Hey all. I recently started working on a project to improve machine-translated webnovels via style transfer. The basic idea is to take the clunky translated prose and rewrite it to something that reads like it was written by a professional author, while remaining as faithful as possible to the original text. The source material is mostly amateur/MTL output full of direct sentence structure translations carried over from Chinese, awkward honorifics, over-translated idioms, that kind of thing. The goal isn't retranslation from the source but a cleanup of the English output. The tricky part is I have no clean data pair for supervised approaches. I've been looking at a few directions: Fine-tuning on target-style prose — collect high-quality English novels, fine-tune a small LLM to rewrite in that register. Just use a local LLM — run a local LLM and provide it with guidelines on what to rewrite and leave the same. No fine-tuning or anything needed, just hoping the transformer can handle it. A few things I'm stuck on: Is the faithfulness/fluency tradeoff actually manageable at the sentence level, or do I need paragraph-level context or more to preserve narrative coherence? How do people handle domain-specific terms like terminology and catchphrase-type things that need to survive the rewrite unchanged? Hard constraints during decoding, or just hope the model learns to leave them alone? Happy to hear about similar projects, relevant papers I might have missed, or just general lessons from working in this space. Thanks. submitted by /u/Divine_Invictus [link] [留言]

Meta has quietly launched Pocket, an experimental AI app that lets users generate and share interactive mini games using text prompts.

TL;DR: Most extensions block Google's AI Overviews by hiding the panel with a content script after it renders — fragile, flickery, and always a step behind Google's markup changes. A better approach: force udm=14 at the network layer with declarativeNetRequest , so the AI Overview never loads. The content script becomes a backstop, not the main mechanism. One Chrome API mystery — AI Mode being invisible to four different extension APIs — shows why the DOM was never the right layer. Google puts an AI Overview at the top of most search results now, and a lot of people would rather it didn't. So there's a whole shelf of Chrome extensions that remove it. Almost all of them work the same way, and I think that way is a mistake. The obvious approach, and why it's a trap The default move is DOM-hiding: inject a content script, wait for the AI Overview panel to render, find it by class name or attribute, and set display: none . It's the first thing anyone reaches for, and it works — until it doesn't. The problems are all baked into the approach. You're reacting after the render, so there's a flash of AI content before your script catches it. You're matching against Google's markup, which is obfuscated and reshuffled constantly, so every layout change is a silent breakage. And you're paying for DOM churn on a page you don't control. You end up in a permanent game of catch-up against a page that changes whenever Google feels like it. The deeper issue is that you're operating one layer too high. The panel is a symptom . By the time it's in the DOM, the work is already done — the server decided to send it, the page rendered it, and now you're scrambling to un-render it. If you can move the decision earlier, none of that scramble has to happen. The thesis: prevent it at the network layer Google Search takes a parameter, udm , that selects which result vertical you get. udm=14 is the plain "Web" results view — the classic list of links, no AI Overview, no AI Mode. It's Google's ow

Hopper will pay $35 million to settle FTC allegations that it used deceptive “dark patterns” to hide fees and mislead travelers about the cost and benefits of services.

