标签：#us

Como eu mostro que estou contribuindo? Posso colocar no meu LinkedIn? E no meu currículo, como faço? Foi a partir dessas dúvidas que eu elaborei esse guia pra você que quer contribuir do seu jeito e mostrar às empresas e às pessoas, de forma clara e estratégica, o que você está fazendo. Vamos lá? 👇 Por que eu deveria mostrar no LinkedIn? LinkedIn é a porta de entrada para o mundo corporativo no Brasil e no mundo. É por meio dele que você mostra "trabalho". E tem mais: não é só experiência remunerada que conta como evidência de que você tem conhecimento e prática, mas também tudo o que você constrói de forma voluntária , seja tirando dúvida de alguém, participando de um projeto open-source ou escrevendo sobre o que aprendeu. Recrutador não lê currículo pensando só em carteira assinada. Lê pensando em capacidade . Você contribui com algo para a comunidade e quer colocar isso no seu perfil. Existem 3 formas que você pode usar, e elas podem ser usadas todas juntas ou só uma. Escolha aquela que fizer mais sentido pro seu perfil ou busque por outras pessoas que você admira dentro da comunidade e veja como elas colocaram no próprio perfil. 1. Seção de Experiência Use como experiência sempre que estiver contribuindo de forma profissional pra uma área que você busca. Se você participa de contribuições no GitHub, seja através de código, documentação ou outra forma, use como experiência. Pessoas que também estão ajudando na moderação ou administração (community managers) podem destacar as responsabilidades ou resultados das suas ações por aqui. Exemplo de como preencher no LinkedIn: Cargo: [cargo que você faz] Open Source Empresa: [Nome do projeto/organização] Tipo de emprego: Meio período (ou Voluntário) Local: Remoto, Brasil Descrição: - Contribuí com [X] pull requests na documentação do projeto [Nome], focando em clareza para novos contribuidores. - Revisei issues abertas e sugeri melhorias de acessibilidade em componentes de UI usando [ferramenta/stack]. - Participei de re

Project: https://quven.tv/ Security model: https://quven.tv/security/ For the last 18 months, I have been building Quven, a self-hosted media server for personal movie, TV, and documentary libraries. I started with a seemingly simple goal: let people keep their media on their own hardware while giving them a polished client experience. Playback quickly became the hardest part. A media server does not simply send a video file to a screen. It has to understand the source, the client, the network, and the user's choices, then select a playback path without making any of that complexity feel visible. These are some of the lessons I learned. 1. "Can this file play?" is the wrong question The real question is whether a particular client can play a particular combination of: container; video codec and profile; audio codec and channel layout; subtitle format; resolution, bitrate, and frame rate; HDR format; network conditions. A client might support the video codec but not the audio track. A browser might decode the video but require a different container. Enabling an image-based subtitle can turn an otherwise direct-playable file into a video transcode. Playback compatibility is therefore not a boolean property of a file. It is a negotiation between the source and the active client. 2. Direct play should be the preferred outcome, not a promise Direct play preserves the original file and avoids unnecessary server work. When the client supports the selected combination, it is usually the best path. But forcing direct play at all costs produces a worse experience. A high-bitrate file may technically be supported while still exceeding the available connection. A selected subtitle might require burning into the video. A television may accept a container while rejecting one of its audio formats. The practical hierarchy I settled on is: Direct play when the complete source is compatible. Remux when the streams are compatible but the container is not. Transcode only what must chan

It turns out some of Benjamin Franklin's opinions from 240 years ago are still relevant today.

Those who have been following me for a while will know that teaching and mentoring are a Big Deal™️ to me. Before I got into tech I was a teacher, and still consider myself a teacher at heart. Being a teacher and mentor was never separate in my eyes from being a good programmer and engineer; on the contrary, teaching was a tool that helped me become better at my craft at every stage of the journey. But in the last few years, and accelerating in the last few months, the landscape for teaching and learning has been changing at a scary pace. The advent of LLMs and "AI" coding assistants has drastically shifted how we acquire engineering skills in ways that we are definitely not prepared for. All of that has prompted many thoughts and conversations, and I hope to distill some of them in this blog post. In true Talmudic fashion, this post doesn't contain too many answers and will hopefully leave you with more questions than you started with. But asking the questions is how we start these conversations, and these conversations need to be happening if we are to do right by the coming generation of programmers and engineers. Don't Spoon-Feed Me As a student, whether in Yeshiva when I used to spend hours each day poring over dense Talmudic legal debates and esoteric Chassidic philosophy or later while learning Rails and React at the Flatiron bootcamp, I quickly realized an uncomfortable truth about skill acquisition. My best, most profound learning never happened when a lesson went smoothly; it happened when I was painfully stuck, banging my head against a cryptic error message or wrestling with a concept that just wouldn't click (usually at 2 AM, fueled by cold coffee and sheer stubbornness). When you strip away that struggle, you get rid of the growth. And when you get rid of the growth, the learning just doesn't happen. Even if you memorize just enough to pass the test, "easy come easy go." Without that cognitive friction, the knowledge evaporates the moment you close you

