标签：#t

My GPT got dumber after the update" gets blamed on the model regressing, or on you prompting worse. Both are unfalsifiable, and both send you to fix the wrong layer. The layer that actually moved is the one you can pin. "The model" is two layers. The weights — the trained network, slow to change, and when they do change it's announced under a new name. And the wrapper — the router that picks which model answers, the system prompt, the default reasoning effort, verbosity caps. The wrapper changes silently, on its own schedule, per product. It's almost always what moved under you. So stop re-tuning prompts to chase it. Pin the wrapper: Force the route. Don't leave it on Auto — set Thinking (or say "think hard") so the router can't quietly demote your prompt to a faster, weaker model. OpenAI's own GPT-5 launch post describes exactly this router (it scores prompts "simple" vs hard); after the backlash they put the picker back (Auto/Fast/Thinking — TechCrunch, Aug 2025). Pin the version. If you build on a model, call its exact versioned ID via the API. A model ID's weights don't change — new versions ship under new IDs — so router and system-prompt churn can't reach you. Own the harness. Running agents? Set the system prompt, reasoning effort, and verbosity yourself instead of inheriting a default. Anthropic's own April 23 post-mortem is the proof: six weeks of "Claude Code got worse" traced to three wrapper changes (a reasoning-effort downgrade, a reasoning-history bug, a verbosity cap their ablations put at ~3% quality) — API weights never touched. A real weights change — a new model — will still move behavior. But that's announced, and you choose when to adopt it. The silent stuff is all wrapper, and the wrapper is the part you can pin. Sources: OpenAI GPT-5 launch (router + "think hard"); TechCrunch, Aug 2025 (model picker reinstated); Anthropic April 23 post-mortem (anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem); InfoQ and VentureBeat (corroboration); Claude platfor

The first year class HelloWorld { public static void main ( String args []) { // Displays "Hello World!" on the console. System . out . println ( "Hello World!" ); } } The second year /** * Hello world class * * Used to display the phrase "Hello World" in a console. * * @author Sean */ class HelloWorld { /** * The phrase to display in the console */ public static final string PHRASE = "Hello World!" ; /** * Main method * * @param args Command line arguments * @return void */ public static void main ( String args []) { // Display our phrase in the console. System . out . println ( PHRASE ); } } The third year /** * Hello world class * * Used to display the phrase "Hello World" in a console. * * @author Sean * @license LGPL * @version 1.2 * @see System.out.println * @see README * @todo Create factory methods * @link https://github.com/sean/helloworld */ class HelloWorld { /** * The default phrase to display in the console */ public static final string PHRASE = "Hello World!" ; /** * The phrase to display in the console */ private string hello_world = null ; /** * Constructor * * @param hw The phrase to display in the console */ public HelloWorld ( string hw ) { hello_world = hw ; } /** * Display the phrase "Hello World!" in a console * * @return void */ public void sayPhrase () { // Display our phrase in the console. System . out . println ( hello_world ); } /** * Main method * * @param args Command line arguments * @return void */ public static void main ( String args []) { HelloWorld hw = new HelloWorld ( PHRASE ); try { hw . sayPhrase (); } catch ( Exception e ) { // Do nothing! } } } The fifth year /** * Enterprise Hello World class v2.2 * * Provides an enterprise ready, scalable buisness solution * for display the phrase "Hello World!" in a console. * * IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED * TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER * PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR REDISTRIVUTE THE LIBRARY AS * PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAM

