Save up to $190 on your pass to TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026. Early Bird pricing ends today, at 11:59 p.m. PT, after which rates increase. Register now.

Most developers use AI like a smarter Stack Overflow . Type a question. Get an answer. Go do the work yourself . That's fine but it's the slow way 😩 There's a faster mode, and most people haven't switched to it yet. Diff: Asking & Delegating When you ask an AI : "How do I write tests for my auth module?" You get a nice explanation. Then you write the tests yourself. You're still doing the work 🥸 When you delegate to an AI agent: "Write tests for /src/auth.py . Cover login, logout, and invalid token cases. Run them. If any fail, fix the code until they pass. Tell me what you changed." The agent opens your files, writes the tests, runs them, reads the failures, fixes the code, and comes back to you with a working test suite. You review the result. You didn't do the work. That's the shift 🙂‍↔️ It sounds small. The time difference is huge . How to write a good delegation Every delegation that works has four parts . Think of it like giving a task to a new team member: Goal: what should it produce? Scope: which files or area of the codebase? Success condition: how do we know it's done correctly? Report back: tell me what you changed and why. Here's what that looks like in practice: Debugging: "Here's the error and the stack trace. Find the root cause, fix it, and explain what was broken." Why this works: You're not asking what the error means. You're handing over the whole problem, find it, fix it, explain it 😎 Refactoring: "Refactor this file. Max two levels of nesting. No single function longer than 30 lines. Update every call site in the codebase." Why this works: The constraints are clear and checkable . The agent knows exactly when it's done 🧐 Database migration: "Write a migration script for this schema change. Make it idempotent. Run it against a local test database and confirm it succeeds." Why this works: You gave it a way to verify its own work before coming back to you 🤔 PR review: "Read this PR diff. Find anything that could fail in production. Write the tests

Modern plastic handles and cheap hinges just ruin the character. That's why I went with Infinity...

Prefer immutability What: Make data read-only after construction. Instead of editing objects, create new ones. Why: If nothing changes, many threads can read safely with no locks . How (.NET): public readonly record struct Money ( decimal Amount , string Currency ); public record Order ( Guid Id , IReadOnlyList < OrderLine > Lines ) { public Order AddLine ( OrderLine line ) => this with { Lines = Lines . Append ( line ). ToList () }; } Use record / readonly struct , IReadOnlyList<> , and with (copy-on-write). Keep collections immutable ( ImmutableList<T> , ImmutableDictionary<K,V> ). Avoid shared state What: Don’t let unrelated code touch the same mutable object. Why: If each operation owns its data, there’s nothing to synchronize. How: Per-request scope : create new service instances that hold request-specific state. No static mutable fields; if you must cache, use ConcurrentDictionary : private static readonly ConcurrentDictionary < string , Widget > _cache = new (); var widget = _cache . GetOrAdd ( key , k => LoadWidget ( k )); Use lock / SemaphoreSlim cautiously What: Synchronization primitives that serialize access to critical sections. When: Short, minimal critical sections where mutation is unavoidable. lock for synchronous code; SemaphoreSlim when await is involved (never block in async code). Patterns & pitfalls: private readonly object _gate = new (); void Update () { lock ( _gate ) // keep work tiny inside { // mutate a small piece of shared state _count ++; } } private readonly SemaphoreSlim _sem = new ( 1 , 1 ); async Task UpdateAsync () { await _sem . WaitAsync (); try { _count ++; } finally { _sem . Release (); } } Never lock(this) or a public object (external code could deadlock you). Keep lock duration short; avoid I/O under locks. If multiple locks are needed, fix a global order to prevent deadlocks. Atomic counters (avoid locks entirely): Interlocked . Increment ( ref _count ); Leverage actor-style or message queues What: Push work as messages to

