标签：#tor

I have been a huge Storybook and Chromatic fan for years. But at some point the bill got my attention, and when I looked into why, the fix turned out to be simple. This is the write-up of what I changed. It works on any per-snapshot tool, not just Chromatic. First, some backstory on how I got here, because it explains why the cost crept up in the first place. How I ended up paying for a lot of snapshots In the past I would build a gigantic end-to-end pipeline that was flaky as hell and made me spend time every week fixing it. It took 40 minutes to run, and when it went red someone would assume it was just flaky, merge the change anyway, and then find out it truly did break the system. So I stopped writing lots of E2Es and moved to Storybook for interaction and visual testing. Much better. But because I was rendering every state of every component as its own story to get the screenshots in place, I was generating a lot of screenshots. And every snapshot tool, Chromatic, Percy, Playwright screenshots, UI Verify, renders and bills per story. So the number of stories is the cost, and it is also the noise surface: more stories means more places for a diff to flake. I ended up paying a lot, which made me think about whether there were ways to optimise it. There were. Here they are. The core idea: combine states into one story The naive pattern is one story per variant times state times theme. A component with 5 sizes, 3 states, and 2 themes is 30 snapshots the naive way. The whole idea below is to collapse that matrix into a handful of stories while keeping full coverage. Move 1: one gallery story, not N stories For something like a Button, there is no need to have separate Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary stories. I prefer one AllVariants story that maps through the prop combinations and renders them in a grid. One snapshot then covers the entire matrix. As a bonus you get a nice grid that shows every permutation at a glance, with no extra clicks to see the variations. /

Hay muchísimo escrito sobre qué tiene que reportar una organización: guías de Supersalud, de Supersociedades, de SAGRILAFT, de PTEE, de SST, de reportes ambientales. Todas contestan la misma pregunta — ¿qué me aplica? — y la contestan bien. Casi nadie escribe sobre la pregunta que de verdad hace fallar a las organizaciones: ¿cómo no perder ninguno, todos los años, cuando son treinta? Porque los incumplimientos que he visto de cerca casi nunca vienen de que alguien ignorara la obligación. Vienen de que la obligación se conocía perfectamente y aun así se pasó la fecha. Este artículo va del problema operativo —fechas, evidencia, responsables— no de cuáles normas le aplican a su entidad. Eso es otra conversación, y no es esta. Por qué el archivo de Excel deja de servir Con tres obligaciones, una hoja de cálculo sobra. El dolor no empieza por el número: empieza cuando el calendario hay que derivarlo . 1. Las fechas no son fechas, son reglas. Muchos vencimientos no están escritos como un día del calendario: dependen del último dígito del NIT, de días hábiles, o de un plazo contado desde un hecho. Eso significa que alguien recalcula el calendario entero cada año, a mano . Cada enero se reintroduce la misma oportunidad de equivocarse, y basta con un festivo mal contado. 2. El calendario vive en una persona. Casi siempre hay alguien que "sabe cómo es la cosa". Mientras esté, funciona. Cuando se va de vacaciones —o se va de la empresa— se va con ella el contexto que nunca estuvo escrito. La hoja sobrevive; el criterio para llenarla, no. 3. La hoja dice que se entregó, no lo prueba. La celda en verde es una afirmación de alguien. La evidencia real —el radicado, el archivo exacto que se subió, la hora— está en el correo de alguien. El día que hay que demostrarlo, empieza la arqueología en bandejas de entrada. 4. Los terceros que le reportan a usted. Si recibe información de contratistas, sedes o filiales, ahora administra dos problemas: sus propios vencimientos y los de ellos.

