标签：#r

As developers, we all want AI to review our code. But sending proprietary, unreleased code to third-party cloud APIs (like OpenAI or Anthropic) isn't always an option—especially if you're working on client projects or under strict NDAs. I wanted an AI code reviewer that was 100% private , free , and actually understood the context of my entire project . So, I built one using Python and Ollama . Here’s a look at what it does and how you can use it! What it does It’s a CLI tool that uses local LLMs (like qwen2.5-coder or llama3 ) to review your code. No API keys, no subscriptions, and zero data leaves your machine. But I didn't want to just paste code snippets into a terminal. I wanted a tool that actually fits into a developer's workflow. Here is what it supports: 1. Review an Entire Codebase Just point it at your project folder. The app will recursively gather your files, automatically ignoring bulky folders like node_modules , .git , vendor , and .next , and give you a full architectural review. python3 app.py ./my-project/ 2. Review Pull Requests Automatically Want to review a PR? Just pass the GitHub PR URL. The tool auto-detects that it's a diff, fetches the changes, and switches into "PR Review Mode." Instead of looking at architecture, it zeroes in on the + lines to find bugs, edge cases, and missing tests introduced by the PR. python3 app.py https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/30000 (Working on a private repo? Just pipe it: gh pr diff 123 | python3 app.py ) 3. Pipe Anything Into It You can pipe individual files, diffs, or snippets straight from your terminal. cat src/main.py | python3 app.py 🛠️ How to run it yourself Install Ollama and pull a solid coding model: ollama pull qwen2.5-coder Clone the repo and install the requirements: pip install -r requirements.txt Run it! python3 app.py ./your-code 💡 The Magic Under the Hood The script dynamically switches its prompt based on what you feed it. If you give it a directory, it looks for separation of concerns

The AI hardware landscape has shifted significantly in 2026, with NVIDIA, AMD, and Intel all competing for developers who need GPUs capable of running local large language models and AI inference workloads. Choosing the right GPU for AI workloads requires looking beyond marketing numbers and focusing on the specifications that actually affect real-world performance. Memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and software ecosystem maturity consistently matter more than theoretical compute peaks when running transformer models locally. This comparison covers the most relevant workstation and prosumer GPUs available in mid-2026, including NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture (RTX 50-series), AMD's Radeon AI Pro R9700, and Intel's Arc Pro B70. The goal is to provide a practical reference for developers deciding which hardware best fits their model sizes, software stack, and budget constraints. Which GPU specifications matter for AI workloads Marketing materials from GPU vendors emphasise AI TOPS and tensor performance, but these metrics rarely tell the complete story for local inference. The specifications below are ranked by their actual impact on running large language models. VRAM capacity VRAM is typically the first limiting factor when running LLMs locally. A model cannot execute entirely on the GPU if it does not fit into available memory. Once model weights spill into system RAM, inference performance drops dramatically. Approximate VRAM requirements for common model sizes: Model Size Recommended VRAM 7B 8-12 GB 14B 16 GB 32B 24-32 GB 70B 48-64 GB 120B+ Multiple GPUs For most homelab users, moving from 16 GB to 32 GB of VRAM provides a substantially larger practical benefit than increasing raw compute performance. A 32 GB GPU capable of running an entire model will often outperform a theoretically faster 16 GB GPU forced to offload tensors into system memory. Memory bandwidth Memory bandwidth determines how quickly model weights can be streamed into compute units. Large tran

Your customers have stopped Googling "best note-taking app." They're asking ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini instead — and getting back a short list of three or four products. If your brand isn't on that list, you're invisible, and unlike a Google ranking you can't even see where you stand. That's the problem I set out to measure. This post is the build breakdown: five AI answer engines, one uniform result shape, a mention-detection core that doesn't lie to you, and the honest gotchas I hit around cost and billing. The whole thing runs as a paid Apify Actor written in async Python. The niche has a name now — GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) or AEO (Answer Engine Optimization). Think SEO, but the search engine is a language model and the "ranking" is whether you get named in the answer. The core question Give the tool a brand, its competitors, and the buyer-intent questions your customers actually type: { "brand" : "Notion" , "competitors" : [ "Obsidian" , "Coda" , "Evernote" ], "prompts" : [ "best note taking app for students" , "Notion vs Obsidian which should I use" ], "engines" : [ "perplexity" , "chatgpt" , "gemini" , "claude" , "aiOverview" ], "samplesPerPrompt" : 3 } It asks each engine each prompt (several times, because LLM answers vary run-to-run), then analyzes every answer for: were you mentioned, how early, were you recommended or just listed, what's the sentiment, who else got named, and — the part incumbents skip — which domains each engine cited. That last one is the actionable output: it tells you which websites the AI trusts for your category, i.e. where you need coverage. Architecture: one shape to rule them all The trick that keeps the whole thing sane is that every engine adapter — whether it's a clean REST API or a messy HTML scrape — returns the exact same record shape : { " engine " : " perplexity " , " prompt " : " best note taking app for students " , " sampleIndex " : 1 , " responseText " : " ... " , " citations " : [{ " url " : " ... "

With the cash, the company aims to expand its world model offering and reach customers across geographies.

The social media site says it will amplify posts made by users' mutual followers' to give the feed more of a communal feel.

The company is raising at least $75 million, led by Robot Ventures, with significant participation from USV and other prominent investors.

Hi all, author here. SX started as a CLI to let developers share skills across AI clients without having to rely on git for storage. This allowed sharing at the Repo/Team/Org and Personal level. However, the more we spoke to users the more we realized that non-technical users were actually using skills more and more but they had no way to share. And there was no way you were going to get your legal team to install and learn git. SX 2.0 is targeting non-technical teams by adding a native Mac, Win

Hi HN, I'm Kevin. I built ContextVault because I kept running into the same problem with AI tools. Every project accumulated prompts, coding conventions, architectural decisions, examples, and other pieces of context that made the models significantly more useful. The problem was that this information quickly became fragmented. Some lived in ChatGPT Projects, some in Claude, some in Markdown files, some in internal documentation, and some only existed in previous conversations. Late last year, I

Project Hail Mary, They Will Kill You, and The Long Walk are among the films deserving of your eyeballs this month.

Please read the 'How is this possible?' page, and the full interactive walkthrough to see how this is all done. Did you use AI? The site copy and explanations hand-edited by me pressing my keyboard buttons. I find AI writing to be cringeworthy and bland. However, AI did help a lot with churning out the code. It's definitely 'my code' - LLM-assisted, but not 'vibe-coded'. This is an entirely novel project and I don't think you could (or should) point an LLM at this and press 'Go' My full thoughts on the use of AI in this project are available to read here submitted by /u/Putrid-Bench5056 [link] [留言]

Bring on the magenta and peach.