https://dsa-life-simulator-frontend.vercel.app"I made a free tool to make DSA practice feel like an RPG — would like feedback from this community"Been grinding DSA for months and it never felt fun. So I built something. What it does: 🏟️ Real-time 1v1 Arena battles against other devs 🧪 Lab to create and publish your own challenges 🏘️ Community Hub to attempt others' challenges 📖 AI writes your weekly coding journey as a life story 🎮 XP, credits, levels, leaderboards Stack: React + Tailwind + Firebase + Node.js + Socket.IO + Groq AI Still early — would genuinely love feedback from people who've felt the pain of traditional DSA prep.

AI coding tools are changing how software gets built. Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Windsurf and other tools can generate code incredibly fast. For small tasks, they are already useful: write a component, explain a function, scaffold an endpoint, create a test, refactor a file. But after using AI in real projects, one thing becomes obvious: The problem is no longer code generation. The problem is engineering control. Most AI coding workflows still look like this: text idea -> prompt -> code -> fix -> prompt again -> more code -> lost context -> start over It feels fast at the beginning. Then the project grows. Requirements change. Architecture decisions disappear inside chat history. The AI forgets previous context. You start acting as product manager, architect, reviewer, QA, DevOps, and prompt engineer at the same time. That is not software engineering. That is vibe coding. ## Vibe coding works until it doesn't Direct AI coding is great when the task is isolated. Ask for a React component. Ask for a SQL query. Ask for a utility function. Ask for a unit test. No problem. But real software is not a collection of isolated snippets. Real software has: - business rules - architectural constraints - existing patterns - security concerns - database impact - deployment requirements - edge cases - regression risk - long-term maintenance When AI jumps directly from prompt to code, it often skips the thinking that should happen before implementation. The result may compile. But does it fit the architecture? Does it respect the domain? Does it create hidden technical debt? Does it solve the right problem? That is the gap we are trying to close with N45.AI. ## What is N45.AI? N45.AI is a framework that turns AI coding tools into a structured engineering workflow. It works with the tools developers already use, including Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, and Windsurf. The idea is simple: Instead of treating AI as one generic assistant, N45.AI organizes the work like a

Most developers never have to design a network protocol from scratch. You use HTTP, gRPC, WebSockets, or something else that already exists and has been debugged by thousands of people over many years. That is the right call for most situations. I did not take that path when building Vaylix, a key-value database engine. I designed a custom binary protocol called VTP2, and the process taught me things about networking that I would not have picked up any other way. This is not an argument that you should also build a custom protocol. For most things, you should not. This is an honest account of what I ran into. Why not HTTP The first question anyone reasonably asks is: why not just use HTTP? HTTP is everywhere. The tooling is excellent. Every language has a client. Debugging with curl is trivial. If I had used HTTP, I would have had working client libraries in a dozen languages before writing a single line of server code. The problem is that HTTP is stateless by design. Every request is independent. Every request carries headers. Every response carries headers. The model assumes that each round trip is a fresh conversation with no memory of what came before. A database session is the opposite of that. A client connects, authenticates, and then issues many commands over the same connection. The authentication should happen once. The session should carry state. Pipelining requests without waiting for each response to return should be natural, not something you fight the protocol to achieve. HTTP/2 closes some of this gap. But using HTTP/2 correctly for a stateful session model involves working against the grain of what HTTP was designed for. I would have been spending a lot of time on infrastructure that exists to make HTTP behave less like HTTP. The other issue is overhead. HTTP headers are verbose. For small key-value operations, the headers can easily exceed the payload. That felt wrong for something designed to be a tight operational data store. So I went with TCP d

A useful thing happened in agent infrastructure this June: several teams shipped "escrow layers for AI agents" - production MCP tools that let an agent run a full commit -> hold -> complete lifecycle without a human anywhere in the loop. An agent can now park value with a contract or service, wait for the other side to deliver, and release on completion. That is genuinely new, and it solves a real problem. It is also worth being precise about, because "escrow" and "settlement" get used as if they were one thing. They are not. There are two structurally different ways to make a trade your agent does at 3am trustworthy, and the difference is exactly who holds the money while the trade is in flight . Model one: held custody In the held-custody model, a third party - a smart contract escrow, a custody service, a payment facilitator - takes the funds, holds them, and releases them when a condition is met. The condition can be anything you can express: a delivery confirmation, an evaluator's attestation, a timeout, a multi-sig approval. This is the right tool for a large class of agent commerce. If your agent is paying a merchant, buying a dataset, or hiring another agent to do a unit of work, the hard question is subjective : did the thing actually get delivered, and was it any good? A hash function cannot see that. A custodian can - it gives the trade a place to pause while something or someone checks. The new agent-escrow tooling is built around exactly this shape: a job, a held balance, a release on completion. For agent-to-merchant payments riding on rails like x402, held custody is the honest primitive. The cost is equally concrete. A held balance is a honeypot. Someone controls the funds between commit and complete, which means someone can freeze them, lose them, misconfigure the release condition, or get drained. You have added a trust assumption and a liveness dependency - the custodian has to be online, solvent, and honest at release time. That is often an accep

My daughter Emma is 11. She's been vibe coding lately, and honestly, she's pretty good at it. The...