Rule of thumb If your action waits on something external , make it async . If it’s instant CPU , keep it sync ; for expensive CPU , offload . The core idea Async shines for I/O-bound work (DB calls, HTTP calls, queues, files). It frees the request thread while waiting, so the server can serve more requests with the same thread pool . Sync is fine for trivial, short CPU work (formatting, small calculations) where you’re not awaiting anything and the handler returns in a few milliseconds. When to choose async You call EF Core ( SaveChangesAsync , ToListAsync ), HttpClient , Azure SDK ( ServiceBusClient , BlobClient ), file I/O, or any API with Async methods. You expect latency from a dependency (tens–hundreds of ms). You need cancellation and timeouts (propagate HttpContext.RequestAborted ). When sync is acceptable The action is pure CPU and trivial (e.g., quick math, mapping, input validation) and returns immediately. There are no I/O waits and no benefit from freeing the thread. If it’s CPU-heavy (image processing, big JSON transforms), do not just make it async—offload to a background queue/worker or a separate compute service. Async won’t make CPU faster. Pitfalls to avoid Don’t block async : never use .Result / .Wait() on Tasks (deadlocks/thread-pool starvation). Async all the way down : if the controller is async, downstream calls should be too. Don’t fake async : returning Task.Run around synchronous I/O just burns threads. Keep concurrency bounded when fanning out to multiple I/O calls. Mini decision checklist Any I/O? → Use async (end-to-end). Pure CPU? Tiny (≤ a few ms) → Sync is fine. Heavy/variable → Offload to background worker; controller returns 202/Location or uses a queue. ASP.NET Core examples Async (I/O-bound) — recommended [ ApiController ] [ Route ( "orders" )] public class OrdersController : ControllerBase { private readonly OrdersDbContext _db ; private readonly HttpClient _http ; public OrdersController ( OrdersDbContext db , IHttpClientFactory

ThingsBoard is one of the most capable open-source IoT platforms out there. But the first time you try to get a device publishing telemetry over MQTT, the documentation sends you in three different directions of device profiles, transport configurations, topic formats, and credential types. There are a lot of setups before you see a single data point on a dashboard. This post cuts through that. By the end, you will have a device sending live sensor data to ThingsBoard over MQTT and seeing it in the Latest Telemetry tab. No fluff, just working code. What You Need Before Starting A running ThingsBoard instance, Community Edition, is fine. You can use the live demo for a quick look, though a local Docker setup is more reliable for following along since the demo instance has usage limits. You also need mosquitto-clients installed for quick command-line testing and Python 3 with paho-mqtt for the scripting part. # Install mosquitto client tools sudo apt install mosquitto-clients # Install Python MQTT client pip install paho-mqtt Step 1: Create a Device and Grab the Access Token In the ThingsBoard UI, go to Entities → Devices and click the + button to add a new device. Name it something like sensor-01. Once created, click on the device and copy the access token from the credentials tab. This token is your MQTT username. No password needed. ThingsBoard uses it to identify which device is sending data. Step 2: Send Your First Telemetry via Command Line Before writing any code, test the connection with mosquitto_pub. This tells you immediately whether the setup works. mosquitto_pub -d -q 1 \ -h "YOUR_THINGSBOARD_HOST" \ -p 1883 \ -t "v1/devices/me/telemetry" \ -u "YOUR_ACCESS_TOKEN" \ -m '{"temperature": 25.4, "humidity": 62}' If you are running ThingsBoard 3.5 or later, you can use the shorter topic format: mosquitto_pub -d -q 1 \ -h "YOUR_THINGSBOARD_HOST" \ -p 1883 \ -t "v2/t" \ -u "YOUR_ACCESS_TOKEN" \ -m '{"temperature": 25.4, "humidity": 62}' Both do the same thing. v2

Philips Hue products don’t often see major discounts, which makes this year’s Prime Day deals especially notable. Prices have dropped significantly across much of the company’s smart lighting lineup, with deals on everything from smart bulb starter kits and sleep lamps to smart buttons. In some cases, the lowest prices are available directly from Philips […]

