标签：#X

Reflection AI will pay $150 million a month beginning July 1, 2026 through 2029 for immediate access to Nvidia's latest GB300 AI chips and supporting hardware across SpaceX's Colossus 2 data center near Memphis, Tennessee.

React Server Components in 2026: Patterns, Pitfalls, and When to Actually Use Them Most React Server Components problems stem from teams treating them like regular components with a new rendering location. The architecture shift is deeper than that. RSC fundamentally changes where code executes, what data can cross boundaries, and how developers reason about state. Teams that ignore these constraints burn weeks debugging serialization errors and performance regressions. The pattern that production teams overlook is the server/client boundary itself. Understanding where computation happens, what props can serialize, and when to break out of server rendering determines whether RSC improves or destroys your application's performance. Core Concepts: How RSC Actually Works Under the Hood React Server Components execute on the server and send rendered output to the client. No JavaScript bundle ships for these components. The client receives a serialized tree describing what to render, along with holes for client components to fill. The execution model works like this: the server runs your component tree, fetches data directly, and serializes the result. When the payload reaches the browser, React reconstructs the UI without hydrating server component code. Only client components hydrate with their JavaScript bundles. RSC execution flow from server to client This distinction is critical. Server components cannot use hooks like useState or useEffect because they don't exist in the browser. They render once on the server per request. Client components ship JavaScript and can use the full React API. The implication here is that your component tree becomes a mix of server and client code. The boundary between them determines your bundle size, waterfall depth, and debugging complexity. Production-Ready Patterns: Streaming, Suspense, and Data Fetching The correct pattern for data fetching in server components eliminates the request waterfall. Fetch data directly in the component

The high-altitude race is a unique test of car and driver.

The company warned about dangers of advanced AI far more than rival OpenAI.

Huntress, HackerOne, Jamf, Recorded Future, and Tanium are among the cybersecurity companies that had data stolen following an earlier breach at market research firm Klue.

Dan Fineran explores how eBPF has evolved far beyond its roots in packet filtering into a robust, safe way to extend the Linux kernel. He explains how the eBPF "verifier", the security guardrail, enables implementation of deep observability and networking without the risks of traditional kernel modules or the slow upstreaming process. By Dan Fineran

I did not choose DeepSeek because I think GPT-4 is bad. I chose it because I was building a free app, and free apps teach you what actually matters pretty fast. The question was simple: how do I keep sessions cheap enough that people can practice a lot without me lighting money on fire? The answer pushed me toward DeepSeek-V3 (and later R1 for specific tasks). The real constraint was volume The app is a conversation practice tool. People come in to rehearse hard talks, not to admire the model. A single practice session runs 8-15 turns. Each turn is roughly 300-600 tokens in, 100-300 out. Multiply that by five sessions a week per active user and the costs start compounding. Here is what the math looked like when I was choosing (mid-2026 pricing): Model Input cost (per 1M tokens) Output cost (per 1M tokens) Cost per 10-turn session (est.) GPT-4o $2.50 $10.00 ~$0.04-0.06 GPT-4 Turbo $10.00 $30.00 ~$0.12-0.18 DeepSeek-V3 $0.27 $1.10 ~$0.004-0.007 DeepSeek-R1 $0.55 $2.19 ~$0.008-0.012 At scale, the difference between $0.005 and $0.05 per session is the difference between running a free product and needing a paywall after three conversations. I wanted people to come back daily without hitting a wall. What DeepSeek handled well It stayed in character for 10-15 turns. It pushed back when the user got vague. It followed persona heuristics (numbered if/then rules in the system prompt) about as reliably as GPT-4o did for our use case. For salary negotiation rehearsal, the model needs to say "that's not in the budget" and hold that position for three more turns while the user tries different approaches. DeepSeek-V3 did this. Not perfectly, but reliably enough that sessions felt real. It also made the app easier to run as a free product. People can try, fail, reset, and try again without me worrying about per-session cost. Where GPT-4 was still better GPT-4 (and 4o) is smoother with nuanced emotional wording. When a conversation gets subtle, loaded with subtext, or requires pick

