标签：#p

Hey fellow productivity nerds, We’ve all been there: piling 50 hours of tasks into a 40-hour workweek, only to feel completely burnt out and defeated by Thursday. Remember The Milk is fantastic for capturing what needs to be done, but it doesn't inherently tell you if you actually have the time to do it. I got tired of constantly overflowing my schedule, so I spent some time leveraging MilkScript (RTM's automation engine) to build something I’m calling the RTM Agile Coach. It’s completely free and open-source. Basically, it transforms RTM from a passive checklist into an active, capacity-aware project manager. Here is what it actually does behind the scenes: ⏳ Precision Scheduling Engine: You tell it your working hours (e.g., 9 AM - 6 PM, Mon-Fri). It simulates your task list minute-by-minute. If a task hits 6 PM, it automatically carries the remaining hours over to the next working day. 📅 实时战略排期推演 (Schedule) • 预计完工: 2026-06-06 10:06:15 星期六 （注：排期表展示的预计完工是“最坏情况”（Worst Case）：如果你白天完全没时间做这个任务，晚上要搞到几点。） 🟢 [06-02(二) 10:29 - 10:39] 检查* 回复-0.33🍅 (10m) 🟢 [06-02(二) 10:39 - 11:39] 查询 材料？-1.00🍅 (30m) 🟢 [06-02(二) 11:39 - 13:40] 2.2.5-如何 -2.00🍅 (60m) 🟢 [06-02(二) 13:40 - 15:40] 3-2-1-在 更新 -2.00🍅 (60m) 🟢 [06-03(三) 09:00 - 09:05] 3. 验证-0.17🍅 (5m) 🟢 [06-03(三) 09:05 - 09:35] 弄清楚 是什么-1.00🍅 (30m) 🟢 [06-03(三) 09:35 - 09:40] 3. 验证-0.17🍅 (5m) 🟢 [06-03(三) 09:40 - 11:40] 准备 材料-2.00🍅 (60m) 🟢 [06-04(四) 09:00 - 09:05] 3. 验证-0.17🍅 (5m) 🟢 [06-05(五) 09:00 - 09:05] 3. 验证-0.17🍅 (5m) ➖➖➖➖➖➖ 🧨 标准容量耗尽 (转入加班推演) ➖➖➖➖➖➖ 🧨 [06-06(六) 10:00 - 10:06] 3. 验证-0.17🍅 (5m) (加班) ↳ 📉 * 阻塞瓶颈 : 高顺位任务占据加班通道，后续2任务被迫顺延。 🧨 [06-06(六) 10:06 - 10:06] 4.发放 ** (0m) (加班) 🧨 [06-06(六) 10:06 - 10:06] 4.发放**** (0m) (加班) • 目标死线: 2026-06-06 23:59:59 星期六 🌡️ Visual Workload Heatmaps: It generates a literal heatmap inside an RTM note. At a glance, you can see which days are 🟩 (idle/comfortable), 🟧 (saturated), or 🟥 (dangerously overloaded). 🌡️ 每日实时战略负载热力 (Load Heatmap) 🟨 06-02(二): 69% [ 5.2/ 7.5h] 🟢空闲2.3h 🟩 06-03(三): 35% [ 3.2/ 9.0h] 🔒含日