Everyone reads the Hugging Face trending page in a browser. Almost nobody knows the whole Hub sits behind a plain JSON API with no key, no login, and cursor pagination. If you want a weekly report of what the AI community is actually adopting, you can build it with fetch . The endpoints GET https://huggingface.co/api/models GET https://huggingface.co/api/datasets GET https://huggingface.co/api/spaces Useful parameters, same across all three: sort ranks results: trendingScore , downloads , likes , createdAt , lastModified direction=-1 for descending search matches names, author restricts to one org like meta-llama filter matches Hub tags: text-generation , license:mit , even arxiv:2606.23050 limit up to 100 per page So the top trending models right now: https://huggingface.co/api/models?sort=trendingScore&direction=-1&limit=100 trendingScore is the interesting one. Downloads and likes rank all time popularity, which is dominated by the same old models. Trending score is Hugging Face's own measure of current momentum, and it moves daily. Today it puts a four day old OCR model from Baidu at the top, which no downloads sort would surface for weeks. Slim payloads with expand By default the models endpoint returns a siblings array listing every file in the repo, which bloats a 100 item page. Ask for exactly the fields you want instead: const fields = [ ' downloads ' , ' likes ' , ' trendingScore ' , ' pipeline_tag ' , ' tags ' , ' createdAt ' ]; const params = new URLSearchParams ({ sort : ' trendingScore ' , direction : ' -1 ' , limit : ' 100 ' }); for ( const f of fields ) params . append ( ' expand[] ' , f ); const res = await fetch ( `https://huggingface.co/api/models? ${ params } ` ); const models = await res . json (); Pagination is a Link header There is no page parameter. Each response carries a Link header with a cursor for the next page, GitHub style: function nextUrl ( res ) { const m = ( res . headers . get ( ' link ' ) || '' ). match ( /< ([^ > ] + ) >; \s *r

Not long ago I wrote about how I built a browser-based board game called "Growing City" in three days using AI — and how the hardest part wasn't the code at all. Some time has passed, and I wanted to share what happened next. Layout Bugs While vibe-coding solo, I only tested on my own screen, resolution, and browser. The problem surfaced as soon as real users joined with different setups: some people saw everything misaligned, some things got clipped, some cards overlapped each other. This is how it looked on some screens I had to rewrite the layout to use adaptive sizing so the game looks correct regardless of screen resolution. It should work now — but if something still looks off on your end, let me know and I'll fix it. Bots Started Talking Another change, unrelated to bugs. The service started feeling more alive. Previously, bots just played: rolled dice, bought cards, said nothing. Now they react in the chat to what's happening in the game — if someone's building gets taken, if someone buys an expensive card or runs out of money. It's a small thing, but the game feels noticeably more lively. An empty game with silent bots versus a session where someone's commenting on what's happening in chat — it's a meaningfully different experience, even though the game itself is the same. Thank You to Early Players A special thanks to everyone who tried the game after my first article. And extra thanks to a user with the nickname SHAM, who pointed out that the game rules never said you can't buy multiple purple cards in a row — even though the game itself has that restriction. Fixed! What's Next The project is still going. I'm thinking about ads and other ways to bring in players. Without new users, it's hard to get feedback — and without feedback, it's hard to know what to fix or improve first. The unit economics don't quite work out yet: paid acquisition costs more than I'm willing to invest at this stage. I'll keep figuring it out. If you have ideas on how to find playe

Here's the thing: i Cut My LLM Bill 40x and Rewrote Nothing: A CTO's Migration Story Six months ago my CFO slid a single line item across the table. OpenAI: $4,800 for the month. I'd like to say I was surprised, but I'd been watching the number climb for two quarters. What actually surprised me was how little it took to bring that number down to under $200 without anyone on my engineering team writing new code, without a single regression, and without telling my customers anything had changed. This is the story of how we did it, what we evaluated, what broke, and what I'd tell any other CTO walking into the same conversation with their finance lead. The Real Cost of Vendor Lock-In I've been a CTO long enough to recognize the pattern. You pick a vendor. The vendor becomes the default. Procurement assumes you're locked. Your engineers build abstractions around their quirks. Six months later nobody can tell you what it would actually cost to switch because the switching cost has become invisible. It's just "how we do things." OpenAI was that vendor for us. GPT-4o handled our summarization pipeline, our customer support copilot, and a few internal tools I'd hacked together on a Saturday. We were paying $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens. At our volume, those numbers add up faster than you'd think because the output side balloons in conversational workloads. Here's the arithmetic that should scare every CTO: at $10/M output, every million tokens of generated text costs a dime on the dollar. If your product generates a 1,000-token response for 100,000 users a day, that's 100 million tokens a day, which is $1,000 a day in output alone. That's $30,000 a month. Just for one feature. The 40x claim I keep seeing isn't marketing spin. DeepSeek V4 Flash charges $0.18/M input and $0.25/M output. Do that math against GPT-4o and the comparison is brutal. Multiply your current OpenAI output spend by 0.025 and you'll get the rough number you'd pay for

