标签：#p

The GitHub Advisory Database is processing more vulnerability reports than ever before. Here's what's driving the surge, how we're responding, and how the community can help. The post Inside the Advisory Database and what happens when vulnerability volume breaks records appeared first on The GitHub Blog .

The Supreme Court's decision to limit geofence warrants is a win for privacy advocates, who called their use unconstitutional but sought an outright ban.

Interesting research on a new class of weak RSA keys: keys with lots of zeros. It turns out that these keys are out in the wild. The badkeys project is an open-source service that checks public keys for known vulnerabilities. While developing this tool, Hanno collected a massive number of real-world keys from public sources, including Certificate Transparency logs, internet-wide TLS and SSH scans, PGP keys, and many others. By searching this dataset for unexpectedly sparse RSA moduli, we uncovered a large number of keys in the wild with the patterns in Figure 1...

WhatsApp is launching usernames later this year, but you can reserve yours starting this week.

Even if you only use WhatsApp sometimes, you might want to snag your username now to stop giving out your phone number.

WhatsApp username can be between 3 to 35 characters.

WhatsApp username can be between 3 to 40 characters length

A new proposal would ban the sale of Americans' health and location information to data brokers - including information people reveal to an AI chatbot like ChatGPT or Claude. In the coming weeks, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Representative Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA) are planning to debut a new version of the Health and Location […]

Dbrand announced Monday that it's refunding everyone who bought its Steam Machine Companion Cube, which it said it made "without a license from Valve." Dbrand announced the Portal-themed Steam Machine accessory in November and took preorders for it last Monday. But a few days later, the product had disappeared from the company's website and the […]

Most developers expect to go through multiple interview rounds, coding assessments, or take-home assignments before getting hired. That wasn't my experience. I ended up working with the YouTuber I had admired for years without an interview, without an exam, and without even sending a resume. Here's how it happened. It Started Long Before the Opportunity I started freelancing when I was in Class 9. At first, it wasn't about building a career. I simply enjoyed creating websites and wanted to gain experience while earning some money. Over the years, I worked with different clients, solved different problems, and learned something from every project. Those freelance gigs taught me much more than writing code—they taught me how to communicate with clients, deliver on time, and take ownership of my work. The Opportunity A few months ago, one of my favorite YouTubers posted in his WhatsApp community that he was looking for someone to build a website. I happened to be a member of that group. As soon as I saw the message, I reached out and told him I could build it. Instead of spending time wondering whether I was "good enough," I decided to let my work answer that question. Building It in Under 24 Hours Once I received the project, I focused entirely on delivering it as quickly as possible without compromising quality. I completed the website in less than 24 hours. After reviewing it, he requested a few modifications. I implemented them immediately and delivered the updated version. At that point, I assumed the project was finished. The Unexpected Offer A few days later, he contacted me again. He had another web application that had been stuck because a previous developer couldn't complete it. He asked if I could take over. That conversation eventually turned into a job offer. No coding interview. No aptitude test. No technical assessment. Just trust built through delivering one project well. What I Learned Looking back, I don't think I got the job because I replied quickly

Every Sanity marketing site ends up with a page builder. An array of sections, an insert menu, a render loop that maps block._type to a component. You've built it. I've built it. We've all built the same thing. And every one of them ships with the same bug. You add a new section. You wire it into the schema. You add a renderer. You add a component. You add the type. And then — because there are five places to touch and you're a human — you forget one. The section renders blank in production. Or it never shows up in the insert menu. Or it fetches no fields because you missed the GROQ projection, so it renders as nothing at all. No error. No red. Just a hole on the page where a section should be. The annoying part isn't the bug. It's that you'll hit it again on the next project, in exactly the same way, because you rewrote the whole thing from scratch — again. The section tax Here's what "add a section" actually costs in a typical Sanity + Next.js page builder: Schema — a new *Section object type, registered in your schema index. GROQ — a new conditional in the page-builder projection so the block's fields actually come down. Component — the React component that renders it. Renderer map — an entry mapping _type → component. Types — the block variant in whatever union your frontend renders. Miss #2 and the block arrives empty. Miss #4 and it silently skips. Miss #5 and TypeScript shrugs because your union is hand-maintained and now lies. Three different failure modes, all of them quiet, all of them "works on my machine until it doesn't." Now look at those five places and ask: which of them is actually unique to your site? The component is. It's welded to your design system — your spacing, your tokens, your brand. Nobody can reuse it and nobody should. The other four are plumbing . "Look up _type in a map, call the renderer, keep the map in sync with the schema and the query." That code is byte-for-byte the same idea on every project you've ever built. So why is it livi