A homelab box that never sleeps runs 8,760 hours a year. So the spec that decides what it costs you is not the one on the box. It is the one nobody prints: how many watts it pulls sitting at the login prompt doing nothing. I kept hitting this while shopping for a Proxmox node, so I put the measured numbers in one place. More on that at the end. First, why the spec sheet lies to you. TDP is a thermal budget, not a power reading TDP is the heat the cooler has to handle at full tilt. It is a design target for the heatsink, not a measurement of what the chip draws, and it says almost nothing about idle. Your homelab box spends 95%+ of its life idle, so the number that runs up the meter is idle wall power, and that number is never on the product page. The arithmetic is unforgiving. One watt running continuously is 8.76 kWh a year. So the gap between a 7 W box and a 35 W box is not 28 watts, it is about 245 kWh a year, every year, for as long as the box is on. Plug in your own rate to get the dollars; the point is the gap compounds. Where TDP actively misleads you A few measured results from the dataset I'll link below, all from third-party wall-meter readings, not vendor claims: The new N100 wave is genuinely low. A Minisforum UN100C measures 5 to 7 W at idle. Beelink, GMKtec and Trigkey N100 boxes land in the 6 to 10 W range. For a Pi-hole, a few containers and some light VMs, this tier is hard to beat on running cost. AMD mini PCs idle far higher than their marketing suggests. A Minisforum UM790 Pro measures 25 to 45 W at idle. A Beelink SER6 Pro lands at 20 to 35 W. These are fast little machines, but if you picked one expecting "small box, small draw," the meter disagrees, and over a year that delta is real money. Newer and higher-TDP is not lower-idle. A Dell OptiPlex 7060 Micro idles just over 18 W on its 65 W-TDP desktop chip. The older 7070 with a six-core part sits around 13 W, and the low-power "T" SKUs lower still. The CPU's TDP class predicted idle better tha

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

I don't identify as a gamer. I occasionally participate in board games or an amateur football match,...

In a post on X, Blue Origin CEO Dave Limp provided an update on the investigation into the New Glenn launchpad explosion.

submitted by /u/patrixxxx [link] [留言]

The dominant production failure mode for LLM agents in 2026 isn't bad reasoning — it's capacity. Here's what the data shows, why nobody demos it, and the capacity-engineering patterns that actually keep agents alive under load.

From furniture and ink to professional printing services, use an Office Depot discount code to maximize your savings on every workspace essential.

Upgrade your sleep setup with the latest Layla promo codes. Save on flippable mattresses, copper-infused pillows, and adjustable bases during the Spring Sale.

Earn more points on skincare purchases when you use our Sephora coupon.

Shop the latest beauty trends and save big using an Ulta promo code for beauty tech, makeup, and more.

Explore Chewy coupon codes for $30 off, $20 off your first order $49, 50% off pet food, and more June 2026 discounts.

Whether you're looking for a Whoop free trial, student discount, or military savings, our guide to Whoop promo codes will help you maximize your membership benefits. Stay on top of your fitness goals for less.

Save on today’s top Skullcandy Promo Codes for Crusher Evo headphones, 36% off Crusher ANC 2 noise-canceling headphones, and more with amazing deals.

Whether you are heading to a sold-out concert or a championship game, use a Vivid Seats discount code to secure your seats for less this June.

submitted by /u/mttd [link] [留言]

From the motivation-pattern-log — a public, dated, falsifiable prediction log for AI-era cybersecurity attack patterns grounded in motivation analysis. Predictions are scored quarterly against stated falsifiers. PREDICTION-20260601-0008 Created: 2026-06-01 Pattern: boredom-with-asymmetric-leverage Substrate: Open-source package registries (npm, PyPI, Crates.io, Packagist) and GitHub Actions CI/CD workflow injection Leading indicator observed: Four distinct, concurrent, cross-registry supply chain campaigns (TrapDoor: 34 packages across npm/PyPI/Crates.io; Megalodon: 5,718 automated commits to 5,561 GitHub repos in six hours; Packagist compromise of 8 packages; Laravel-Lang PHP credential stealer) appeared within a 72-hour window in 2026-W22, all exhibiting automation signatures — throwaway publisher accounts, wave publishing, base64-encoded shell payloads, off-the-shelf delivery via GitHub Releases — consistent with toolkit operation rather than bespoke tradecraft. npm's reactive rollout of 2FA-gated publishing signals registry operators recognizing volume pressure. Predicted window: 2026-Q3 through 2027-Q1 Predicted shape: Automated, low-sophistication credential-stealing and backdoor-planting campaigns against npm, PyPI, Crates.io, and Packagist will continue to increase in incident volume while average per-campaign novelty declines. The dominant operational signature will be scripted account creation, automated package publication across multiple registries simultaneously, and CI/CD workflow injection via forged or compromised GitHub bot identities — all executable with commodity toolkits requiring no original exploit development. At least two registry operators beyond npm will announce reactive publishing controls (mandatory 2FA, namespace-squatting detection, automated malware scanning with publication holds) within the window in direct response to volume pressure. Security vendors will report a measurable increase in "unsophisticated supply chain" incidents re