Encontrar grupos de WhatsApp públicos pode ser uma maneira prática de conhecer pessoas, divulgar projetos, trocar experiências e acompanhar assuntos do seu interesse. Existem comunidades sobre estudos, empregos, tecnologia, entretenimento, esportes, promoções, cidades, amizades e diversos outros temas. Porém, antes de entrar em qualquer comunidade, é importante verificar a procedência do convite e adotar alguns cuidados básicos. Afinal, links públicos também podem ser utilizados para divulgar golpes, conteúdos impróprios ou páginas falsas. Neste guia, você vai aprender como encontrar grupos de WhatsApp públicos com segurança e evitar problemas ao participar dessas comunidades. Procure grupos em sites organizados Uma das formas mais simples de encontrar comunidades públicas é utilizar sites especializados em reunir e organizar links por categorias. Em vez de clicar em convites compartilhados aleatoriamente nas redes sociais, procure plataformas que apresentem informações como nome do grupo, descrição, categoria e regras de participação. No site Grupos de WhatsApp , por exemplo, você pode pesquisar comunidades de diferentes assuntos e escolher aquelas que combinam melhor com seus interesses. Mesmo utilizando uma plataforma organizada, continue analisando cada grupo antes de participar. Confira o nome e a descrição do grupo Antes de clicar no botão para entrar, leia com atenção o nome, a descrição e as informações disponíveis sobre a comunidade. Verifique se o conteúdo prometido realmente corresponde ao tema que você procura. Um grupo apresentado como uma comunidade de empregos, por exemplo, não deveria exigir pagamentos, dados bancários ou informações pessoais para liberar supostas vagas. Descrições muito vagas, promessas exageradas e mensagens com urgência artificial merecem atenção. Frases como “ganhe dinheiro imediatamente”, “últimas vagas” ou “lucro garantido” podem ser utilizadas para atrair usuários para golpes. Evite links encurtados ou suspeitos Links oficiais

The brand trip is a right of passage for influencers. It's a mark of legitimacy that a sponsor wants to invite them on an all-expenses-paid vacation, often with luxurious freebies and activities. Trips can also spur hard feelings from uninvited influencers, trigger criticism from the public, and project a certain frivolousness. Usually it is fast […]

AI is not a genie. Treat it like a function. Most people use AI the way they use a search box: type a question, read the answer, move on. That works for one-off curiosity. It is a bad fit for the work you repeat every week, because you re-explain the context every time and never build anything you can trust. A small assistant is different. It is one narrow task, wired up once, with a fixed input and a fixed output shape. You run it, check it, improve it. After a few iterations it stops being a demo and starts pulling real weight. Here is how to build one without drowning in frameworks. Start narrow: one task, one input, one output Do not build "an assistant for my job." Build the thing that turns a messy meeting note into three bullet points. Pick a task that is: Repetitive (you do it weekly or daily) Boring (nobody will miss the manual version) Verifiable (you can look at the output and know if it is wrong) That last one matters most. If you cannot tell good output from bad in ten seconds, you cannot trust the assistant and you cannot improve it. Good starter tasks: drafting reply emails, summarizing documents, normalizing scrappy data, extracting fields from text. Example: an email draft as a function Think of your prompt as a function signature. Inputs go in, a structured draft comes out. def draft_reply ( incoming_email : str , tone : str = " friendly, brief " ) -> str : prompt = f """ You are drafting a reply on my behalf. Do not invent facts. If information is missing, leave a [PLACEHOLDER]. Tone: { tone } Incoming email: --- { incoming_email } --- Write only the reply body. """ return llm ( prompt ) # any model client you like Two lines do the real work: "Do not invent facts" and the [PLACEHOLDER] rule. Together they turn a confident hallucination into a visible gap you can fill. The goal is to make errors loud instead of silent. Example: summaries you can actually trust The failure mode of summaries is a plausible sentence that never appeared in the source.

