今日已更新 294 条资讯 | 累计 31122 条内容
关于我们

标签：#p

找到 12882 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

The Machines Got a Wallet: x402 Goes Live as Stablecoins Hit $300 Billion

How a dormant HTTP status code and a $500 billion valuation fight tell the same story: money is finally becoming native to the internet. For three decades, the HTTP specification carried a status code that did nothing. Code 402 — "Payment Required" — was reserved in the 1990s for a future in which the web would have money built in. That future never arrived. Payments were bolted on instead: card forms, PayPal buttons, checkout redirects, subscription walls. On July 14, 2026, that changed formally. The Linux Foundation announced the operational launch of the x402 Foundation , the open-governance body that now stewards the x402 protocol — the standard, contributed by Coinbase, that turns HTTP 402 into a live payment negotiation layer. Forty organizations have joined. The premier member list reads like a peace treaty between industries that spent a decade fighting each other: Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Stripe, Adyen, Fiserv, Google, AWS, Shopify, Coinbase, Circle, Cloudflare, Ripple, MoonPay , plus the Solana, Stellar, and Monad foundations. When card networks, cloud providers, and crypto issuers all sign the same governance charter, something structural is happening. That something is AI agents — and the question of how they pay for things. From press release to protocol The x402 story started in September 2025, when Coinbase and Cloudflare announced their intent to create a foundation around a simple idea: if AI agents are going to consume APIs, data, compute, and content autonomously, they need a payment method that works the way machines work — inside the HTTP request itself, with no account signup, no card form, and no human in the loop. The mechanics are deliberately boring. A client, typically an AI agent, requests a paid resource. The server responds with status 402 and a machine-readable header describing what it wants: the amount, the asset (usually a stablecoin like USDC), the network, and the payment scheme. The agent signs a payment authorization,

2026-07-27 原文 →
AI 资讯

Claude Code, Bun and TypeScript

Why Claude Code runs on Bun: runtime tradeoffs in TypeScript CLI tooling Anthropic recently shipped Claude Code — their agentic CLI coding assistant — on Bun instead of Node.js. For most product announcements, the runtime choice would be a footnote. Here it's worth unpacking, because the tradeoffs Anthropic navigated are exactly the ones you hit when building or evaluating TypeScript-heavy developer tooling: startup latency, bundling strategy, native module compatibility, and what "good enough" dependency management actually looks like in 2025. This isn't a Bun vs. Node benchmarking post. It's an examination of why the decision makes sense for a CLI tool specifically, what it signals about the broader ecosystem, and where the tradeoffs still bite you. Why runtime choice matters more for CLIs than for servers For a long-running server process, Node.js startup cost of 50–150ms is irrelevant — you pay it once. For a CLI invoked dozens of times per development session, cold-start latency is a first-class UX concern. Bun's startup time is consistently in the 5–15ms range for a simple script. Node.js lands closer to 50–80ms before your first line of application code runs. That delta is imperceptible in a single invocation. Run a CLI 30 times in a session and you've saved a couple of seconds — more importantly, you've removed the subjective sense of lag that makes a tool feel heavy. This is the same reason Deno has gained traction in scripting contexts despite losing the server-side battle to Node. Fast startup is a feature, and for AI-assisted tooling where the human is waiting in a tight feedback loop, it matters. Bun's bundler as a distribution primitive Bun ships a first-party bundler. For a CLI, this is significant. The standard Node.js distribution story for a TypeScript CLI involves: Compile TypeScript with tsc or esbuild Bundle with esbuild or rollup to collapse the dependency graph Either ship node_modules (large, fragile) or use a tool like pkg or nexe to produce

2026-07-27 原文 →
AI 资讯

Legged Arbitrage on Polymarket: Buying Cheap Now, Hedging Later

Not every arb opportunity is simultaneous. My bot uses a “legged” approach: it buys one side when it’s heavily underpriced, then waits for market sentiment to shift and buys the other side later for a total cost under $1.00. This strategy shines in volatile non-crypto markets (elections, sports playoffs, news-driven events). Careful inventory and timing controls turned it into a consistent contributor to the bot’s $130k+ track record. The sample source is in https://github.com/cryptomoonday/polymarket-arbitrage-bot

2026-07-27 原文 →
AI 资讯

I needed Markdown JSON in four pipelines, so I shipped one endpoint that does it once

The same parser, four times Over the last year I kept running into the same shape of problem: A docs site generator that wanted Markdown chapters turned into navigation JSON. A RAG ingestion script where each Markdown file needed to become a list of text chunks plus its frontmatter metadata. An n8n flow that took Markdown emails and extracted only the tasklists. A static-site backend that accepted user Markdown and needed to validate structure before persisting. Each one is small on its own. But every time I reached for a different library — remark here, gray-matter there, marked once, a hand-rolled regex once too many — and every time one of them broke on the same edge cases: Nested GFM tasklists where the checked state was silently lost YAML frontmatter that included quoted booleans (parsed as strings, not booleans) Tables whose headers contained spaces (regex parsers treated them as one key) Code blocks containing Markdown — re-parsed as Markdown instead of fenced code So I built one endpoint that does it once, properly. What it returns POST /v1/parse takes a Markdown body ( text/markdown ) or a JSON envelope ( application/json ) and returns one stable JSON shape: { "success" : true , "data" : { "title" : "Project Alpha" , "frontmatter" : { "title" : "Project Alpha" , "status" : "shipping" }, "headings" : [ { "level" : 1 , "text" : "Project Alpha" , "id" : "project-alpha" } ], "sections" : [ { "heading" : { ... }, "children" : [ ... ], "content" : [ ... ] } ], "lists" : [ { "ordered" : false , "items" : [ "ship MVP" , "write README" ] } ], "tasklists" : [ { "items" : [ { "text" : "ship MVP" , "checked" : true } ] } ], "tables" : [ { "headers" : [ "Module" , "Status" ], "rows" : [{ "Module" : "API" , "Status" : "Done" }] } ], "codeBlocks" :[ { "lang" : "js" , "value" : "..." } ], "links" : [ { "text" : "..." , "url" : "https://..." } ], "paragraphs" :[ "..." ], "ast" : null } } The sections tree is the part I care most about. It's not just a flat list of headings

2026-07-27 原文 →
← 上一页 下一页 →