🔥 rust-lang / rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software
GitHub热门项目 | Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software. | Stars: 113,279 | 56 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software. | Stars: 113,279 | 56 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | Fast, small, and fully autonomous AI personal assistant infrastructure, any OS, any platform — deploy anywhere, swap anything 🦀 | Stars: 31,680 | 30 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | Servo aims to empower developers with a lightweight, high-performance alternative for embedding web technologies in applications. | Stars: 36,887 | 15 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | The Fully Customizable Desktop Environment for Windows 10/11. | Stars: 16,942 | 12 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | Hundreds of models & providers. One command to find what runs on your hardware. | Stars: 27,018 | 115 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | A modern platform for visual, flexible, and extensible graph-based investigations. For cybersecurity analysts and investigators. | Stars: 4,147 | 351 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | 🌊 The leading agent meta-harness for Claude. Deploy intelligent multi-agent swarms, coordinate autonomous workflows, and build conversational AI systems. Features adaptive memory, self-learning swarm intelligence, RAG integration, and native Claude Code / Codex Integration | Stars: 57,138 | 354 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | The most comprehensive authentication framework | Stars: 28,543 | 19 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | A skill for AI-coding tools to build and edit Microsoft Copilot Studio agents as YAML — with schema validation, templates, and AI-powered skills. Suited for Claude Code, GitHub Copilot CLI, and more. | Stars: 286 | 5 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | The HTML Presentation Framework | Stars: 71,524 | 157 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | Home of the WebKit project, the browser engine used by Safari, Mail, App Store and many other applications on macOS, iOS and Linux. | Stars: 9,863 | 4 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | An interactive git visualization and tutorial. Aspiring students of git can use this app to educate and challenge themselves towards mastery of git! | Stars: 33,538 | 37 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | ALL IN ONE Hacking Tool For Hackers | Stars: 76,839 | 141 stars today | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | OBLITERATE THE CHAINS THAT BIND YOU | Stars: 5,922 | 62 stars today | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | Free, open source crypto trading bot | Stars: 51,018 | 68 stars today | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | TradingAgents: Multi-Agents LLM Financial Trading Framework | Stars: 81,463 | 284 stars today | 语言: Python
When I decided to ship this blog in four languages, I had a clear mental ranking. English would win on volume. Spanish would be runner-up because of the sheer speaker count. Japanese would stay steady because it's my native language. Portuguese, I figured, was the long tail. I added it mostly out of completism. Twenty-two days later, the GA4 snapshot disagrees with every part of that ranking. PT: 748 pageviews , 709 sessions EN: 195 pageviews , 176 sessions JA: 27 pageviews , 29 sessions ES: 7 pageviews , 7 sessions That is Portuguese pulling roughly 3.8× English, 28× Japanese, and 107× Spanish on the same blog, same publishing cadence, same author. One Portuguese article on its own (a post about a 24-hour security agent: 375 PV) got more pageviews than my entire English blog combined. I wrote that article hoping Spanish would surprise me. Instead Portuguese surprised me, and Spanish quietly continued to not exist. The setup, so you can discount my numbers properly This is not a clean comparative experiment. It's a single blog, kenimoto.dev , running four language directories ( /en/ , /ja/ , /pt/ , /es/ ). Articles get translated through a cross-language LLM pipeline, then hand-edited for register and locale (BR Portuguese vs PT Portuguese, LatAm-neutral Spanish vs Spain Spanish). The window: 2026-04-30 to 2026-05-21, 22 daily snapshots. EN has 26 articles. JA has 25. PT has 17. ES has 10. So PT has fewer articles than EN and still beats it almost 4 to 1. If you stop reading here, take this one thing: language asymmetry can swallow article-count asymmetry whole . Adding articles in a saturated language is slower than adding articles in an underserved one. Why Portuguese pulled ahead I don't think the answer is "Portuguese readers like me more." I think three asymmetries are stacking on top of each other. 1. TabNews is a community door English doesn't have TabNews is a Brazilian developer community where you can post a technical article and have it actually read by h
There is a special kind of productivity theater that happens during a developer job search. You wake up motivated, open LinkedIn, and apply to 27 positions before breakfast. You press the Easy Apply button with the precision of a professional gamer. By the end of the week, you have submitted 143 applications, updated a spreadsheet with several impressive numbers, and developed a minor emotional dependency on refreshing your inbox. Unfortunately, your inbox still looks like an abandoned shopping mall. No interviews. No useful feedback. No clear explanation. Perhaps two automated emails thanking you for your interest before informing you that the company decided to “move forward with other candidates,” a sentence that has become the corporate version of disappearing into the fog. So you decide to solve the problem by applying to another 200 jobs. This is not a strategy. It is email-based agriculture. You are throwing resumes into the soil and waiting for a recruiter to grow. Volume Matters. Blind Volume Does Not. Let us begin with an uncomfortable truth: getting your first developer job usually requires applications. Sometimes it requires many applications. The market will not discover your GitHub profile through divine intervention. A recruiter is unlikely to wake up in the middle of the night with a mysterious urge to search for junior developers who recently deployed a to-do list. You need to put yourself in front of companies consistently. However, there is a significant difference between applying consistently while improving your positioning and clicking every blue button on LinkedIn until one of you collapses. Volume is useful when it generates information. Blind volume only produces exhaustion. If you apply to 300 jobs with the same generic resume, the same generic portfolio, and the same vague explanation of your skills, you are not running 300 experiments. You are repeating the same experiment 300 times and acting surprised when the result remains unchanged.