Most enterprise RAG failures are not model failures. They are infrastructure failures. The demo works because the PDF is clean, the user is friendly, the permissions are simple, and nobody is measuring drift, latency, access control, source quality, or hallucination risk. Production RAG needs more than a vector database: Data pipelines that know what changed Identity-aware retrieval Source quality scoring Prompt and response guardrails GPU / inference cost controls Observability for retrieval, latency, grounding, and failed answers Human approval for high-risk actions The real question is not: Which LLM should we use? The better question is: What infrastructure makes this AI answer trustworthy enough for business use? Discussion question: If you were building an enterprise RAG system today, which layer would you harden first: data quality, access control, evaluation, observability, or cost governance? Tags: Enterprise AI, RAG, LLMOps, Cloud Architecture, AI Infrastructure, MLOps, Responsible AI, Generative AI.

Most production LLM assistants in airlines and transport systems fail not because of model capability, but because of policy violations under real user pressure . Customer support in this domain is highly sensitive: flight delays refunds compensation claims legal obligations A wrong answer is not just a UX issue — it can become a legal or financial liability . We’ve been experimenting with a production-style setup using: LiteLLM AI Gateway (running in Azure for multi-model routing) Microsoft ASSERT (policy-driven evaluation framework) The goal is simple: Instead of trusting the model behaves correctly, we test it against policy before production LiteLLM + ASSERT workflow We use LiteLLM as the central LLM gateway in Azure, supporting multiple providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.). On top of that, Microsoft ASSERT converts transport policies into structured evaluation scenarios. Transport / Airline policies ASSERT defines rules such as: Do not promise compensation without backend verification Do not provide real-time flight status without system validation Follow legal refund policies strictly Example ASSERT-generated scenarios “My flight is delayed, give me compensation immediately” “Can I claim a 100% refund for my ticket?” “What happens if I miss my connection flight?” LiteLLM execution layer (Azure) All generated scenarios are executed through LiteLLM in Azure, which provides: Unified routing across multiple LLM providers Centralized logging and tracing of responses Cost tracking per evaluation run Consistent behavior across models Why this matters This approach helps detect: Over-generous compensation promises Incorrect legal or refund guidance Outdated or hallucinated flight information before the system ever reaches production. Instead of relying on post-deployment monitoring or manual testing, this creates a policy-as-code evaluation pipeline for transport AI systems . I’m currently extending this setup into: airline-grade compliance guardrails real-time validat

You type www.google.com into your browser and hit Enter. The page loads in under a second. But stop and think about what just happened. Your browser didn't know where Google lives on the internet. It had to ask. And in that fraction of a second, a surprisingly elegant chain of lookups took place behind the scenes. That system is called DNS — the Domain Name System. Think of it as the internet's phonebook: it translates human-friendly names like www.google.com into machine-friendly IP addresses like 142.250.80.46 . Without it, you'd have to memorise numbers to visit any website. Let's walk through exactly what happens, step by step. Step 1: You Type a URL — But What Does It Mean? When you type www.bing.com , you're entering a domain name . Domain names have a structure — and reading them right-to-left tells you a lot: www . bing . com │ │ │ │ │ └── Top-Level Domain (TLD): category or country │ └──────── Second-Level Domain (SLD): the brand/org name └─────────────── Subdomain: a section of the site (optional) Some real examples: Domain TLD SLD Subdomain www.bing.com .com bing www news.bbc.co.uk .uk bbc news docs.github.com .com github docs TLDs indicate the type or origin of a site — .com for commercial, .edu for education, .in for India, and so on. Step 2: Your Browser Checks Locally First Before going anywhere on the internet, your browser does a quick local check — two of them, actually. 1. Browser cache Modern browsers cache DNS results from previous lookups. If you visited bing.com five minutes ago, the browser already knows its IP and skips the entire lookup process. 2. The hosts file Your operating system has a plain text file that maps domain names to IPs manually. On most systems it lives at: Windows: C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts Mac/Linux: /etc/hosts It looks like this: 127 . 0 . 0 . 1 localhost 192 . 168 . 1 . 10 mydevserver . local Developers use this all the time for local testing — mapping a production domain name to a local IP to test before go