Pull a hot steel bolt out of a furnace and quench it in oil, and a fair question is: does the bolt cool from the outside in, with a sharp temperature difference between its skin and its core, or does the whole thing drop in temperature more or less together? The answer is not obvious from the part itself. A thin copper washer and a thick ceramic block behave very differently in the same bath, even at the same starting temperature. The Biot number is the small calculation that settles this question before you commit to any heavy analysis. It tells you, in a single dimensionless figure, whether an object can be treated as having one uniform temperature or whether you must resolve a temperature gradient inside it. That distinction changes the math from a one-line exponential decay to a partial differential equation. Why this calculation matters Transient heating and cooling problems show up everywhere: heat-treating metal parts, quenching forgings, cooling electronics, baking or chilling food, warming up an engine block. In every one of these, the engineer wants to know how the temperature changes over time. The hard version of that question requires solving the heat conduction equation across the body, with position and time as variables. The easy version is the lumped-capacitance model, which treats the whole object as a single point at one temperature. It reduces the problem to a simple first-order exponential. The catch is that the lumped model is only valid when internal conduction is fast compared with surface convection. The Biot number is exactly the check that tells you whether that condition holds. Skip the check and apply the lumped model where it does not belong, and you can badly mispredict cooling times, residual stresses, and the risk of cracking from thermal gradients. The core formula The Biot number compares two thermal resistances. One is the resistance to conducting heat through the inside of the solid. The other is the resistance to carrying heat a

n8n is the open-source workflow automation tool that competes with Zapier and Make. I have been running it for saas.pet's content pipeline for 6 months. Here is my honest take on self-hosting n8n versus paying Zapier, and whether it is worth the hassle. What n8n does that Zapier cannot n8n is an open-source workflow automation platform with 400+ built-in integrations. You connect nodes on a visual canvas: when X happens in one app, do Y in another. The killer difference from Zapier: you control where it runs. Self-host on a $5/month VPS or run on n8n Cloud at $20/month. No per-task pricing, no 'you hit your zap limit' emails. For high-volume workflows, the cost difference is dramatic. I run n8n on the same $6/month HK server that hosts my proxy. 12 workflows handle saas.pet's entire content pipeline: daily data fetch from GitHub Trending API, transform JSON, write to data files, trigger build, push to git, notify me on Telegram. The same workflows on Zapier would cost $73.50/month (Professional plan with 2,000 tasks). On n8n, $6/month for the server plus $0 for the software. The self-hosting overhead is real—updates, SSL certs, monitoring—but for 12+ active workflows, the savings are $800+/year. If you only have 2-3 simple zaps, stay on Zapier's free tier. If you have 5+ workflows with volume, n8n pays for the hosting in month 1. My 6-month setup for saas.pet I run n8n in Docker on the HK server. The initial setup: install Docker, pull n8n image, configure nginx reverse proxy, set up SSL via Certbot. That took about 2 hours the first time. Now I can deploy n8n in 15 minutes on a fresh server. The 12 workflows: (1) Daily GitHub trending fetch via saas.pet/api/trending, (2) data transform to unified JSON, (3) write to data/YYYY-MM-DD.json, (4) trigger build-ci.mjs, (5) git add + commit + push, (6) Telegram notification with commit SHA, (7) weekly sitemap health check, (8) monthly backup of reviews/ JSONs to S3, (9) uptime ping every 15 minutes, (10) DNS health check,

On Thursday, the Instagram account for a lecture series in Newport Beach, CA posted a photo of what appeared to be a cease and desist letter from the surveillance technology company Flock Safety. Flock has received significant backlash over its technology and work with law enforcement agencies, and this letter kicked off yet another wave […]

Quando voce cria um container e depois outro, eles podem nao se enxergar. O motivo quase sempre e a rede. Entender os tipos de rede que o Docker oferece resolve isso de uma vez. Comece listando as redes que ja existem no seu Docker. docker network ls A rede bridge e a rede host vem de fabrica. Nenhuma delas oferece resolucao de nomes entre containers. Para isso voce precisa criar a sua propria rede. docker network create minha-rede Agora os containers que entrarem nessa rede conseguem se comunicar pelo nome do container. docker run -d --name app1 --network minha-rede nginx docker run -d --name app2 --network minha-rede alpine sleep 3600 Teste a comunicacao. docker exec app2 ping app1 -c 2 O ping funciona. O DNS interno do Docker resolve app1 para o IP interno do container. Isso resolve 90% dos problemas de comunicacao. A rede bridge padrao nao tem esse recurso. Crie sua propria rede sempre que precisar que containers se enxerguem. Agora a rede host. Ela elimina o isolamento de rede. O container usa a placa do host diretamente, sem NAT e sem mapeamento de porta. docker run -d --name web-host --network host nginx O nginx fica acessivel em http://localhost:80 direto. Sem -p 80:80. Mas so um container pode usar cada porta, porque a porta e a do host de verdade. Para ambientes com mais de uma maquina, existe a rede overlay. Ela precisa do Docker Swarm ou de um cluster. docker swarm init docker network create -d overlay rede-overlay docker service create --name api --network rede-overlay --replicas 3 nginx Os containers em maquinas diferentes se enxergam pelo nome como se estivessem na mesma maquina. No dia a dia, a rede bridge personalizada resolve quase todo caso de uso. Host e para performance ou casos especificos. Overlay e para quando voce escala para mais de uma maquina. That's all for now. Thanks for reading!