The loop I didn't notice closing Seven weeks ago I started using AI for work. Two weeks after that, I published an article. Seven weeks after that — today — the article is one of sixteen, and they are all in a memory file that the AI reads at the start of every new conversation. I didn't notice the loop until I named it. This is a note about that loop, what it is, what it isn't, and why I keep publishing even though the loop doesn't strictly need me to. The shape It runs like this: I decide what to do. I work it out with the AI — usually in dialogue, sometimes by pasting raw code or data. The dialogue becomes a record. Sometimes a memory entry. Sometimes a published article. The record becomes context for the next conversation, which informs the next decision. It didn't look this clean while it was happening. The numbering is hindsight. From inside, the steps overlap. The first step is the one I keep. Direction is mine: what to build, what to write, what to negotiate. The history that shapes those decisions — twenty-four years of solo work, my company, my family, my health — is also mine. The AI is not setting direction. The second step is where most of the leverage is. I describe what I want to do as completely as I can, sometimes by handing over source code. Then I ask: does this look right? Is there a path I'm missing? Where would this break? I'm opening drawers — possibilities I half-saw in my own head — and checking which ones open cleanly. When one opens cleanly, that is the GO signal. Not "will this succeed" but "this is doable, so do it." The third step happens almost without effort. The conversation already exists as text. Some of it becomes a memory entry I add deliberately. Some of it becomes raw material for an article. The article writes itself partly because I have already explained the thing to the AI. The fourth step is the one that took longest to arrive — and the one I want to be most careful about describing. Three phases, not one The loop didn't
An LLM-written kernel benchmarked 38% faster on a microbench. Here is what kernel-level validation showed it actually did at runtime. TL;DR Multi-agent LLMs are now writing CUDA kernels (RightNow AI’s AutoKernel, Meta’s KernelEvolve, a multi-agent system claiming 38% speedup on Blackwell). Source-level benchmarks measure clean throughput on a single isolated kernel. They do not measure SM occupancy under co-scheduling, DRAM bandwidth saturation, dispatcher off-CPU during a real serving workload, or NCCL wait correlation with sibling kernels. Kernel-level validation closes that gap: an eBPF trace of the same kernel running under the same workload as production answers all four questions in one capture. The kernel-writing wave Three pieces of work in April surfaced the same pattern: agents generate CUDA kernels, then quote a single throughput number against a baseline. RightNow AI’s AutoKernel (announced Apr 6) – LLM agents iteratively rewrite CUDA kernels for a target metric, claiming substantial speedups on selected microbenchmarks. Meta’s KernelEvolve – similar shape: agents propose kernel variants, rank by throughput, keep the best. Multi-agent system on Blackwell (Apr 29 reports) – claims a 38% speedup on a public kernel benchmark using a coordinated agent setup. All three are real research, all three produce real kernels, and all three report numbers that come from microbenchmarks. The microbench setup is exactly what you want for the optimization loop. It is not what you get in production. What microbenchmarks do not see Run an LLM-generated kernel under nvprof or nsight-compute on an otherwise-idle GPU and the throughput number is real. Put the same kernel in front of a vLLM serving workload and four properties change immediately: SM occupancy under co-scheduling. The kernel that achieves 95% SM occupancy in isolation will achieve 40-50% with three other kernels sharing the same SMs. The optimizer never sees this regime. DRAM bandwidth saturation. A kernel tha