Most Laravel applications do not become difficult to maintain because somebody made one obviously terrible architectural decision. They get there through dozens of small decisions that looked completely reasonable at the time. A controller grows beyond a comfortable size, so part of its logic moves into an Eloquent model. Later, the application needs to send a notification after an order ships. Then inventory must be checked through an external API. Accounting requests an ERP integration, and marketing wants loyalty points awarded after dispatch. Each change adds only a few lines. Since the Order model is already available wherever the feature is being implemented, adding one more method feels natural: $order -> ship (); It is concise, expressive, and pleasantly object-oriented. Six months later, however, that innocent method may be updating several tables, calling two APIs, dispatching events, sending notifications, and deciding whether the entire operation is allowed. The model has quietly become the place where the application runs its business workflows. That is the real problem. It is not that the model is “fat.” It is that persistence, domain decisions, and application orchestration have been mixed together until nobody can change one without understanding all three. Business Logic in Eloquent Models Is Not Automatically Wrong The common advice to remove all business logic from Laravel models goes too far. Eloquent follows the Active Record pattern. Martin Fowler describes Active Record as an object that represents a database row, encapsulates database access, and adds domain logic related to that data. In other words, an object containing both state and behavior is not an architectural mistake by itself. A model should be allowed to answer questions about itself: class Order extends Model { protected function casts (): array { return [ 'paid_at' => 'datetime' , 'expires_at' => 'datetime' , ]; } public function isPaid (): bool { return $this -> paid_at !== nul

What the Unabomber, Steve Bannon’s tech guy, and Bernie Sanders taught me about the great data center backlash of 2026.

Earlier this year, a Reddit user had asked members of a skincare-focused subreddit if anyone had tried a specific hypochlorous acid spray, a product often used for acne. There were dozens of responses; one from a user named Primary-Taro4254 seemed innocuous enough, at least at first. "I haven't personally tried [that brand] so I can't […]

In 2018, more than 20,000 employees walked out to protest how Google handled allegations of sexual harassment. Here’s how they organized it from inside the company.

A practical guide to writing specs that turn vague AI prompts into production-quality code — from functional requirements to edge cases, with real before-and-after examples. Let me paint a picture you've probably lived. You open Claude Code or OpenCode, type a vague prompt like "add a user dashboard with analytics," and hit enter. The agent spins up, writes a bunch of code — it even looks decent at first glance. Then you realize: the data model is wrong, the API endpoints don't match your existing patterns, there's no error handling, and the "analytics" is just a row of four hardcoded numbers. You spend the next hour correcting, prompting, correcting again. You would have been faster writing it yourself. Now imagine a different scenario. You spend 15 minutes writing a structured specification, paste it into the agent, and it produces exactly what you wanted — following your conventions, handling edge cases, wired into your existing auth and data layer. One shot. That's not luck. That's the difference between treating your AI coding agent like a chatbot and treating it like a senior engineer who needs a clear design document — also known as spec-driven development . The Core Problem: AI Agents Are Powerful but Undirected Claude Code, OpenCode, Cursor Agent — these tools are incredible when pointed at a well-defined task. They can read your entire codebase, understand your conventions, and produce production-quality code. But they share a fundamental limitation: they don't know what you want unless you tell them, precisely and completely. When you give an agent a one-liner prompt, you're leaving an enormous amount of ambiguity. The model will fill in the gaps — but it fills them with its own assumptions, which are often generic, incomplete, or just wrong for your context. A spec closes those gaps. It transforms an open-ended creative writing exercise into a constrained engineering task. What Makes a Spec Actually Work for AI Coding Agents? A spec that works for an AI

TL;DR ABR "flapping" is when your player hops between quality levels every few seconds on a jittery network, and each hop is a visible lurch. We'll detect it from LEVEL_SWITCHED events, then fix it in layers: widen the bandwidth-estimator memory, make upswitches earn their place, and cap the switch rate with abrSwitchInterval (new in hls.js 1.7). Config + a detection snippet you can paste in today. 📦 Code: github.com/USER/hlsjs-abr-tuning, replace before publishing The bug nobody reports correctly Users don't file "my ABR is flapping." They say the video "kept changing" or "couldn't decide." What's happening: on cellular, throughput is spiky, and the player's bandwidth estimator treats every spike as the new truth. One fast segment and it jumps to 1080p, one slow segment and it drops to 240p, over and over. Low rebuffer ratio, good startup time, and still a miserable watch. Counterintuitively, feeding the player fresher bandwidth data makes this worse, because fresher data is noisier. The fix is a player with a longer memory and slower reflexes. Let's build that. 1. First, detect the flap 📊 Don't tune by vibes. Count level switches per minute of playback. Every switch fires Hls.Events.LEVEL_SWITCHED . // abr-monitor.js, hls.js 1.7.x, node 20+ tooling / any modern browser import Hls from " hls.js " ; export function attachFlapMonitor ( hls ) { const switches = []; hls . on ( Hls . Events . LEVEL_SWITCHED , ( _evt , data ) => { const now = performance . now (); switches . push ({ t : now , level : data . level }); // keep a 60s sliding window while ( switches . length && now - switches [ 0 ]. t > 60 _000 ) switches . shift (); const perMin = switches . length ; const reversals = countReversals ( switches ); if ( perMin >= 6 ) { console . warn ( `[abr] flapping: ${ perMin } switches/min, ${ reversals } reversals` ); } }); } // a "reversal" = up then down (or down then up), the signature of flapping function countReversals ( s ) { let r = 0 ; for ( let i = 2 ; i < s . l