Overview Tulisan ini menceritakan pengalaman saya meng-install NixOS di VPS Jetorbit memakai nixos-anywhere , dideploy dari laptop macOS (nix-darwin). Komposisi Laptop (macOS + nix-darwin) : Semua konfigurasi NixOS dibuat di sini, lalu dikirim ke server. VPS Jetorbit (x86_64 Linux) : target deploy. Boot lewat legacy BIOS , dengan IP statis (bukan DHCP). nixos-anywhere : dipakai sekali saja untuk install awal. nixos-rebuild : dipakai untuk update konfigurasi setelah install awal. Catatan Penting : VPS tidak perlu menyimpan file konfigurasi sendiri. Kita edit config di laptop, lalu push ke VPS lewat SSH. Tidak ada apt update , tidak ada config drift, dan kondisi server selalu reproducible dari git. Pre-flight: Cek Sebelum Menyentuh Server Banyak kegagalan install sebenarnya bisa dicegah kalau kita cek tiga hal ini: 1. Mode boot: UEFI atau legacy BIOS? Ini menentukan konfigurasi bootloader. Salah konfigurasi di sini dapat menyebabkan GRUB gagal saan install nanti. Di VPS (SSH ke VPS): [ -d /sys/firmware/efi ] && echo "UEFI" || echo "BIOS" Di Jetorbit secara default adalah BIOS . Artinya konfigurasi GRUB mode legacy BIOS, bukan EFI. 2. Networking: IP, netmask, dan gateway Jetorbit memakai IP statis, bukan DHCP. Kalau konfigurasi NixOS kita set IP maka NixOS akan fallback ke DHCP, dan akan gagal dapat IP, sehingga server jadi tidak bisa diakses sama sekali setelah reboot. Di VPS: ip -4 a # lihat IP + CIDR dan nama interface (misal. ens3) ip route # lihat "default via X.X.X.X", itu gateway-nya Contoh: 2: ens3: ... inet 110.XXX.XXX.XXX/24 brd 110.XXX.XXX.255 scope global ens3 3. SSH Root nixos-anywhere memerlukan akses root ke server untuk bisa melakukan instalasi. Akses ini didapat lewat SSH key, bukan password. Jadi pastikan Di VPS: public key sudah terdaftar di root . Konfigurasi SSH root ini bisa dilakukan saat install OS awal di panel Jetorbit atau dikonfigurasi secara manual di ~/.ssh/authorized_keys . Cara Kerja nixos-anywhere Sebelum menjalankan perintahnya, ada ba

Where AI incidents in legal actually come from, and what infrastructure (not policy) prevents them. Blake Aber · Predicate Ventures · 2026 The policy layer is table stakes. It isn't enough. When Sullivan & Cromwell apologized to a federal bankruptcy judge in April 2026 for AI hallucinations in a court filing, the firm's apology letter said the firm had policies. Safeguards existed. Those safeguards weren't followed. That framing, "the safeguard existed but wasn't followed," is how a policy failure gets described. But something more specific happened: a hallucination was generated, wasn't caught at generation time, wasn't caught at review time, and made it into a document that got filed. That's not a policy problem. It's an infrastructure problem. The distinction matters because it determines what you build next. What policy can and can't do Policy is a promise made before the event. A well-written AI acceptable-use policy says: don't submit output you haven't reviewed; verify citations before they go into a document; a human must approve anything client-facing. This works when the human executing the task has time, attention, and professional accountability in that moment. It fails when one of those is missing: a deadline, a junior practitioner, a late-night run. Policy can't: Verify a citation at the point of generation Flag output that has drifted below a confidence threshold Stop hallucinated text from appearing in a draft before a human ever sees it Detect when the underlying model is behaving differently than it was in testing Policy can: Set the expectation that review must happen Define who bears accountability when it doesn't Create a paper trail after the fact One of those is prevention. The other is compliance. What infrastructure does instead An AI harness layer operates at the point of generation, not at the point of review. This reflects a broader reality that production AI is mostly harness and very little model . For legal work specifically, three com

Why AI programs at PE portfolio companies stall at the same organizational seam, and what to do about it. Blake Aber · Predicate Ventures · 2026 There's a failure mode I've watched play out at enough portfolio companies that I've given it a name: the ownership dyad. It goes like this. The AI program is running. The product manager owns the roadmap (what the AI should do). Engineering owns the deployment (how it does it). Both parties are competent. Both are aligned on the goal. And the AI initiative quietly stalls anyway, usually somewhere between the promising pilot and the production system that was supposed to follow. The mechanism is diffuse accountability at the decision layer. What the dyad looks like in practice In the average portco planning meeting, the PM and the engineering lead sit across from each other. The PM has a change request: "The model is producing summaries that miss the key clause in contracts above a certain length. We should fix this." Engineering hears this and wants to know: is this a prompt change or a model change? Either requires scoping, and scoping requires the PM's input on acceptable behavior. So engineering asks the PM. The PM says "whatever's best technically." Engineering ships a prompt change. The next month, the same issue appears in a different context. The PM brings it back. Neither person is wrong. Neither person is slacking. The problem is structural: there's no single person who can describe (precisely and completely) what the AI should produce, evaluate whether it's producing it correctly, and approve a change to the system without requiring the other party's sign-off. The dyad looks like shared ownership. It functions as diffuse accountability. No one is in charge of the model's behavior. The failure mode at month nine Most portco AI programs that make it through a successful pilot still die quietly around month nine of production. The most common reason is not that the model got worse. It's that the harness around the m

