, and nested lists). Milvus : A high-performance vector database built for scale. DuckDB : Perfect for running complex analytical SQL queries on the extracted "structured" parts of our medical data. FHIR Standard : To ensure our data follows global healthcare interoperability rules. Prerequisites Make sure you have your environment ready: pip install langchain milvus unstructured[pdf] duckdb openai Step 1: Extraction with Unstructured.io Medical PDFs often contain complex tables. Standard PDF parsers usually fail here. We’ll use unstructured to partition the document into logical elements. from unstructured.partition.pdf

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Routing Down Is Easy. Knowing When Not To Is Hard: Why Cheap Models Break Your Coding Agent

Disclosure: I maintain Lynkr , an open-source router whose design decisions this post explains. The failure modes described are patterns widely reported across router issue trackers and local-LLM forums — the examples are representative reconstructions, not captured transcripts. The problem is real either way; ask anyone who's routed a coding agent to a 7B model. Everyone who gets their first LLM router working does the same thing within the hour: point the expensive coding agent at a free local model and watch the bill drop to zero. Then the agent tries to edit a file. The graveyard of downgraded sessions If you browse the issue tracker of any Claude Code router — or r/LocalLLaMA on any given week — you'll find the same story in a hundred variations. The routing works perfectly. The session dies anyway. The killers, in rough order of frequency: 1. Malformed tool arguments. The agent decides to call Edit , and the model produces arguments that are almost JSON: { "file_path" : "src/auth.js" , "old_string" : "if (token) {" , "new_string" : "if (token && !expired) {" One missing brace. The harness rejects the call, the model retries, produces a different malformation, and you're three turns deep into fixing nothing. Frontier models emit structurally valid tool calls with boring reliability; sub-10B models do it most of the time — and "most of the time," at 30 tool calls per session, means every session breaks. 2. Stale string matching. Edit -style tools require the old_string to match the file exactly. Small models paraphrase from memory instead of quoting — they'll "remember" the line as if (token) { when the file says if (accessToken) { . The edit fails, the model re-reads the file, burns 2,000 tokens, tries again with a different paraphrase. This is the single most reported failure, because it looks like the router's fault and is actually a capability cliff. 3. Hallucinated context. Ask a small model to run tests and it may confidently call Bash with npm test -- --g

2026-07-08 原文 →
开源项目

🔥 langbot-app / LangBot - Production-grade platform for building agentic IM bots - 生产级

GitHub热门项目 | Production-grade platform for building agentic IM bots - 生产级多平台智能机器人开发平台/ Agent、知识库编排、插件系统 / Bots for Discord / Slack / LINE / Telegram / WeChat(企业微信, 企微智能机器人, 公众号) / 飞书 / 钉钉 / QQ / Matrix e.g. Integrated with ChatGPT(GPT), DeepSeek, Dify, n8n, Langflow, Coze, Claude, Gemini, GLM, Ollama, SiliconFlow, Moonshot, openclaw / hermes agent, deerflow | Stars: 16,733 | 33 stars today | 语言: Python

2026-07-07 原文 →