This is an adapted English version of an article I first wrote in Japanese. I work with AI to shape and review my drafts, but the argument and the field observations are my own. The numbers are cited from public surveys (linked at the end). I built an aggressive prompt-injection block to stop my AI agent from repeating the same mistakes. It worked, so I kept adding rules. By the time I noticed, the file had ballooned to 56,000 characters — and the agent had quietly stopped functioning. Too much context, attention spread too thin to act on any of it. I gutted it back to under 1,200 characters, and here's the part that still stings: it behaved better with fewer rules. That was the day I learned my whole mental model was backwards. This isn't a post about making your AI more accurate. It's about designing so that accuracy stops being the thing you depend on. The mistake I made for months My agent kept skipping the same step in a workflow. So I did what every engineer does on instinct: I added a rule. "Don't skip this step." Then it did something else dumb, so I added another rule. Then another. I was treating the rules file like a conversation with a colleague — as if the agent would remember yesterday's correction and carry it forward. It doesn't. Every run starts cold. "Be careful next time" assumes a next time that shares state with this time. For a stateless model, there is no continuity to appeal to. You are talking to a counterparty with no memory of the conversation you think you're having. So the rules pile up, because each correction feels like progress. And for a while the numbers even improve. But adding rules has a ceiling, and I blew straight through it: at 56,000 characters the agent wasn't reasoning over my guardrails anymore — it was drowning in them. Knowing a rule and stopping at it are different things Here's the distinction that took me far too long to see. Putting a rule in the context window means the model knows the rule. It does not mean the mod

У большинства self-hosted VPN-панелей одна и та же боль: Docker-стек, внешняя БД, реверс-прокси и куча конфигов, которые надо связать между собой, прежде чем хоть что-то заработает. Мне хотелось наоборот — что-то, что можно закинуть на свежий VPS и поднять меньше чем за минуту. Так появилась РосПанель : self-hosted панель для администрирования личного VPN-сервера на Xray-core , который поставляется одним статическим бинарником . React-фронтенд вшит через go:embed , база — встроенный SQLite, отдельного веб-сервера нет. Поставил, открыл, добавил юзера. Главная идея: один бинарник, ничего лишнего Цель, которая определила всё остальное, — радикальная простота. В отличие от Marzban и 3x-ui, у РосПанели нет Docker-обвязки, нет внешней БД и нет отдельного веб-сервера, который надо настраивать. Всё живёт в одном исполняемом файле: Веб-интерфейс собирается в web/dist и вшивается в Go-бинарник на этапе сборки. Состояние хранится в SQLite (чистый Go-драйвер modernc , то есть без CGO ). Конфиг Xray всегда генерируется из базы и применяется супервизором — SQLite это единственный источник правды, а не JSON, который правят руками. В итоге деплой — это просто положить бинарник и systemd-юнит. Никакой оркестрации, ничего не надо держать в синхроне. Что она на самом деле делает РосПанель — это панель управления (control plane), а не VPN-клиент. Она настраивает и обслуживает ваш собственный сервер: генерирует конфиг Xray, выдаёт ссылки на подписки и показывает статистику. Протоколы из коробки — один конфиг Xray, один набор учёток: VLESS-Vision (TCP/443 + uTLS-fingerprint) Trojan-WS (через fallback на 443) Hysteria2 (UDP с port-hopping) VLESS-gRPC-REALITY (отдельный порт, маскировка под чужой TLS) Маскировка — панель спрятана за секретным путём. Любой другой путь отдаёт сайт-заглушку (11 готовых шаблонов), так что сервер неотличим от обычного хостинга. Без знания /<secret>/ форму логина не найти. TLS, который просто работает — ACME через Let's Encrypt или ZeroSSL, авто-продление и self

I built a Chrome extension called Margin — a news reader that lives in the browser's side panel and shows one bite-sized story at a time, instead of an infinite-scroll feed. This is a build log: the decisions, the constraints that pushed back, and a couple of things I had to solve in slightly unusual ways. Why the side panel Chrome shipped chrome.sidePanel in MV3 a while back and most uses I saw were utility tools — note-taking, translation helpers. Nobody was using it for content consumption. News felt like a good fit: a side panel that stays open next to whatever you're working on, where you tap through headlines in a couple of minutes without leaving the page. The reading model is intentionally narrow: one card, one headline, one short summary, tap to read the full article at the source . No infinite scroll, no algorithmic feed. If you've used InShorts, the shape will be familiar. The stack Preact + Vite + @crxjs/vite-plugin . Preact because the side panel is a small UI surface and I didn't want React's weight for what's essentially a card stack and a settings screen. @crxjs/vite-plugin handles the MV3-specific build wiring (manifest generation, service worker loader, HMR for the extension context) that would otherwise be a lot of manual plumbing. The constraint that shaped onboarding chrome.sidePanel.open() requires a user gesture . You cannot call it from a background service worker on install — Chrome will throw. That one constraint shaped the whole first-run experience. My first instinct was "just auto-open the panel on install so people see it immediately." Doesn't work. The fix ended up being two-pronged: On chrome.runtime.onInstalled with reason === 'install' , open a real browser tab with a short walkthrough (find the icon → pin it → open the panel). The button on that page calls sidePanel.open() — valid, because the click is the gesture. The first time the panel itself is opened, show an in-panel welcome screen before onboarding, nudging the user to pin

