标签：#ci

Dozens of people have complained to the Federal Trade Commission about Norse Atlantic Airways’ tech-first customer service operation. Some said they lost thousands of dollars.

Michael Stiefel spoke to Sonya Natanzon, about the intersection of technical and social aspects of software architecture. Understanding the business and how a company operates is more important than the specific technologies used. Effective requirements analysis requires focusing on problems to be solved that describe good and bad outcomes, rather than statements of need or solution statements. By Sonya Natanzon

Sellers of products with names like Boner Bears and DTF have voluntarily recalled their products after testing positive for the active ingredients in Viagra and Cialis.

submitted by /u/Dapper_Order7182 [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/InvestigatorSoft5764 [link] [留言]

Solo dev here. Building an AI companion that lives entirely on your device — no cloud, no account, no data ever leaving your phone. Coming soon to Google Play. Would love honest feedback. I genuinely just want opinions. It is not even available yet. I have been working on this for over a year. I am still building it. I started this project because a regular family budget like mine cannot just go out and purchase an AI companion robot. So I started with a cheap robot kit from Amazon — something my 9 year old son and I could build together. Then I thought... "What if I could give it a real brain?" I had an old Samsung Galaxy collecting dust and went to work. Scout is a calm AI companion that transforms an old phone into a friend. He listens, remembers, learns, and provides a warm family-safe presence — designed to feel less like an assistant and more like someone who is simply glad you are there. Everything runs offline. No account. No subscription. No data leaving your phone. Ever. I will need beta testers later — but right now I am just curious: What would make you look at something like this and think "that is actually kind of nice"? Edit: It will what support your own free Gemini key for online conversations if you want them. I call this "more Intelligent conversations" submitted by /u/CapeManCoral [link] [留言]

There might finally be a way forward for long Covid treatment—if only you were allowed to talk about it.

Follow this link to ask your questions during our Ask Me Anything session on the European Parliament's subreddit, 02/06 15.00-16.00 CET. submitted by /u/Marty_ol [link] [留言]

I do analysis of automobile dealership data and prepare reports based on the analysis for management review. I’m getting way better analytics and cleaner reports being built by ChatGPT Plus compared to Claude pro. Claude is consuming too many tokens and sometimes for longer documents it used my 100% of the 5 hour limit which is very annoying. ChatGPT on the other hand feels to me that it has unlimited usage for my requirement. What is the view of you people when using AI for business and financial data analytics? Is anyone else finding ChatGPT nicer too? submitted by /u/TurboChargedV12 [link] [留言]

I've been paying attention to my own workflow lately and noticed a lot of my time goes into moving stuff between AI sessions, not the actual thinking. Like I'll get an output in one session and then manually bring the relevant pieces into another so it has what it needs. What I can't tell is how much of that is necessary vs. me just being sloppy. So I'm curious how others handle it: When you move from one session to another, what do you actually carry over? Just the output, or also the reasoning, the decisions, the constraints, what to avoid? Have you ever handed off too little and the second session went sideways? Or too much and it got lost in the noise? Does anyone have a mental rule for what's "enough context" to pass along? Trying to figure out if there's a clean pattern here or if it's just inherently messy. Curious what people have landed on. submitted by /u/riley_kim [link] [留言]

Great to see Odysseus blow up this past day, local AI getting this much attention is genuinely good for everyone building in this space. Figured this is the right crowd to share what we're launching tomorrow (June 1st), since we're playing a pretty different game. A quick framing: Odysseus is a self-hosted workspace that points at engines (Ollama, llama.cpp, vLLM, cloud APIs) and runs through Docker. Conifer is the engine itself, with our own runtime, running natively on Mac, Linux, and Windows. So we're the layer underneath, not a competitor to the workspace. What's actually in it tomorrow: A native inference runtime across Mac, Linux, and Windows, with our own Metal engine for Apple Silicon already matching or beating llama.cpp on a few models on the M3 Max (full benchmarks, including where we're still behind, are at conifer.build/benchmarks) A real coding IDE on top (CodeMirror, integrated terminal, file viewers), so you can code locally with models that never leave your machine Typhoon, a local agent that can read and edit a folder you point it at, kernel-sandboxed rather than just a shell with a warning Install is a signed app you double-click, no Docker, no localhost ports Fully free and open source The honest reason we exist: PewDiePie's wave defined "local AI" in millions of people's heads as Linux + Docker + an NVIDIA rig. If you weren't on that exact setup, the conversation probably felt like it skipped you. Conifer is what local AI should feel like when it's actually native to your machine, whatever your machine is. Launches tomorrow, free and open source like PewDiePie! You can sign up for our waitlist here: conifer.build I'll be around in the comments all day tomorrow, please bring the hard questions. submitted by /u/No_Elephant_7530 [link] [留言]

Ok, so I had days long conversation with AI, but half of it disappeared, and now it's giving me different answers than it was before. submitted by /u/Melora1976 [link] [留言]