I love board games — especially the kind you can play without leaving home. You just call your friends, drop a link, and you're playing in minutes. At some point, I caught myself wondering: how realistic is it to build a complete game almost entirely with AI? Not a prototype, but something actually playable. I decided to find out. Three days later, I had a working browser-based board game: rooms, multiplayer, bots, chat, full game sessions. But the most interesting thing turned out to have nothing to do with AI writing code. What's the Game? The game is called "Growing City" (Растущий город). It's an economic board game about developing your own city. Each turn, players roll a die, buildings activate, income flows in, and you earn money to buy new structures. Gradually you build up enterprises, construct your economic engine, and race to complete all the key buildings before your opponents. You can play directly in the browser with no registration. I wanted the simplest possible entry: open the site, enter a nickname, create or join a room. If the mechanics seem familiar — you're not imagining it. I was inspired by a well-known city-building board game. Day 1: AI Really Can Write Games I'm not a developer. I work in tech, but I don't code professionally. Over the past few months I've been experimenting heavily with vibe coding, so I decided to build this project the same way. I didn't start with code at all. First, I wrote out the mechanics in detail: what cards exist, how a turn plays out, what should happen in each situation. Once the logic settled, I started gradually converting the description into code using AI. Day 2: Writing the Game Was Just the Beginning When the first playable version appeared, it quickly became clear that the code was far from the hardest part. The biggest problem was balance . If you leave everything as-is, players find the single most profitable strategy within a few games and repeat it endlessly. I had to manually tweak card costs, adj

The news comes about a week after OpenAI announced its own custom AI chip in a partnership with Broadcom.

One of Kalshi’s most prominent traders tells WIRED he’s swearing off Spotify-related markets until the issue is resolved.

Laptop chargers are much easier to travel with these days, and there's one specific technology that is largely to thank.

When looking for a Property Management System (PMS) dashboard for a hotel project, I noticed most existing solutions look like they were built in 1998. I decided to code a modern, premium dashboard from scratch using pure HTML and vanilla CSS. I focused on two main design trends: Dark Mode and Glassmorphism. Here is a breakdown of how I approached the design, along with some CSS snippets you can use in your own projects. The Dark Mode Color Palette Instead of using pure black (#000000), I used a deep slate blue for the background. This reduces eye strain for hotel staff working night shifts and feels much more premium. `css :root { --bg-dark: #0f172a; /* Deep slate / --surface-dark: #1e293b; / Slightly lighter surface / --accent-gold: #facc15; / Premium gold for CTAs */ --text-main: #f8fafc; } body { background-color: var(--bg-dark); color: var(--text-main); }` The Glassmorphism Effect For the statistics cards (like Revenue and Occupancy Rate), I used a subtle glass effect to make them pop off the dark background without looking flat. `css .stat-card { background: rgba(30, 41, 59, 0.7); backdrop-filter: blur(12px); -webkit-backdrop-filter: blur(12px); border: 1px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.08); border-radius: 16px; padding: 24px; transition: transform 0.3s ease; } .stat-card:hover { transform: translateY(-5px); }` The Result By combining these modern design tokens with a clean CSS Grid layout, the dashboard feels incredibly sleek. It tracks live bookings, room statuses, and RevPAR seamlessly. Want the full code? If you are a developer, agency, or freelancer building a SaaS or a booking system, you don't have to start from scratch. I've packaged the complete, fully responsive HTML/CSS template. You can see the design and grab the source code here to save yourself 20 hours of coding: 👉 Download the Lumina PMS Template Happy coding! Let me know if you have any questions about the CSS architecture in the comments.