You ship all the time. A fix here, a new setting there, a feature you spent a whole weekend on. And your users mostly don't notice. That gap is expensive. When people can't see a product moving, it feels abandoned, even when you're shipping every week. They churn a little faster, they email asking for things you built a month ago, and all the momentum you're actually creating stays invisible. The fix is boring and old: a changelog. But not a changelog rotting in a Notion doc nobody opens. One that shows up inside your app , where users already are. Here's the approach I settled on. The idea: a widget, not just a page A "what's new" widget is a small button or badge in your UI. Click it, and a panel slides out with your latest updates. Users see it in the flow of using your product, not on some /changelog page they'd never visit. You really want three things: An in-app widget users actually see. A public page and RSS feed you can link from emails and docs. A way to write updates in plain language and publish in a click. The one-tag version I ended up building a tool for this (honest disclosure below), but the integration is the part worth showing, because it's the pattern any changelog widget should follow: <!-- Paste before </body> --> <script src= "https://cdn.patchlog.io/widget.js" data-project= "your-project-id" data-position= "bottom-right" async ></script> One script tag. No SDK, no npm install, no framework coupling. It behaves the same in React, Vue, Rails, or a plain HTML page. Two implementation details matter, whether you build one of these yourself or evaluate an existing one: Render it in a Shadow DOM. A changelog widget should not inherit or leak styles. If it uses the host page's global CSS, it will look broken on half the sites it lands on. Shadow DOM isolates it completely. Fail silently. A marketing widget must never break the host app. If the network call fails, it should quietly do nothing. What to actually write in it The tool is the easy part. T

Meta told Dylan Byers, of Puck News, that it had nixed the feature after backlash from its user base.

Following significant backlash, Meta is turning off the feature it announced this week that let users generate AI images based on content from public Instagram accounts just by tagging them. The feature, as originally set up, meant that content from any public Instagram account could be used in AI creations without the account owner's permission. […]

Data centers are driving up the company’s use of electricity—and carbon pollution.

Reinforcement learning uses error information to adjust control algorithms.

More police and firefighters use drones to catch and deter illegal fireworks.

Last year, we told you about Xtra, the company that lets DJI sneak its popular cameras into the US, and Skyrover, a brand seemingly selling DJI drones in disguise. They're just two of the many firms DJI is suspected of starting to skirt the United States' foreign drone ban. But it appears the FCC is […]

Schneider, who formerly served as the CEO of Automattic and is a partner at True Ventures, says he is "all in" on the unconventional social media platform.

