Uber’s robotaxi lobbying effort puts it on a collision course with Waymo
Washington D.C. has become a battleground for Uber and Waymo's competing views.
找到 13368 篇相关文章
Washington D.C. has become a battleground for Uber and Waymo's competing views.
Davide de Paolis discusses the realities of rolling out cloud infrastructure compliance without fracturing developer relations. Drawing from a real-world platform team reboot at Sevdesk, he explains how to implement "minimum viable governance" on AWS, utilize event-driven Slack alerting to automate policy feedback, and shift from rigid enforcement to high-empathy, data-driven collaboration. By Davide de Paolis
Hello, I'm Rijul. I'm building git-lrc, a micro AI code reviewer that runs on every commit. It's free...
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Sperm donors need limits, says a European fertility group Ties van der Meer doesn’t know how many siblings he has. The 47-year-old was conceived at a private fertility clinic using sperm…
Create AI ads that convert, not just look good Discussion | Link
These butt-cleaning machines also offer luxe features like custom seat warming and adjustable water flows.
Swimming against the iGarden Swim Jet X Pro 10’s artificial current is a real workout, even if it doesn’t quite replace a full-size lap pool.
This essay was written with Nathan E. Sanders, and originally appeared in The Guardian . Opposition to AI data centers has emerged as a primary theme in US politics, one that—surprisingly—doesn’t fall along party lines. We applaud people coming together for constructive debate on any issue, and agree that communities need to evaluate whether any economic benefits these data centers bring is worth their costs. Still, we worry that a focus on data centers obscures the larger impacts of AI on people’s lives: the concentration of power of AI companies, and their widespread political and financial influence...
Experts explain how they work, what they can do, and what's still unsettled.
By some benchmarks, Julia code can run 10X to 1,000X faster than Python—but there’s a reason it’s not a very popular programming language.
In this podcast, Michael Stiefel spoke to Sarah Wells about the relationship of governance to software architecture. Governance enables teams to work effectively by establishing procedures that minimize system complexity, improve security, and reduce repetitive tasks. Targeted checklists help engineers by reducing the stress over these procedures. By Sarah Wells
When a series of regional outages forced a rethink of a multi-region AWS API, the team discovered that an obstacle to global failover was hiding in plain sight: a pre-flight discovery call baked into every client session years earlier as the only available option. This article describes what it took to remove it, and what the rollout actually cost. By Suresh Gururajan
Described as the “feel-good movie of white-boy summer” by one extremist, the movie Citizen Vigilante has been hailed by the far-right as a way to convert moderates to their cause.
GitHub热门项目 | Grok2API 是一个基于 FastAPI 构建的 Grok 网关,支持将 Grok Web 能力以 OpenAI 兼容 API 的方式转换。 | Stars: 5,532 | 112 stars today | 语言: Go
Nearly three years ago, I showed you an awesome $8 cable tester that quickly tells you if your USB-C cable is likely fast, slow, powerful, or weak. Sadly, that gadget got discontinued, and I've never found anything as intuitive or inexpensive since. But if you've got a Mac with Apple Silicon chips, you can simply […]
Introducing InterceptX: The Ultimate Modern Alternative to ModHeader for HTTP Modifications As web developers, API engineers, and security auditors, we spend a significant portion of our time inspecting and tweaking HTTP traffic. For years, extensions like ModHeader have been the go-to utility for modifying request and response headers on the fly. However, as the browser extension landscape transitions fully to Manifest V3 —bringing stricter security, better performance, and tighter permission rules—many developers are looking for a modern, lightweight, and local-first alternative. Enter InterceptX . What is InterceptX? InterceptX is a high-performance, compact Chrome extension designed to give you complete control over browser network requests. Built from the ground up on Manifest V3 using the declarative declarativeNetRequest API, it is fast, secure, and preserves your battery life by running lightweight matching rules inside the browser engine itself. Whether you need to bypass CORS policies, simulate mobile user-agents, override security headers, or redirect API endpoints to your local development server, InterceptX does it all with a premium, glassmorphic UI. Key Features at a Glance If you are familiar with ModHeader, you will feel right at home with InterceptX—but with several modern upgrades: 1. Request & Response Header Modifications Inject, append, or strip headers on outgoing requests or incoming responses: Set : Override an existing header or add a new one (e.g., setting custom auth tokens or Origin ). Append : Append values to headers like Accept or Cookie . Remove : Completely strip headers (e.g., testing behaviors when header keys are omitted). 2. URL Redirections Need to test API endpoints or redirect files? InterceptX features a built-in regex redirect engine (using RE2 syntax). You can redirect matching patterns and even use capture groups (e.g., redirecting https://api.production.com/(.*) to http://localhost:3000/\1 ). 3. Granular URL & Domain Fil
In the previous article , we briefly discussed the relationship between Cookies and CORS . In this article, we'll take a closer look at how browsers decide whether a Cookie should be included in a Cross-Origin request. One of the most common misconceptions is that once CORS is configured correctly, Cookies are automatically sent with every request. In reality, that's not how browsers work. 📌 Default Browser Behavior When a Cross-Origin request is made using fetch() or XMLHttpRequest , browsers do not send Cookies, Authorization headers, or other credentials by default. For example: fetch ( " https://api.example.com/profile " ) Even if the user is already logged into api.example.com , the browser will not include any Cookies with this request. This default behavior helps prevent authentication data from being unintentionally leaked across different Origins. 📌 How Can We Send Cookies? If you want the browser to include Cookies in a Cross-Origin request, you must explicitly use the credentials option. For example: fetch ( " https://api.example.com/profile " , { credentials : " include " }) Using credentials: "include" does not guarantee that Cookies will be sent. Instead, it tells the browser: "If there are any Cookies that are eligible to be sent with this request, include them." 📌 What Makes a Cookie Eligible? Even with credentials: "include" , the browser still evaluates the Cookie before sending it. Some of the most important checks include: Domain Path SameSite For example: If the Cookie's Domain doesn't match the request destination, it won't be sent. If the request path doesn't satisfy the Cookie's Path attribute, it won't be sent. If the Cookie's SameSite policy blocks Cross-Site requests, it won't be sent. In other words, credentials is only the first requirement , not the final decision. 📌 Server Configuration Matters Too If your application expects JavaScript to access the response while using Cookies, the server must also be configured correctly. For exampl
