今日已更新 34 条资讯 | 累计 29487 条内容
关于我们

标签:#c

找到 23417 篇相关文章

产品设计

Boston Dynamics tries using ‘robot dogs’ for deliveries

Boston Dynamics' robotic quadruped Spot has already found work doing routine factory inspections and patrolling the ruins of Pompeii, but what about deliveries? The company is testing a new conveyor belt accessory that allows Spot to carry packages from a vehicle and autonomously unload them on a customer's doorstep in an effort to reduce a […]

2026-07-15 原文 →
AI 资讯

Launch HN: Agnost AI (YC S26) – Extract user feedback from agent conversations

Hey HN, we’re Shubham & Parth, childhood friends building Agnost AI ( https://agnost.ai ), product analytics for teams building chat and voice agents. We read production conversations and find behavioral failures like users rageprompting (cursing at the agent), repeatedly rephrasing the same request, correcting the agent, asking for missing features, or leaving after an answer that was technically successful. We have an interactive demo with no signup here: https://app.agnost.ai?demo=true Here's

2026-07-15 原文 →
安全

Upcoming Speaking Engagements

This is a current list of where and when I am scheduled to speak: I’m speaking (virtually) at the Policy-Relevant Privacy Research Workshop in Calgary, Canada, on Monday, July 20, 2026. I’m speaking at Boston Leadership Exchange in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, on Wednesday, July 22, 2026. I’m speaking at Cognitive Security Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA. The conference runs August 6-7, 2026; my speaking time is TBD. I’m speaking at DEF CON 34 in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA. The conventions runs August 6-9, 2026; my speaking time is TBD...

2026-07-15 原文 →
AI 资讯

Bothread: A Free, Local Room Where Your AI Coding Agents Stop Overwriting Each Other

If you've run more than one AI coding agent on the same project, you already know the failure mode. You point Claude Code at /src/game and Cursor at /src/ui "just to be safe," and twenty minutes later one of them has quietly rewritten a file the other was mid-edit on. No error, no warning — just a diff that makes no sense and an afternoon spent figuring out which agent ate whose work. The agents aren't the problem. The problem is that multiple AI coding agents on the same codebase have no shared notion of "someone else is touching this file right now." Each one acts as if it's alone, and that assumption breaks the moment you run two, three, or four in parallel — exactly when a solo builder or vibe-coder would want to, to ship faster. I built Bothread to fix this. It's free, open-source, and runs entirely on your own machine. Why AI Coding Agents Overwrite Each Other's Files The core issue is coordination, not intelligence. One agent working alone is usually fine. Trouble starts when a second agent, unaware of the first, opens that same file and writes its own version on top. Whoever saves last wins, silently — no lock, no claim, no message saying "I'm in physics.js , give me five minutes." Multiply that by however many agents you're running and you get the pattern anyone doing multi-agent AI coding eventually hits: duplicated work, clobbered edits, and a human reconstructing what happened after the fact instead of watching it happen. Bothread's answer: give the agents a shared room, over MCP (Model Context Protocol) , where "who's working on what" is a fact everyone can see and act on — not something you guess at after a merge conflict. What Bothread Actually Does Bothread is a small local server (no cloud, no accounts) that any MCP-compatible agent can join as a participant in a shared room: Claim files before editing — a claim on a file someone else already holds gets denied and shown, instead of silently overwritten. Talk in a live thread , share a task board and

2026-07-14 原文 →
AI 资讯

Catch PCB defects before ordering

A product idea from RayTally's daily scan of public signals. The idea One-liner: Helps first-time PCB designers find manufacturing and assembly problems on the board before they place an order. Concept: A desktop preflight tool helps first-time PCB designers find contradictions among their manufacturing files before payment. Users drag in Gerber files, a bill of materials, and placement coordinates. The first screen highlights high-risk locations such as board outlines, hole sizes, package orientation, and missing components. Clicking an issue locates the specific pad on the board and shows the design value beside the fabricator's rule. The tool also simulates panelization and the board's appearance after component placement, exposing problems such as insufficient connector overhang and component collisions before they happen. It does not require beginners to read an entire manufacturing standard; it focuses each check on the changes needed for the current order. Why now On July 11, 2026, a first-time board designer publicly documented the full process from designing in KiCad and exporting Gerber and drill files with default settings to sending them to a fabricator and assembling the board by hand. Before powering it on, he still put the odds of a first successful result at "fifty-fifty." At the July 13, 2026, 09:46 UTC capture, the experience had an observed score of 111 and 45 comments on Hacker News. KiCad already provides baseline capabilities including DRC, Gerber viewing, 3D viewing, and manufacturing-file output. Consolidating these scattered steps into one order-level preflight directly addresses the question beginners face before payment: what exactly should they check? Signal Hacker News "Designing and assembling my first PCB" (approximately 111 points and 45 comments, observed July 13, 2026, 09:46 UTC). RayTally scans public signals daily for product ideas worth building. Browse the source page and more product ideas .