With all the talk about AI companions and autonomous agents, I’ve been experimenting with building a more personal, always-on assistant that runs locally or on your own hardware. The goal wasn’t just another chatbot — it was something that could handle voice conversations, manage ongoing tasks across different platforms (chat apps, scheduled triggers, etc.), remember context over long periods, and delegate work without constant babysitting. What stood out in practice • One consistent “brain” across everything — Whether you’re talking to it via voice, Telegram, a web interface, or it wakes up on a schedule, the core reasoning, memory, and tool use stay the same. This eliminated a lot of the fragmentation you see in many current agent setups. • Modular extensions — Different capabilities (voice, different chat networks, external tools, long-term memory consolidation) plug in cleanly. This made it easier to add or swap things without rebuilding the whole system. • Persistent and proactive — It can maintain memory across days/weeks, run background tasks, and even hot-reload its configuration when you change settings. The result is something that starts feeling more like a digital collaborator than a question-answering box. A quick feel for the voice interaction style is here: https://youtube.com/shorts/NGIi8sliooU I open-sourced the harness (called Maven) under an MIT license for anyone interested in running or extending their own version: https://ageneral.ai/maven I’m curious how others are thinking about personal agent setups in 2026. • Do you prefer fully local models, cloud APIs, or a mix? • What capabilities feel most missing from today’s consumer AI assistants? • How important is “owning” your agent data and runtime vs. using polished third-party services? Would love to hear experiences or concerns from both technical and non-technical users. submitted by /u/qasimsoomro [link] [留言]

I know the most popular are Claude, chat got and Gemini but idk which one to use submitted by /u/Ok_Durian3627 [link] [留言]

ive been scrolling on tiktok and instagram reels, found out that the subjects in these specific ai skit videos generated by chinese people tend to have a really bad negative canthal tilt and same face syndrome. after a while, i noticed some ai advertisements are getting the same negative canthal tilt issue, the ethnicity, age, gender dont matter in this case, they all have a same eyes i can only attach one image, but i have 2 other examples i came across. submitted by /u/Deanphoque [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/WishbringerAurus [link] [留言]

Everyone knows about tech debt. You cut corners on code quality to ship faster, and you pay for it later. We're definitely watching a new version of that emerge in real time, except instead of deferring manageable code, you're deferring actual understanding. And unlike tech debt, cognitive debt compounds invisibly. You don't get a failing test suite. You just get someone who can't debug their own project, can't evaluate whether the AI's suggestion is good, and can't extend what they've built without prompting their way through it again. What I keep thinking about is where this leads at scale. Right now it's mostly developers vibe-coding their way through projects they half-understand. But AI is moving into law, medicine, and finance. The same dynamic follows: people making consequential decisions with tools they can't interrogate, in domains where "I'll just re-prompt it" isn't a recovery strategy. The pessimistic, or maybe rational read is that judgment without foundational understanding is just confident ignorance, and we're building entire careers on that foundation right now. Curious what people here think. Does cognitive debt get self-correcting as the stakes get high enough? Or are we sleepwalking into a generation of professionals who are deeply dependent on systems they fundamentally don't understand? submitted by /u/Expensive_Trouble_40 [link] [留言]

okay so this is embarrassing to admit but here it is took a reasoning test in 2022, scored pretty well. Retook the same test last month out of curiosity, dropped significantly, like not a small difference. The only major change in my life is using AI tools daily for work and the worst part? i kind of knew something was off before the test. I noticed i couldn't sit with a problem anymore without immediately opening chatgpt, like my brain forgot how to be uncomfortable for even 5 minutes memory is worse. attention is worse, i feel slower in conversations. but my productivity at work has never been higher lol so what is actually happening here , are we trading long term cognitive health for short term output? Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me being paranoid ⊙⁠﹏⁠⊙ genuinely asking because i don't want to just accept this as normal (⁠｡⁠ŏ⁠﹏⁠ŏ⁠) submitted by /u/Difficult-You9582 [link] [留言]

He's been on the same exestencial crisis for a while so how do I end it submitted by /u/Huge_Heart3957 [link] [留言]

A flanged pipe joint looks simple: two raised faces, a gasket between them, a ring of bolts pulling them together. Yet the gasketed bolted flange is one of the most common sources of leaks in process plants, and the reason is almost always the same — the bolts were not tightened to the right load. Too little and the joint weeps; too much and the gasket is crushed. The number that sits between those failures is the bolt preload, and it is not the same as the pressure load. This article explains how a bolted flange actually carries internal pressure, why the bolts must be preloaded well above the pressure end force, works a concrete example, and lists the mistakes that turn a sound joint into a leaking one. Why this calculation matters Bolted flange joints appear wherever a pipe or vessel has to be opened for maintenance: pump connections, valve bodies, heat exchanger shells, instrument tappings, and reactor manways. Unlike a welded joint, a flange is meant to be taken apart and reassembled, and every reassembly depends on the fitter applying the correct bolt load. The stakes are real. A leaking flange on a hazardous service can release flammable or toxic fluid. Even a benign leak wastes product and forces an unplanned shutdown. Design codes such as ASME Section VIII Appendix 2 set out a full method for sizing flange bolts, and at its heart is a comparison: the load the bolts can supply versus the load the joint demands in two distinct conditions — seating the gasket, and holding pressure. Understand the pressure end force and you understand the floor that the bolt load must clear. The core method When the line is pressurised, internal pressure acts on the fluid inside the flange and pushes the two flanges apart. The total separating force is the hydrostatic end force , the pressure acting over the area enclosed by the gasket sealing circle: H = p * (pi / 4) * G^2 Here p is the internal pressure and G is the gasket reaction (sealing) diameter — the effective circle on