When building an AI agent, you need LLM calls. It can be done via a remote API or a local API, but either way you need to do it. Whether the agent is a simple conversational agent or a ReAct agent with a bunch of tools, whether it's using a complex graph or a simple RAG, it must be based on the concept of sending prompts to the language model. But, what if we replace the language model with... another agent? Let's say we already have a smart agent with a bunch of tools that can handle complex problems. Why not use it to build a new agent on top of it? This way we can focus on the specific custom functionality we want to achieve, while already having the common functionalities covered by the underlying agent. You might think this must be expensive. You get a better performance, so you have to pay for it, right? Well, not necessarily. The catch is that the coding assistants are actually surprisingly cheap when compared to API prices. They offer much more than raw LLM calls, they offer amazing agent functionality, but the cost is actually lower, and it's not a small difference. The cost of LLM calls per 1M tokens is usually between $2 and $7. For coding assistant subscriptions, it's a bit more tricky to calculate because you pay for monthly subscription, but it can be still converted to per 1M tokens cost, and from what LLM just told me it is around $0.08 to $2. That's a huge difference! And the complex agents are cheaper than raw LLM's! according to ChatGPT: Service Cost per 1M tokens Codex / ChatGPT coding plan ~$0.08 Cursor Pro ~$0.08–0.25 GitHub Copilot Pro ~$0.10–0.30 Claude Pro / Claude Code ~$0.74 GPT-5 API ~$2.1 Claude Sonnet API ~$4.2 Claude Opus API ~$7.0 according to Claude: Service Cost per 1M tokens Haiku 4.5 (API) $1.80 Sonnet 5 (API, intro thru Aug 31 '26) $3.60 Sonnet 5 (API, standard) $5.40 Opus 4.8 (API) $9.00 Fable 5 (API) $18.00 Claude Code — Pro ~$1.10–$2.15 (est.) Claude Code — Max 5x ~$2.10–$4.15 (est.) Claude Code — Max 20x ~$2–$4 (est.) So, why

Apple has sued OpenAI, alleging that former employees that now work for the AI company have stolen Apple's trade secrets "for the benefit of OpenAI." In its complaint, Apple alleges that it has uncovered "a pattern of theft of Apple's trade secrets by OpenAI employees who were formerly at Apple," and it names IO Products […]

AI Agents: Memory Layers, Test Automation, and Workflow Orchestration Today's Highlights This week's highlights dive deep into critical aspects of AI agent development, from choosing the right memory layer for TypeScript agents to innovative applications in end-to-end testing and content automation. We explore practical frameworks and methodologies for building robust, intelligent workflows. Mem0 vs TurboMem: which memory layer actually fits your TypeScript agent (Dev.to Top) Source: https://dev.to/arneesh/mem0-vs-turbomem-which-memory-layer-actually-fits-your-typescript-agent-54pc This article offers a direct comparison between two popular memory management solutions for TypeScript-based AI agents: Mem0 and TurboMem. Mem0 is presented as a widely recognized choice, often implemented as a separate service. In contrast, TurboMem advocates for an embedded memory model, integrating directly into the agent's process. The core of the discussion likely revolves around the architectural trade-offs of these two approaches, particularly for AI agent orchestration. The piece would detail the implications of operating memory as a distinct service versus embedding it. Key considerations for developers would include performance overheads, operational complexity (e.g., managing another service for Mem0), and data consistency. It provides practical guidance on selecting the appropriate memory layer based on an agent's specific requirements, such as real-time responsiveness, scalability needs, and deployment environment. Understanding these differences is crucial for optimizing agent performance and ensuring efficient state management in complex AI applications. Comment: As someone building TypeScript agents, understanding the pros and cons of embedded versus service-based memory like Mem0 and TurboMem is essential for architecture and performance. This comparison helps me make informed decisions on how to manage my agents' state. Slack Introduces Agent Driven End-to-End Testing to

How I Built a Zero-Cost Facebook Auto-Poster Using Node.js and GitHub Actions Automating social media management can save hours of manual work. In this guide, I will show you how to build a fully automated, production-ready system that posts daily motivational quotes with images to a Facebook Page— completely for free , running on autopilot via GitHub Actions. We will also tackle a major pain point: resolving Meta's strict token expiration and permission structures by dynamically fetching a Page Access Token using a Meta Business System User, the officially recommended way for secure automation. 🛠️ Prerequisites Before diving into the code, make sure you have: A Facebook Page A Meta Developer Account A Meta Business Suite (Business Portfolio) A GitHub Account Basic knowledge of Node.js 🎯 Step 1: Configuring Meta Architecture for Secure Automation Meta has deprecated direct publish_actions for user tokens, making automated image uploads tricky. The professional way to solve this is by using a System User bound to a Business Portfolio . 1. Create a Meta App Go to the Meta for Developers dashboard. Create a new app, choose Business and pages as the category, and give it a clean name. 2. Link your Facebook Page Inside your App Dashboard, navigate to App Settings -> Advanced . Scroll down to the App Page section and select your target Facebook Page to link it. 3. Setup a System User Go to your Meta Business Settings ( business.facebook.com/settings ). Under Users , click on System Users and create an Admin System User (e.g., Ttp-penguin ). Click Assign Assets , select your Facebook Page, and turn on the Full Control (Everything) toggle. 4. Generate the Permanent Token Click Generate Token for that System User and select your app. Explicitly check these 3 essential scopes : pages_manage_posts pages_read_engagement pages_show_list Copy the generated token ( EAak2B... ). Save this safely —this token acts as our master key! 💻 Step 2: Writing the Automation Script We will wri