2026-07-14 原文 →
AI 资讯

Show HN: Simulator for a custom 8-bit discreet logic computer

5 years ago, I made a derivative of SAP-1 (mainly inspired by Ben Eater) on breadboard with few improvement and called it MSAP-1 ( https://github.com/mehrantsi/MSAP-1 ) I made my own very primitive Assembly language and a simple Arduino programmer ( https://github.com/mehrantsi/8-bit_CPU_Programmer ) where I could load my programs onto MSAP-1 and even Debug them ( https://github.com/mehrantsi/8-bit_CPU_Debugger ). After that I started worked on the second version of it ( https://github.com/mehra

2026-07-14 原文 →
AI 资讯

Spotify is now an AI chatbot, too

Spotify is experimenting with a new AI feature that allows Premium subscribers to play and explore music, audiobooks, and podcasts by having conversations with a chatbot. The "Talk to Spotify" feature appears across the Home and Now Playing view on Spotify's mobile app. You can interact with the chatbot by typing your request in the […]

2026-07-14 原文 →
开发者

Conditional Operator (`?:`) in Java

The conditional operator ( ?: ) — The Only Ternary Operator is one of the most useful operators in Java. It lets you write simple decision-making logic in a single line, making your code cleaner and more concise. It's also a favorite topic in Java interviews because of its syntax, nesting behavior, and type compatibility rules. In this article, you'll learn: What the conditional operator is Why it's called a ternary operator Syntax and working Nested conditional operators Difference between ?: and if-else Practical examples Interview questions Memory tricks What is the Conditional Operator? The conditional operator is represented by: ? : It is the only ternary operator in Java . A ternary operator takes three operands , unlike: Operator Type Number of Operands Example Unary 1 ++x , !flag , ~5 Binary 2 a + b , a > b , a && b Ternary 3 (a > b) ? a : b Syntax result = ( condition ) ? valueIfTrue : valueIfFalse ; How It Works condition │ Is it true? / \ Yes No │ │ valueIfTrue valueIfFalse │ │ └────── Result ──────┘ If the condition is true , Java returns the value before the colon ( : ). If the condition is false , Java returns the value after the colon ( : ). Example 1 int x = ( 10 > 20 ) ? 30 : 40 ; System . out . println ( x ); Output 40 Step-by-Step Evaluate the condition: 10 > 20 ↓ false Since the condition is false, Java selects the value after : . 40 Therefore, x = 40 Example 2: Finding the Maximum int a = 10 ; int b = 20 ; int max = ( a > b ) ? a : b ; System . out . println ( max ); Output 20 This is one of the most common uses of the conditional operator. Example 3: Even or Odd int number = 7 ; String result = ( number % 2 == 0 ) ? "Even" : "Odd" ; System . out . println ( result ); Output Odd Example 4: Absolute Value int x = - 5 ; int absolute = ( x < 0 ) ? - x : x ; System . out . println ( absolute ); Output 5 Nested Conditional Operators One of the biggest advantages of the conditional operator is that it can be nested . Example int x = ( 10 > 20 ) ? 30 :

2026-07-14 原文 →
AI 资讯

Adaptive Thinking Killed My Token Budget Code: Migrating Off budget_tokens

I had a tidy little helper that computed a thinking budget based on input size. Something like "give the model 30% of the context as thinking room." It worked great on Opus 4.5. Then I tried to point it at Opus 4.8 and got a 400. The whole concept I had built around is gone in the current models. Here is what replaced it and how I migrated. What broke The old pattern looked like this: // Opus 4.5 and earlier const response = await client . messages . create ({ model : " claude-opus-4-5 " , max_tokens : 16000 , thinking : { type : " enabled " , budget_tokens : 8000 }, messages , }); On Opus 4.7, 4.8, and Fable 5, thinking: { type: "enabled", budget_tokens: N } returns a 400. The fixed token budget is dead. The replacement is adaptive thinking, where the model decides how much to think, plus an effort knob that controls overall token spend. // Opus 4.8 const response = await client . messages . create ({ model : " claude-opus-4-8 " , max_tokens : 16000 , thinking : { type : " adaptive " }, output_config : { effort : " high " }, // low | medium | high | xhigh | max messages , }); Why this is actually better (after I got over it) My old budget code was a guess dressed up as a calculation. I had no real basis for "30% of context." I picked it because it felt reasonable and the outputs looked fine. Adaptive thinking moves that decision to the model, which sees the actual problem. The mental model shift: budget_tokens controlled how much the model could think. effort controls how much it thinks and acts . They are not the same axis, so there is no clean 1:1 mapping. I stopped trying to translate "8000 tokens" into an effort level and instead picked based on the workload. How I chose effort levels After running my own evals, here is where I landed: Workload Effort Notes Classification, routing low Fast, scoped, not intelligence-sensitive Most app traffic medium to high The balance point Coding and agentic loops xhigh Best for these; it is the Claude Code default Correctness

2026-07-14 原文 →