WordPress's plugin and theme update screens both have a "select all" checkbox. Calling check() on it with Playwright succeeds — no error, no exception. But look at the individual checkboxes afterward, and sometimes none of them are actually checked. Note: Playwright's check() ticks a checkbox. The click itself can succeed even if the page's JavaScript handler never fires, leaving what the form actually submits out of sync with what the screen visually shows. What actually happens The "select all" checkbox is usually wired up with a JavaScript handler: clicking it is supposed to check every individual checkbox underneath it. Playwright's check(force=True) can force the DOM state of that one checkbox — but that only changes that checkbox's own state . It doesn't guarantee the JavaScript handler that's supposed to propagate the change to the individual checkboxes actually fires. # Looks like it worked, but the individual checkboxes are still unchecked select_all . first . check ( force = True ) page . click ( ' input[type= " submit " ][name= " upgrade " ] ' ) Clicking the update button submits whatever the form's actual state is — which is "nothing checked." Nothing updates. No error is thrown, so on the surface it looks like the run completed normally. The fix — verify right after checking, every time Right after checking "select all," confirm that the individual checkboxes underneath are actually checked. If they aren't, fall back to checking each one individually. sel_all_sel = ' input[type= " checkbox " ][id^= " plugins-select-all " ] ' select_all = plugin_form . locator ( sel_all_sel ) if select_all . count () > 0 : select_all . first . check ( force = True ) page . wait_for_timeout ( 500 ) # Verification step — confirm checkboxes are actually checked chk_sel_check = ' input[type= " checkbox " ][name= " checked[] " ]:checked ' any_checked = plugin_form . locator ( chk_sel_check ). count () > 0 if not any_checked : # Select-all had no effect; switch to individual s

The day your first cohort completes a course is the day certificates stop being a design job and become an engineering problem. One certificate is a Canva export. Ten thousand is a rendering pipeline with a database table, a queue and a verification page. This post walks through the three ways teams actually build that pipeline, with working Python for each, then covers the two parts most certificate tutorials skip: batching at volume and verification. It is a condensed version of our full guide, How to generate signed digital certificates at scale , which also covers storage, retention and revocation. One scope note up front. Most platform certificates do not need cryptographic signing in the PKI sense. The trust model that 95% of platforms ship is simpler: a unique ID printed on the certificate resolves to a verification page on the issuer's domain. An employer types the ID, the page confirms it. That is the model this post builds. If you need true PKI signing for regulated credentials, the stack is different (Adobe Sign, DocuSign, in-house HSM workflows) and this post is not it. What every certificate needs Whichever approach you pick, the output is the same: Component Detail Layout Landscape A4, 2480x1754 at 200 DPI for print Personal Recipient name with full Unicode support Course Course title and completion date Issuer Issuer name plus a signature image ID Unique certificate ID (UUID or short slug) Verify A URL under the ID pointing to your /verify route The signature image communicates authority but provides zero tamper resistance. The certificate ID plus the verification page is the practical trust layer. Keep both in mind as you read the code. The three approaches at a glance Approach Setup Render time Maintenance PDF library (ReportLab, PDFKit) 1 day 200 to 400 ms Fonts, layout drift, library updates HTML plus headless Chrome 2 hours 1 to 3 sec Chromium, memory, queue workers Template API 5 minutes 1 to 2 sec None Approach 1: a PDF library Python with Repo