This is a submission for the June Solstice Game Jam What I Built The Imitation Game The Imitation Game is a real-time multiplayer social deduction game inspired by Alan Turing's famous Imitation Game the thought experiment that eventually became known as the Turing Test. Most people believe they can easily tell the difference between an AI and a human. They assume AI is too perfect, too logical, too fast, or too obvious. The Imitation Game challenges that assumption. Players enter a live chat room convinced they'll spot the machine within minutes. Then conversations begin, suspicions form, accusations fly, and certainty starts to disappear. Was that awkward response written by a human, or an AI trying to sound human? Was that emotional story genuine, or generated? Was the player who stayed silent suspicious, or simply distracted? By the end of a match, players often discover that identifying an AI is far harder than they expected. The real question isn't whether the machine can fool people. It's whether people are as good at detecting machines as they think they are. Instead of a single human interrogating a machine, players are placed into a live chat room with other participants and asked a simple question: Can you identify which player is actually an AI? Hidden among the players is a Quanbit , a rogue artificial intelligence from the year 3026 . Its mission is simple: blend in, appear human, avoid suspicion, and survive. The challenge for human players is equally simple, but far more difficult in practice. They must carefully analyze conversations, voting patterns, response timing, and social behavior to determine who among them is secretly the machine. The game currently features two distinct modes, each designed around a different style of deception. Eyefold Eyefold is the purest form of the game's Turing Test experience. Players enter a room where one participant is secretly a Quanbit. Conversations unfold naturally, and everyone is free to discuss any topic.

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility — your central hub for news and insights on the future of transportation.

Part 1: Self-hosting on Jetson Orin Nano 👽 Jetson Orin Nano Web Server Follow-up...

Having spent over 25 years in software development and managing countless Linux environments, I've accumulated a vast collection of custom bash scripts, containers, and CLI tools. Remembering their exact paths and managing them efficiently directly from the terminal is a common challenge. To solve this, I built mytuis . mytuis is a small, attractive terminal UI for managing a personal catalogue of applications. It is built with gum and plain bash, with persistent storage in a human-readable YAML file. GITHUB REPO : https://github.com/horaciod/mytuis Why mytuis? I wanted a tool that didn't require heavy dependencies or a complex setup, but still looked great and provided a smooth user experience. Here is what mytuis brings to the terminal: CRUD operations: You can create, read, update, and delete application entries from a single menu. Quick launch: Pick an app from the filterable list and it is launched immediately. It replaces the manager process via exec, meaning no extra shell window is left behind. Smart path handling: It accepts absolute paths (like /usr/bin/firefox), relative paths (./scripts/myscript.sh), tilde paths (~/bin/foo), or plain command names looked up in your $PATH (firefox). Persistent metadata: Every entry stores its name, description, absolute path, creation date, and last-used date. Friendly TUI: You get clear menus, color-coded messages, and clean borders, all powered by gum. Under the Hood: Plain Text and Standard Utils Simplicity and standard compliance were key goals. mytuis requires bash ≥ 4 and standard Unix utilities like awk, sed, grep, date, and tput. Your catalogue is stored at ~/.mytuis.yaml. Because it is a standard YAML file, it can be inspected, edited, or backed up with any text editor. It is also completely safe to sync with a dotfiles repository or version-control. To ensure data integrity, all file operations are performed atomically by rewriting the YAML file from scratch on every change, so there is no risk of leaving the fi

A scan node sits at the leaf of the tree and pulls rows from a single table. A join node sits in the middle and brings together the rows that its two children send up. It takes one row from users , one row from orders , checks whether they belong to the same user, and if they match, emits the combined row. PostgreSQL has three nodes for this one job: NestLoop, HashJoin, and MergeJoin. The reason a single task splits into three nodes is much like the reason scans did. There is more than one way to find matching pairs from two inputs, and which way is cheapest depends on the size of the inputs and the shape of the join condition. Deciding which way is cheapest, by costing the alternatives, was the planner's job in an earlier chapter. This section looks at what those three nodes actually do when they execute. Given the same two tables, the three find matches in completely different ways, and that difference in approach is exactly what tells them apart. How the three nodes route requests All three join nodes are internal nodes with two children. One child is called the outer, the other the inner. All three run on the Volcano model's pull framework: when the parent asks for the next row, the join node takes rows from its two children, builds one matched row, and sends it up. The only difference is the order and manner in which it routes pull requests to its two children. NestLoop pulls the inner from the start all over again for each outer row it receives. HashJoin slurps the inner in one pass to build an index in memory, then takes outer rows one at a time and probes that index. MergeJoin, on the assumption that both sides are sorted in the same order, advances both sides one step at a time in lockstep. NestLoop: rescan the inner for every outer row The simplest method is NestLoop. As the name says, the loops are nested. The outer loop takes one row from the outer; the inner loop scans the inner from beginning to end, looking for inner rows that match that outer row. Wh