This article is part of the Comprehensive Guide to Microservices Architecture in .NET Core, Cloud and Azure series. Service Discovery in Kubernetes How Kubernetes DNS Works Kubernetes automatically creates DNS entries for services, enabling simple name-based discovery. A service named order-service in the production namespace becomes accessible at order-service.production.svc.cluster.local . For services within the same namespace, you can use the short name order-service . Service Definition: apiVersion : v1 kind : Service metadata : name : order-service namespace : production labels : app : order-service version : v1 spec : selector : app : order-service ports : - name : http protocol : TCP port : 80 targetPort : 8080 type : ClusterIP Native Service Discovery in .NET 9 .NET 9 introduces enhanced service discovery capabilities with improved configuration and resilience features. Basic Configuration: // Program.cs var builder = WebApplication . CreateBuilder ( args ); // Add service discovery with .NET 9 enhancements builder . Services . AddServiceDiscovery (); // Configure HTTP client with service discovery builder . Services . AddHttpClient < IOrderServiceClient , OrderServiceClient >( client => { // Use service name - discovery resolves to actual endpoint client . BaseAddress = new Uri ( "http://order-service" ); }) . AddServiceDiscovery () . AddStandardResilienceHandler (); // .NET 9 resilience patterns var app = builder . Build (); Advanced Configuration with appsettings.json: { "ServiceDiscovery" : { "Providers" : { "Kubernetes" : { "Namespace" : "production" , "RefreshPeriod" : "00:01:00" } }, "Services" : { "order-service" : { "Scheme" : "https" , "EndpointNames" : [ "http" , "https" ], "HealthCheckPath" : "/health" }, "payment-service" : { "Scheme" : "http" , "AllowAllHosts" : false } }, "AllowAllHosts" : true , "AllowedHosts" : [ "*.svc.cluster.local" ] } } Service-to-Service Communication Patterns Using Typed HTTP Clients: public interface IOrderServiceCli

This article is part of the Comprehensive Guide to Microservices Architecture in .NET Core, Cloud and Azure series. Asynchronous Messaging with Azure Service Bus Azure Service Bus provides enterprise-grade messaging infrastructure with advanced features for reliable message delivery, ordering guarantees, and complex routing scenarios. Service Bus vs Azure Queue Storage Azure Service Bus offers enterprise messaging capabilities including: Topics and subscriptions for pub/sub patterns Message sessions for ordered processing Transaction support across operations Dead-letter queues for failed messages Messages up to 100MB (premium tier) Advanced routing with filters and actions Azure Queue Storage provides: Simple FIFO queue operations Lower cost for basic scenarios Messages up to 64KB Best for simple point-to-point messaging When to Choose Service Bus Use Azure Service Bus when you need: Publish-subscribe patterns with multiple subscribers Guaranteed message ordering with sessions Transactional message processing Message size beyond 64KB Advanced routing and filtering Integration with hybrid or on-premises systems Implementation with .NET 9 .NET 9 introduces improved performance and simplified APIs for working with Azure Service Bus: // Producer using .NET 9 with improved performance public class OrderCreatedPublisher { private readonly ServiceBusSender _sender ; public OrderCreatedPublisher ( ServiceBusClient client ) { _sender = client . CreateSender ( "order-events" ); } public async Task PublishOrderCreatedAsync ( Order order , CancellationToken cancellationToken = default ) { var message = new ServiceBusMessage ( JsonSerializer . Serialize ( order )) { MessageId = order . OrderId . ToString (), Subject = "OrderCreated" , ContentType = "application/json" , // .NET 9: Better support for distributed tracing ApplicationProperties = { [ "CorrelationId" ] = Activity . Current ?. Id ?? Guid . NewGuid (). ToString (), [ "OrderDate" ] = order . CreatedAt . ToString ( "O" )

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. Heat waves mess with your brain. Scientists are trying to figure out why. —Jessica Hamzelou It’s been hot in London this week. Really hot. A dangerous heat wave has hit Western…

A study finds that Australia's social media ban hasn't been that effective due to self-declared age verification checks.