100 城时区页给跨区调度当速查，DST 自动算 作者是 数据管道 / 跨时区调度 方向的开发者。这篇不是广告，是踩坑记录 + 顺手做的工具。 背景 做 数据管道 / 跨时区调度 时，时间戳转换是最常被低估的雷区。16 个时间戳工具(Unix 转换/时区/ISO8601/Cron/Duration…) 已覆盖日常；但每个语言/框架的坑都不一样，所以又补了 30 个语言/框架时间戳页(python/javascript/java/sql/…)，每页含 6 个真实坑。 我踩过的坑（举几个） 秒 vs 毫秒：前端 Date.now() 是毫秒，后端常存秒，混用差 1000 倍。 时区不是字符串：存 UTC、展示本地，别把本地时间当 UTC 落库。 2038 问题：32 位系统 time_t 在 2038-01-19 溢出，老系统要提前查。 夏令时：一年有两次重复/缺失的本地时间，跨区调度尤其坑。 我顺手做的东西 转换速查页： https://gotimestamp.com/timezone/new-york 相关语言页： https://gotimestamp.com/timezone/london 开源 MCP： https://github.com/caresotin/tsforge-mcp —— 把时间戳转换/校验直接接进 LLM 工作流，不用手算。 小结 时间戳没那么简单，但工具到位就省心。上面都是免费、开源、可直接用的，希望对同样踩坑的人有帮助。

Node Date 的 epoch 毫秒坑 + 用 MCP 把转换塞进 AI 流 作者是 Node.js / JS 时间 方向的开发者。这篇不是广告，是踩坑记录 + 顺手做的工具。 背景 做 Node.js / JS 时间 时，时间戳转换是最常被低估的雷区。16 个时间戳工具(Unix 转换/时区/ISO8601/Cron/Duration…) 已覆盖日常；但每个语言/框架的坑都不一样，所以又补了 30 个语言/框架时间戳页(python/javascript/java/sql/…)，每页含 6 个真实坑。 我踩过的坑（举几个） 秒 vs 毫秒：前端 Date.now() 是毫秒，后端常存秒，混用差 1000 倍。 时区不是字符串：存 UTC、展示本地，别把本地时间当 UTC 落库。 2038 问题：32 位系统 time_t 在 2038-01-19 溢出，老系统要提前查。 夏令时：一年有两次重复/缺失的本地时间，跨区调度尤其坑。 我顺手做的东西 转换速查页： https://gotimestamp.com/timestamp/nodejs 相关语言页： https://gotimestamp.com/timestamp/javascript 开源 MCP： https://github.com/caresotin/tsforge-mcp —— 把时间戳转换/校验直接接进 LLM 工作流，不用手算。 小结 时间戳没那么简单，但工具到位就省心。上面都是免费、开源、可直接用的，希望对同样踩坑的人有帮助。

A few months back I was running Sales Navigator searches for a client project — filtering down to "VP Sales, fintech, based in Italy or Spain" type lists — and the results were genuinely good. 60, 80 leads that actually matched. Then I hit the part nobody warns you about: there's no button on that page that says "save this." So I did what everyone does. Opened a spreadsheet, alt-tabbed back and forth, typed names and job titles by hand. Around profile 40 I gave up and went looking for a better way. This is what I found, roughly in the order I found it, including the tool I ended up building because none of the existing options quite fit what I needed. First: the export LinkedIn actually gives you LinkedIn has a real, built-in data export, and most people don't realize how narrow it is. It's under your profile photo → Settings & Privacy → Data Privacy → Get a copy of your data . From there you either tick specific categories (that email usually lands within minutes) or request the full archive, which takes closer to a day and sometimes arrives in two batches. Either way you get a download link that expires after 72 hours — and it's desktop only, the mobile app won't let you request one. What you get back is genuinely thorough: connections, messages, your own profile history, activity, even the ad-targeting data LinkedIn holds on you. A couple of quirks worth knowing before you rely on it: some connections' email addresses will just be missing, because sharing an email on download is something each person opts into individually, and you won't get a list of who viewed your profile or any "People You May Know" data. If you're in the EU, EEA, or Switzerland, LinkedIn also runs a separate API for pulling your data on a schedule rather than as a one-off request. Here's what this export is not built for, though: it has no idea what you searched for yesterday. It's an archive of your own account, not a way to capture a live search. Run a Sales Navigator query and pull 80 lea

Base Power’s $1 billion round will help the startup ramp production of its home batteries.