It is a privacy-first, local-first photo organizer powered by deep learning face recognition. It detects, embeds, and groups faces to organize your photos automatically—all 100% offline. 🔥 Highlight Features: ✅ 100% Local: No cloud APIs, no telemetry, no leaks. ✅ Deep Learning: Driven by OpenCV DNN (YuNet + SFace ONNX models). ✅ Smart Automation: Copies matches, partial matches, and individual profiles into organized folders, complete with ZIP archives and JSON reports. ✅ Standalone EXE: Run it on Windows instantly with zero dependencies. ✅ Dynamic UI: Fully responsive Tailwind dashboard with Dark/Light modes. Check out the repository, download the EXE, or contribute: 👉 https://github.com/Shaan-alpha/face-sort-studio Let me know what you think! ⭐ machinelearning #computervision #python #localfirst #privacy #developers #opensource #ai Internet access on first launch only (to fetch the AI models ~40-50mb)

I built a pay-per-call MCP server too — here's the piece that almost broke everything When kirothebot dropped the breakdown of what the agent payment stack actually looks like, it landed because it's a problem almost no one has documented honestly. Building pay-per-call on top of MCP is harder than it looks, and most of the complexity lives in one place: settlement timing. The problem with settling after the call The obvious approach is: run the tool, check if payment cleared, return the result. That's backwards. Here's why. If you settle after the call, you've already spent the compute. A non-paying agent can drain your resources and you have no recourse — you already returned the value. You can rate-limit after the fact, but by then you've done the work for free. The correct sequence is: price check → authorization → tool execution → result delivery. The authorization step is what makes this different from a standard webhook with a Stripe call attached. Authorization in this context means the calling agent or its orchestrator has confirmed: (a) it has credit for this call type, (b) the credit is being reserved before execution, and (c) the tool will receive settlement confirmation as part of the return flow. That's not how HTTP requests work out of the box. You need a layer that lives between the MCP protocol and your tool handler. The credit-reservation problem at agent scale Here's the complication that doesn't show up until you have multiple concurrent agents: credit reservation under contention. If ten agents each have 5 credits remaining and they all hit your MCP server simultaneously, naive implementations let all ten through — because at the moment each request lands, each agent appears to have credit. You end up with ten executions and five payments. This is a race condition in the authorization layer, not in your tool logic. The fix is optimistic locking on credit state, which is standard database concurrency control but needs to be built into the payment

Audit thousands of passwords against data breaches — completely in your browser with zero-knowledge privacy. Published: June 9, 2026 TL;DR Most bulk password checkers require you to upload your entire vault. Utilora’s Bulk Password Breach Checker uses HIBP’s k-anonymity + local hashing so your passwords never leave your device . The Hidden Risk Most People Ignore Using a password manager is excellent, but it’s not enough. Many users unknowingly reuse or slightly modify passwords that have already been leaked in massive breaches (LinkedIn, Adobe, Yahoo, etc.). Manually checking hundreds or thousands of passwords is impractical — which is why people turn to bulk checkers. The problem? Most bulk checkers ask you to upload your password list . That creates a massive new privacy risk. How Utilora’s Zero-Knowledge Breach Checker Works We built this tool using a privacy-preserving technique called k-anonymity (popularized by Troy Hunt of Have I Been Pwned). Step-by-Step Technical Process: Local Hashing — Your browser uses the WebCrypto API to create a SHA-1 hash of each password locally. Prefix Only — Only the first 5 characters of the hash are sent to HIBP’s Range API. Server Response — HIBP returns hundreds of matching hashes that start with the same prefix. Local Comparison — Your browser checks if your full hash exists in the returned list. Result: HIBP knows someone checked a password starting with ABC12 , but has no idea which specific password it was. Why You Should Audit Your Entire Vault Regularly Discover weak or compromised passwords you forgot about Clean up old reused passwords Respond quickly after major breaches Maintain good password hygiene across all accounts Real-World Scenarios You exported your Bitwarden / 1Password / KeePass vault You want to check 500+ passwords before a security audit You just heard about a new major breach and want to verify impact You’re helping a family member or client secure their accounts How to Use the Tool Go to the Bulk Pas