In the previous article , we learned that an Origin consists of three components: Scheme (Protocol) Host Port Browsers use these three components to determine whether a request is Same-Origin or Cross-Origin . Whenever a web page attempts to access resources from a different Origin, a security mechanism called CORS (Cross-Origin Resource Sharing) comes into play. 📌 Why Does a CORS Error Occur? Suppose your web application is running at: https://app.example.com Now it tries to fetch data from: https://api.example.com Although both URLs belong to example.com , their Hosts are different. That means they have different Origins. As a result, the browser treats this as a Cross-Origin request. If the destination server does not explicitly allow this Origin, the browser prevents JavaScript from accessing the response, resulting in what we commonly call a CORS Error . 💡 Important: CORS is a browser security mechanism , not a server security mechanism. ⚠️ A Common Misconception About CORS Many developers believe that a CORS error means the request never reached the server. In most cases, that's simply not true. Typically: ✅ The browser sends the request. ✅ The server receives it. ✅ The server generates and returns a response. ❌ The browser blocks JavaScript from accessing that response. In other words, the request was successful—the browser simply refuses to expose the response to your application because the CORS policy was not satisfied. This is why sending the exact same request using tools like Postman or curl usually works without any problems. Those tools are not browsers, so they do not enforce browser security policies like CORS. 📦 How Does the Server Handle CORS? To allow JavaScript to access the response, the server must include the appropriate CORS headers. The most important one is: Access-Control-Allow-Origin: https://app.example.com This header tells the browser that JavaScript running on https://app.example.com is allowed to read the response. ✅ Examples Suppos
You've written setTimeout(fn, 0) expecting it to run "immediately." It didn't. A Promise.then() you scheduled a line later ran first, and somewhere a for loop of 50,000 iterations froze your UI for a full second despite every function being "async." None of this is a bug. It's the JavaScript event loop doing exactly what it always does — you just haven't seen the mechanism yet. What you'll learn By the end of this guide you'll be able to: Explain, precisely, why microtasks (Promises) always run before macrotasks ( setTimeout , setInterval ) — even at a zero delay Predict the exact console output order of any mix of synchronous code, setTimeout , and await Diagnose a frozen UI as a blocked call stack, not a "slow async function" Choose correctly between queueMicrotask , setTimeout(fn, 0) , and requestAnimationFrame for a given timing need Avoid the two most common event-loop bugs: microtask starvation and accidental serial await s in a loop Who this is for: you've written async / await and used setTimeout , but you want the model that makes their interaction predictable instead of memorized. Contents Why the JavaScript event loop exists The mental model Stage 1: the call stack and blocking code Stage 2: Web APIs and the macrotask queue Stage 3: Promises and the microtask queue Stage 4: async/await is sugar, not magic Stage 5: rendering, and Node's extra queues Edge cases and gotchas Best practices FAQ Cheat sheet Key takeaways Why the JavaScript event loop exists JavaScript runs on a single thread. One call stack, one thing executing at a time, no parallel function calls in the same realm. That's a deliberate design — it means you never need locks or mutexes to protect a shared variable — but it creates an obvious problem: how does a single-threaded language do anything concurrent, like waiting on a network response, without freezing the entire page while it waits? Here's the naive expectation, and why it would be a disaster if JavaScript worked this way: console . l
Imagine you're loading a dashboard. Four widgets, four APIs, fire them all at once: const [ users , revenue , alerts , activity ] = await Promise . all ([ fetchUsers (), fetchRevenue (), fetchAlerts (), fetchActivity (), ]); The alerts API is occasionally slow and sometimes returns a 500. When it does, your entire dashboard fails. Not one broken widget — four broken widgets. Promise.all rejects on the first failure and takes the other three successful results with it into the void. You reached for the right primitive for concurrency, but the wrong one for this use case. The four methods and what they actually do JavaScript gives you four ways to run promises concurrently. They differ in one thing: what happens when a promise fails or resolves first. Method Resolves when Rejects when Promise.all All succeed Any one fails Promise.allSettled All finish (success or failure) Never Promise.any Any one succeeds All fail Promise.race Any one finishes Any one fails first The instinct to reach for Promise.all is understandable — it returns all the values in a single array and feels like the obvious way to "do these things at the same time." But concurrency and failure handling are two separate questions. Promise.all answers both at once, and the answer to the second one is often wrong for the situation you're in. 🎮 Try it yourself ▶️ Open the interactive playground → Runs right in your browser — poke at it and watch the concept react live. Promise.allSettled — partial success Promise.allSettled waits for every promise to settle — resolve or reject — and returns a result array describing what happened to each one: const results = await Promise . allSettled ([ fetchUsers (), fetchRevenue (), fetchAlerts (), fetchActivity (), ]); for ( const result of results ) { if ( result . status === ' fulfilled ' ) { console . log ( ' got data: ' , result . value ); } else { console . error ( ' failed: ' , result . reason ); } } Each element has a status of 'fulfilled' (with a value ) or 'r