Most of us treat design systems as a functional problem: consistent colors, consistent spacing, consistent components. That part's solved for most teams now. The part nobody writes down is tone. How should this loading state feel? Should this error feel scary or manageable? Is this confirmation message robotic or human? Here's what I've learned paying attention to that layer. Four moments that carry the emotional weight In any app, four states do most of the emotional work: Loading Error Empty Success Get these four right and the whole product feels better, even if nothing about the actual functionality changed. ** Loading: ambiguity feels worse than the wait itself** jsx // Vague, slightly anxious < Spinner /> // Specific, calmer < div className = "loading-state" > < Spinner /> < p > Fetching your latest data... </ p > </ div > A spinner with no context makes people wonder if something's frozen. A spinner with a short label tells them exactly what's happening. Same wait time, different feeling. Errors: same bug, different emotional outcome jsx // Robotic " Error: Request failed with status 500 " // Human " Something went wrong on our end. Your changes weren't lost, try again in a moment. " The second version does three things the first doesn't: it's plain language, it removes blame from the user, and it tells them what to do next. That's the difference between an error that frustrates and one that reassures. Success: robotic vs genuine jsx // Robotic " Action completed successfully. " // Human " Done! Your changes are saved. " This message shows up constantly across a typical app. If it reads like a system log every time, the product feels cold. A small rewrite makes it feel like a person is on the other end. Micro-interactions: timing is part of tone too `jsx// No feedback during the wait, feels broken <button onClick={handleSave}>Save</button> // Immediate feedback, feels responsive <button onClick={handleSave}> {isSaving ? "Saving..." : "Save"} </button>` A butt

I got tired of SSHing into the box every time I shipped something, just to watch the logs come up. So I wanted a page in the admin panel where the lines scroll past as they happen, no dashboard, no Grafana, just the raw tail. The surprising part was how little I had to build for it, most of the pieces were already sitting on the server waiting for me to connect them. Here's the whole idea. The app writes JSON to stdout, systemd grabs that stdout and drops every line into the journal, and journalctl can follow the journal and hand the lines back live. All three of those already exist on an Ubuntu box. So the "live log viewer" is really just me spawning journalctl on the server and piping its output to the browser over an EventSource , which is a lot less code than it sounds like. journald is boring and well understood. SSE is boring and well understood (it's been in browsers since about 2011). Nobody gets excited about either one on its own. But snap the two together and you get a real-time log tail with no agent, no log shipper, no vendor, and nothing new to keep alive. Two defaults meeting each other and pretending to be a feature. Systemd thing People have opinions about systemd. Some of them are that you should avoid every part of it that you can, run your own supervisor, ship logs somewhere with your own daemon, and treat journald as a thing to route around. That's a fine hobby if you have the time for it. I don't. The box boots, systemd starts my unit, and when the unit writes to stdout the line ends up in the journal without me configuring anything. Being a purist here costs real hours and buys me a philosophy. Being pragmatic costs nothing and buys me a log tail. So this is the pragmatic path. If you're on a distro where journald is the default (Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, most of them now) the setup below is basically free. Getting logs into the journal Here is the part most people overcomplicate. You do not "set up journald". You do not open a socket to it or p