Ever received a WebSocket tick stream for US stocks and wondered why your indicators behave oddly outside regular hours? The raw data doesn’t tell you which session a trade belongs to, but identifying the session is crucial for signal quality. Here’s a clean, no-dependency-heavy way to do it in Python. Quick Session Reference Session US Eastern Time Data Characteristics Pre-market 04:00-09:30 Sparse trades, choppy moves Regular hours 09:30-16:00 Dense liquidity, smooth price action After-hours 16:00-20:00 Volatility often triggered by news Method 1: Timestamp Conversion Almost every API sends a UTC timestamp. Convert it to US/Eastern and classify. from datetime import datetime import pytz # US Eastern timezone et = pytz . timezone ( ' US/Eastern ' ) def get_session ( ts ): t = datetime . fromtimestamp ( ts , et ) # Check pre-market window if t . hour < 9 or ( t . hour == 9 and t . minute < 30 ): return " pre " # Regular session if t . hour < 16 : return " regular " # After-hours return " after " Method 2: Use a Session Status Field If your provider sends a field like sessionType , you can skip the timezone math. Just make sure to test edge cases at session boundaries. Live Integration Example Using a WebSocket feed (like AllTick’s market data stream) that includes a timestamp, I label ticks on the fly. import websocket import json from datetime import datetime import pytz # US Eastern timezone et = pytz . timezone ( ' US/Eastern ' ) def session ( ts ): t = datetime . fromtimestamp ( ts , et ) if t . hour < 9 or ( t . hour == 9 and t . minute < 30 ): return " pre " elif t . hour < 16 : return " regular " else : return " after " def on_message ( ws , message ): data = json . loads ( message ) s = session ( data [ " timestamp " ]) print ( f " { data [ ' symbol ' ] } | { s } | { data [ ' price ' ] } | { data [ ' volume ' ] } " ) # Open WebSocket connection ws = websocket . WebSocketApp ( " wss://ws.alltick.co/stock " , on_message = on_message ) ws . run_forever () Effic

When we started experimenting with AI translations, we assumed the biggest challenge would be accuracy. We were wrong. The harder problem was preference. Give two AI models the same sentence, and both translations can be technically correct. Yet people almost always have a favorite. One sounds more natural. One feels more human. One is the version they'd actually use. That observation eventually led us to build Parley , a simple game where players compare two translations and choose the better one. What happened next surprised us. People became highly engaged with a task that looked almost trivial. They started debating word choices, discussing tone, and noticing subtle differences between translations. Some users spent far longer interacting with translation examples than they ever would reading documentation or language-learning materials. It highlighted something interesting about AI products: evaluation can be more engaging than generation. Most AI interfaces focus on creating content. But humans are often much better at judging quality than producing it from scratch. Asking someone to choose between two outputs requires less effort while still training their intuition. The experiment also changed how I think about language learning. Traditional language apps often rely on memorization and repetition. But comparing alternatives forces you to think about meaning, context, and natural expression. You're not just learning vocabulary, you're developing taste. And in a world where AI can generate endless content, taste might become one of the most valuable skills we can build. Have you seen similar patterns in AI products where evaluation turns out to be more engaging than creation?

submitted by /u/Successful_Bowl2564 [link] [留言]