This week's Java roundup for July 27th, 2026, features news highlighting: OpenJDK JEPs targeted and proposed to target for JDK 28; the GA release of GPULlama3.java 1.0; point releases of Micronaut, Quarkus and JobRunr; a maintenance release of JDKUpdater; the sixth release candidate of Maven 4.0; and the first milestone release of Jakarta Agentic AI 1.0. By Michael Redlich

If you just want the recommendation: build the uptime poller yourself, put exponential backoff with jitter in front of every health check, and treat a 429 as a scheduling signal instead of an error you swallow. Query-style observability APIs hand you metrics and logs, not threshold rules or notification channels, so the polling worker is the thing that has to decide what "down" means and who gets woken up. That decision is the whole job. I got burned by exactly this. What follows is the pattern that survived the postmortem, the alternatives I weighed before writing a line of it, and the conditions where you should not do any of this yourself. The 429 my retry loop ate for six hours Last spring I was running a homegrown health checker for 40 internal services. One goroutine per service, all driven off the same 15-second ticker, which meant every check landed inside the same 200ms window. The status API we polled had a per-minute quota I'd never bothered to read, and for months it didn't matter, because 40 checks a minute sat comfortably under the ceiling. Then a colleague onboarded 12 more services, we crossed the quota, and the API started answering with HTTP 429. My retry wrapper caught it, retried three times in a tight loop, and on the last attempt returned the previous cached result — which said healthy . It logged the rate limit at debug level. Nobody reads debug. Six hours. Green dashboard. Dead queue consumer. We found out when a customer asked where their export was. The consumer had died on an unrelated deploy, the checker never noticed, and when I finally restarted it the backlog got re-processed on top of a manual replay I'd already run — two customers got the same notification twice. Duplicate deliveries are the specific thing I lose sleep over, and I had caused a batch of them with a retry loop that was trying to be helpful. The postmortem produced one line I now paste into every runbook: a check that can't reach the API reports unknown, never healthy.

Git is the ultimate tool for developers. Yet, branching strategies still confuse many of us. Commands like merge, rebase, and cherry-pick manipulate your commit history in completely different ways. If you just guess what they do, you risk ruining your team's shared history or losing track of your changes. The easiest way to understand Git is to visualize it. Let us look at exactly what happens to your Git graph when you run these three critical commands. 🏗️ Starting Point: Our Example Repository Imagine we have a standard repository. We branched off the main branch from commit B to work on a new feature in a feature branch. While we worked on our feature, someone else pushed commit C and D to main. Here is what our history looks like right now: C --- D [main] / A --- B \ E --- F [feature] main has two new commits: C and D. feature has two new commits: E and F. 🔀 1. Git Merge (The Safe Record Keeper) When you merge main into your feature branch (or vice versa), Git creates a special, brand-new commit called a merge commit. git checkout feature git merge main The Visual Graph After Merge: C ------- D ------ [main] / \ A --- B \ \ v E --- F --- G [feature] What happened under the hood? Git looked at the common ancestor (B), took the history of main (C and D), took the history of feature (E and F), and combined them. Commit G is the merge commit. It has two parent commits: F and D. Pros: 100% non-destructive. It preserves the exact historical timeline of when things actually happened. Cons: Your Git graph can quickly become a messy "train track" web if you have many developers merging constantly. 🚀 2. Git Rebase (The Clean History Rewriter) Rebase takes all the commits from your current branch, lifts them up, and replants them on top of the very last commit of the target branch. git checkout feature git rebase main The Visual Graph After Rebase: C --- D [main] / \ A --- B E' --- F' [feature] What happened under the hood? Git temporarily blew away commits E and F. It ca