By the time 1.4 ends, the planner has produced one PlannedStmt. Inside it is an execution tree built from Plan nodes, frozen into a form you can follow step by step, something like "go into the primary key index on users, fetch the one matching row, then output that whole row." But that is still only a blueprint. Reading actual pages off disk, picking out the rows that match the condition, handing results back to the caller: none of that has happened yet. The stage that takes that blueprint and produces actual rows is the executor. The difference between the planner and the executor is the difference between deciding and doing. The planner was the stage that weighed "which index, in what order, with what join method" by cost and chose . The executor takes the chosen approach and carries it out as is . There is nothing left to choose. It just runs the nodes baked into the plan tree and pulls rows out of them. To run it, the executor takes the Plan tree it received and turns it into a PlanState tree. The Plan tree is the static blueprint the planner made, and it does not change during execution. But to actually run, each node needs state that changes as execution proceeds: which row it is reading now, whether the hash table is fully built, what tuple it has buffered from a child. So when execution begins, a PlanState tree with the exact same shape as the Plan tree is created. The blueprint Plan tree is left untouched, and the running state lives in that PlanState tree instead. How the executor produces result rows is the heart of the stage. The executor does not build the entire result set at once and stack it up. Instead, it asks the topmost node of the tree for "the next row," and that request travels down the tree to the leaves. When a leaf scan node reads one row from a page and passes it up to its parent, that row climbs up one level at a time through joins and filters until it reaches the top. The top sends that single row to the caller (the client, or the targe

A few weeks ago, I started exploring the Afriex MCP server. The setup was surprisingly straightforward. Connect your MCP client. Configure your API key. Verify the connection. Done. But then I ran into a different problem. Not a technical problem. A prompt problem. The Blank Prompt Problem Once everything was connected, I found myself staring at an empty prompt box. What should I ask? Sure, I could retrieve balances. I could create customers. I could generate virtual accounts. But what were the most useful workflows? What were the prompts that would actually help developers build real products? This isn't a problem unique to Afriex. It's becoming a common challenge across the entire MCP ecosystem. The infrastructure exists. The tools work. But many developers don't know where to start. MCP Changes How We Build Traditionally, integrating a payment API looked something like this: Read documentation Find the endpoint Write HTTP requests Parse responses Build business logic With MCP, the workflow looks very different. You can simply tell your AI assistant what you want to build. For example: Create a customer onboarding flow that: - Collects customer details - Generates a virtual account - Displays payment instructions Build it using Next.js and TypeScript. Instead of manually stitching everything together, the AI can interact with infrastructure through the MCP server. That's incredibly powerful. But only if you know what to ask. The Idea That's what led me to build the: Afriex MCP Prompt Cookbook A collection of practical, production-oriented prompts designed specifically for developers building with Afriex MCP. The goal is simple: Copy. Paste. Build. Instead of starting from scratch every time. The cookbook is open source and available on GitHub: https://github.com/SonOfUri/afriex-mcp-cookbook Feel free to explore the prompts, use them in your own projects, and contribute new recipes. What's Inside The cookbook is organized around real-world use cases. Not API endpoi