PostgreSQL Error 2200G: Most Specific Type Mismatch PostgreSQL error code 2200G ( most_specific_type_mismatch ) is a SQL-standard data exception that occurs when a value's type does not match the most specific (most derived) type expected in a context involving type hierarchies, XML schema types, or user-defined structured types. It most commonly appears when working with composite types, domain hierarchies, or XML processing functions where type inheritance or derivation is in play. While relatively rare in everyday CRUD operations, it can be a significant pain point in enterprise applications with complex type systems. Top 3 Causes and Fixes 1. Composite or Domain Type Hierarchy Mismatch When a function expects a specific domain or composite type but receives a parent/base type, PostgreSQL raises 2200G. Always cast explicitly to the most specific required type. -- Define types CREATE TYPE base_info AS ( name TEXT , value INTEGER ); CREATE DOMAIN specific_info AS base_info ; -- Function expecting the specific domain type CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION handle_info ( data specific_info ) RETURNS TEXT AS $$ BEGIN RETURN ( data ). name || ': ' || ( data ). value ; END ; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql ; -- WRONG: passing base type causes mismatch -- SELECT handle_info(ROW('test', 42)::base_info); -- CORRECT: explicit cast to the most specific type SELECT handle_info ( ROW ( 'test' , 42 ):: specific_info ); 2. XML Type Processing Mismatch Using XML functions like XMLTABLE or XMLCAST without explicitly matching the expected schema type can trigger this error. Always declare column types explicitly. -- Correct: explicitly typed columns in XMLTABLE SELECT * FROM XMLTABLE ( '//product' PASSING XMLPARSE ( DOCUMENT ' <products> <product> <id>1</id> <price>29.99</price> </product> </products> ' ) COLUMNS product_id INTEGER PATH 'id' , price NUMERIC PATH 'price' ); -- Explicit XMLCAST to resolve type ambiguity SELECT XMLCAST ( XMLQUERY ( '//price/text()' PASSING XMLPARSE ( DOCUMENT '<data><pri

Hey everyone, I am a frontend dev and design engineer with about 4.5 years of experience. I am currently looking for a full time role. I am hoping to join an agency or a product team that actually cares a lot about good design. I love building modern and clean websites with a minimalist touch. My approach to work is just based on first principles. I always try to think about how Apple would make things. Good design is not really about what you add, it is about what you refine. Here is what I use to build things: My stack: React, Next.js, TypeScript, and Tailwind CSS. Animations: Motion and GSAP for really smooth interactions. How I work: I focus heavily on the design intent and the core architecture to build pixel perfect layouts and animations from scratch. You can check out my work here: My Portfolio: https://deepbuilds.in Recent Build (Autumn): https://autumndev.vercel.app If your team is looking for someone who sweats the small details and wants to build some really cool stuff together, drop me a DM. Let's talk! submitted by /u/Party-Membership-597 [link] [留言]

Keeping validation schemas, OpenAPI docs, and test fixtures in sync requires manual effort. I built TriadJS as a POC to consolidate them in one place. You define the API once using a TypeScript DSL. The framework derives the following: Runtime validation OpenAPI 3.1 & AsyncAPI specs Database schemas via Drizzle Boundary tests (calling scenario.auto() reads schema constraints to generate fuzz tests) This is a pre-1.0 project with specific architectural compromises: Auto-generated tests abstract away edge cases, which can complicate debugging. Designed for AI: It optimizes for single-file context so LLMs can read the API without traversing multiple YAML and test files. This prioritizes scaffolding over standard modularity. There is are built in claude plugin with skills (schema DSL, endpoints, channels, BDD behaviors with the authoritative assertion phrase table, testing, adapters, Drizzle, CLI, DI) and 8 slash commands ( /triadjs:new , /triadjs:model , /triadjs:endpoint , /triadjs:channel , /triadjs:scenario , /triadjs:test , /triadjs:docs , /triadjs:validate ). I am looking for feedback on this architecture. Is this level of tight coupling an anti-pattern, or is the single source of truth worth the DSL requirement? Repo: TriadJS submitted by /u/justhamade [link] [留言]

anthropic just released fable 5 two days ago and i haven’t had a chance to properly dig in yet for context it’s basically a public version of mythos, the model they’d been keeping locked behind project glasswing for select partners only. now it’s out for everyone on pro/max/team plans until june 22 for free, after that it’ll need usage credits from what i’ve read it’s supposed to be insane at long agentic tasks… like multi-hour sessions where it spins up sub-models, gathers data, writes and tests its own code. someone gave it one prompt to build a travel-time map and it went off on its own for hours and just… built it the one catch is it has hard safety blocks in areas like cybersecurity, bio, chem. falls back to opus 4.8 when it hits those but i want to hear from people actually using it right now. what’s the best thing you’ve noticed? and what feels overhyped or still rough? drop your experiments in the comments, genuinely curious submitted by /u/NewMuffin3926 [link] [留言]

Hey HN. I'm a high schooler in Fremont, CA. Tuesday morning I got a county-wide AC Alert text telling everyone in Alameda County to prepare a go-bag for an East Bay Hills Red Flag Warning that starts tonight at 11 PM. The text went to ~half a million phones. The actual NWS warning polygon only covers East Bay Hills (NWS zone CAZ515). Most people who got the text don't need a go-bag tonight. Some in the hills don't realize how close they are. So I built this tool - https://redflag-check.info/ mit

TLDR: we just launched free OpenClaw hosting. One-click deploy, no infrastructure to manage, only pay...

Hey DEV community! 👋 I'm Gamya, an iOS developer and new here on DEV. So excited to be part of my...

From personalized gifts to business essentials, WIRED can help you save with our selection of VistaPrint promo codes.