Galfus Script has reached its first MVP milestone. Galfus is an experimental programming language written in Rust, designed around a typed VM-first execution model, compact .gfb artifacts, deterministic module/workspace resolution, and an ownership model based on anchors, edges, and weak observers. The MVP goal was not to build a full ecosystem yet. The goal was to prove the complete local execution pipeline: txt .gfs source -> lexer and parser -> resolver -> type checker and semantic analyzer -> ownership check -> MIR lowering -> bytecode emitter -> Galfus Module Image -> .gfb serialization -> VM interpreter execution https://github.com/vulppi-dev/galfus-script/discussions/10

[v0.3.0] - 2026-06-29 🚀 Added Checkpoint Mechanism — ReActCore introduces three checkpoints during streaming: content_ended (after text content), before_tool_calls (before tool calls), and after_tool_calls (after tool calls), enabling precise interception and state synchronization of the execution flow. Message Queue System — Added a new MessageQueue class in run.py , supporting async enqueue, drain, and remove operations. Users can now queue messages while the LLM is running; queued messages are sent automatically after the current task completes. The frontend introduces a QueueBar component to display queued messages, with CSS spinning animation, single-line ellipsis, and hover-to-delete functionality. Queue Message Merging — MessageQueue.drain_all() now merges consecutive messages with the same name into a single message, preventing fragmented user input when multiple queue entries share the same sender. Queue WebSocket Events — The execution event protocol introduces three new event types: message_queued , queue_drained , and queue_returned ( useRunWebSocket.ts ). The frontend processes queue state updates in real time. Stop & Queue Integration — When the user clicks Stop, pending queued messages are returned to the input box via queue_returned . Checkpoint stops cleanly clear the queue and automatically start the next message. System Notification Messages — Introduced the SystemMessage type (with notification role) to separate error messages from assistant content. Errors are now rendered as independent notification bubbles, no longer embedded within assistant message cards. tiktoken Real-Time Token Estimation — ReActCore initializes a tiktoken encoder on startup for real-time token counting during streaming. Unknown models fall back to o200k_base . 🔧 Improved Custom Model Name Auto-Complete — The model name field in ModelManager has been upgraded from Select to AutoComplete , allowing users to type custom model names not in the predefined list. Message Block T

Qwen's new image paper is easy to read as another benchmark bump. Qwen-Image-2.0-RL takes the existing Qwen-Image-2.0 model, runs a reinforcement-learning pass on top, and reports better scores: 57.84 on Qwen-Image-Bench, up 2.61 points from the base model. Its text-to-image arena Elo moves from 1115 to 1193. Its image-editing arena Elo moves from 1256 to 1349. Those are the headline numbers. They are not the useful part. The useful part is the training story underneath them. The paper is a good reminder that "just optimize the reward" is a dangerously incomplete sentence, especially when the model is not an LLM and the output space is a whole image. The model got better, but not by one simple trick Qwen-Image-2.0-RL is a post-training pipeline for a diffusion image model. In plain English: the base model already knows how to generate and edit images. The RL stage tries to steer it toward outputs humans prefer, including better prompt following, better aesthetics, better portrait fidelity, and more reliable editing. The team builds task-specific reward models. For text-to-image, those rewards cover alignment, aesthetics, and portrait quality. For editing, they cover instruction following and face identity preservation. Then they train with a GRPO-style setup adapted for flow-matching diffusion models. If you only squint at that, it sounds like the same broad recipe people use for language models: generate candidates, score them, push the model toward the better ones. The paper is more interesting because it shows how fragile that story becomes once you touch the actual training loop. The CFG detail is the first real lesson Classifier-free guidance, usually shortened to CFG, is one of those diffusion-model knobs that users mostly experience as "make the image follow the prompt harder." Under the hood, it changes how the model samples. The Qwen team tested three ways to use it during RL. Using CFG during both rollout and training made the images collapse into incohere

"We believe this will be one of the most transformative deals in the space industry."

Want to go back to your ex... AI assistant? We don't blame you. Take these steps to get Google Assistant back after your fling with Gemini.

"Where does the threshold live that an action necessitates some proportional reaction?"