Originally published on MRTD.NET — fast, sourced news on crypto security, cyber & SEO. The uncomfortable first lesson You built a clean site, submitted a sitemap, maybe pinged IndexNow — and Google still shows nothing. Here's the part most guides skip: getting indexed by Google and getting indexed by everything else are two different problems , and conflating them wastes weeks. We separate what actually moves Google in 2026 from the folklore that just feels productive. Bing, Yandex and ChatGPT are the easy half If you've set up IndexNow , you've largely solved discovery for Bing, Yandex, Naver, Seznam and Yep — you POST your new/changed URLs to one endpoint and they get notified instantly. And because ChatGPT Search retrieves from Bing's index , confirmed Bing indexing effectively gates your visibility in ChatGPT's web results. That's a big chunk of the modern search surface handled with one integration. The catch: Google does not use IndexNow. It has said so repeatedly. So every "instant indexing" claim that leans on IndexNow is talking about Bing's world, not Google's. For Google, you need different levers. What actually gets you into Google There are really only two fast paths, plus one slow one. 1. Google Search Console — the only direct lever. Verify your domain (a private DNS TXT record; it does not trigger penalties or "re-evaluation," a common fear), submit your sitemap.xml , then use URL Inspection → Request Indexing on your key pages. There's a soft daily cap (~10–12 URLs), so spread a new site's pages over a few days. GSC is also the only place you can see whether a domain carries an inherited problem — essential if you bought an aged or expired domain. 2. Links on pages Google already re-crawls hourly. Googlebot's crawl budget for a brand-new, zero-authority domain is tiny. The fastest way to get a new URL discovered is a link to it from a page Google visits constantly — Reddit, Hacker News, Medium, established communities. These links are usually nofoll

Doing the work and being able to explain the work are two different skills. I've had the first one for 8 years. I'm building the second one now. I'm a Cloud Platform Engineer. AWS, Kubernetes, Terraform, Linux. Regulated environments, healthcare, production systems. Real experience. Almost zero public documentation of it. That's the gap I'm closing, starting from Day 1. The platform is KodeKloud. Each session gives you tasks across multiple tools. I'm posting the Linux and AWS tasks here. Here's what I built and what actually matters about each one. Task 1 (Linux): Create a User with a Non-Interactive Shell The task was to create a system user that can own processes but cannot log in interactively. This is what you do for service accounts. bash ssh user@hostname sudo su - useradd username -s /sbin/nologin cat /etc/passwd | grep username The /sbin/nologin shell is the important part. The user exists in the system, can own files and run processes, but cannot open a shell session. You verify by checking /etc/passwd because the last field in each line is the assigned shell. I've been doing this in production environments for years. I still verify every time. Not because I'm unsure. Because in a regulated environment, you don't assume, you confirm. Task 2 (AWS): Create an EC2 Key Pair via CLI aws ec2 create-key-pair \ --key-name my-key-pair \ --key-type rsa \ --key-format pem \ --query "KeyMaterial" \ --output text > my-key-pair.pem aws ec2 describe-key-pairs --key-names my-key-pair The private key is returned exactly once at creation. AWS does not store it. If you lose it, you generate a new one and replace it everywhere it was used. I've seen this cause real problems in production environments where the key wasn't backed up properly. Always run chmod 400 my-key-pair.pem after saving it. SSH will refuse to use a key file with open permissions. It won't tell you that's the reason straight away. What Day 1 Taught Me That 8 Years Didn't Nothing here was technically new to

SpaceX's AI1 satellite spans 70 meters tip-to-tip — wider than a Boeing 747 — and it exists entirely to run AI inference in low Earth orbit. Elon Musk posted the reveal video to X on June 9, 2026, ahead of SpaceX's IPO, with a three-word summary: "much simpler than Starlink." Each satellite produces 150 kW of peak AI compute and 120 kW sustained. SpaceX's roadmap calls for 1 GW of orbital AI compute capacity by late 2027, which at 150 kW per satellite means manufacturing roughly 6,700 AI1 units per year. To hit that number, they are building an 11-million-square-foot facility in Bastrop, Texas called Gigasat — nearly twice the floor area of Tesla's Gigafactory Nevada, dedicated to satellite production. The question is not whether the engineering works. SpaceX has launched more than 7,000 Starlink satellites. The question is whether orbital AI compute makes economic sense at scale, and that question nobody has answered publicly yet. The Reveal Wasn't Accidental SpaceX filed for its IPO at approximately $75 billion valuation in early June 2026. Musk's June 9 reveal of AI1 arrived within days of that filing. Orbital AI compute is the narrative SpaceX needs to justify a valuation that goes beyond launching satellites for other people. Every terrestrial cloud provider — AWS, Google Cloud, Azure — is competing for land, power, and cooling capacity to support the next generation of frontier AI. Musk's pitch is that those three constraints don't exist in space. The physics backs him up. The economics remain unproven. Why Space Has Structural Advantages for AI Compute The AI1 satellite's design exploits two physical realities that are impossible to replicate on Earth. Power is essentially free. In a sun-synchronous LEO orbit, a satellite receives near-constant solar illumination. SpaceX's solar arrays achieve 250 W/m² power density without atmospheric attenuation. The marginal cost of electricity after the capital investment in the array is close to zero — no grid contracts,