GitHub热门项目 | A hive mind communication platform | Stars: 3,079 | 2,720 stars this week | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | RustDesk Server Program | Stars: 10,102 | 10 stars today | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | CLI proxy that reduces LLM token consumption by 60-90% on common dev commands. Single Rust binary, zero dependencies | Stars: 72,532 | 274 stars today | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | Empowering everyone to host fast and efficient Minecraft servers. | Stars: 8,141 | 96 stars today | 语言: Rust

Synthesia launched AI Roleplay Sessions, an interactive enterprise training platform where employees practice workplace conversations with AI avatars that provide feedback, scoring, and analytics to help companies measure training effectiveness.

Substack shipped an AI detector this week. Every post, note, and comment over 100 words can now be...

The company donated more than $3.6 million to conservative groups between 2020 and 2025, including $1 million to the MAGA Inc. super PAC.

Pat Gelsinger wants to pave the way to ever more powerful artificial intelligence using tiny beams of light.

Everyone is arguing about AI ROI right now. Boards want a number. Consultants are selling frameworks. And the headlines look brutal: an MIT report claimed 95% of enterprise GenAI pilots showed no measurable return, and a Forbes piece this January says 56% of CEOs see zero ROI from AI. So AI is a bust, right? Here is the thing. Ask any of those same companies to turn off email for a week. Just try it. Nobody ever ran a six month ROI study on email. Nobody had to. It became the way work happens, and the return stopped being a line item because it was everywhere. I think AI is following the same path, and the data backs it up. The gap between the pilot and the person That same MIT report has a stat that got way less coverage than the 95% number: 90% of employees regularly use personal AI tools for work, while only 40% of companies have an official LLM subscription. Workers adopted it at more than twice the rate of their own employers. The report even found that 70% of workers prefer AI over a colleague for quick stuff like drafting emails and basic analysis. So the official pilot fails its KPI review while the people inside the building are quietly using AI multiple times a day. That is not a failed technology. That is a measurement problem. Worth noting: the 95% figure itself has been heavily criticized. It came from 52 interviews and a narrow definition of success. I would not build a strategy on that number in either direction. Why the ROI is invisible The value seems to be landing in the same place email's value landed: the unglamorous middle of the workday. Drafting the reply. Summarizing the thread. Turning messy notes into something you can send. None of that shows up as a new revenue line. It shows up as an hour you got back and immediately spent on something else. You cannot easily measure that, but you can feel it. Take the tools away from a developer who has been using them for a year and watch what happens. People cannot imagine working without it anymore.

Analysis of bestseller charts shows an 80 percent dip from 2025's sales rate.

It must be earnings day, because Tesla is making a Robotaxi announcement. The company said in a post on X that it was launching its Robotaxi service in Orlando and Tampa, attaching a pair of maps that show each city's service area. No word on fleet size or whether interested customers would be able to […]

Originally published at https://eveningdesk.cloud/blog/woocommerce-customer-support-workflow.html . WooCommerce support often starts in a shared mailbox and ends in several tabs. A customer asks where an order is. An agent searches the inbox, opens the store admin, finds the order, checks fulfilment, then returns to write a reply. That sequence is manageable at low volume. It becomes fragile when several people share the work or when the same question arrives all day. The goal is not to add a complicated service desk. It is to make the support workflow reliable: one owner, the right order context, and a reply a human has reviewed. Start With One Support Inbox Use a dedicated address for customer questions, such as support@yourstore.com , rather than mixing them with supplier, marketing, and personal email. Every incoming request should have a clear status: New, when nobody has handled it. Assigned, when one person owns the reply. Waiting, when the customer or carrier needs to respond. Resolved, when no further action is needed. The important part is ownership. If two people read the same message and neither knows who is replying, the customer waits. If both reply, the customer receives conflicting information. Keep Order Context Beside the Conversation Support agents should not guess about an order. A useful workflow links the conversation to the order reference, then checks the information that matters for the question: Order number and purchase date. Payment and fulfilment status. Items, quantities, and shipping method. Tracking or carrier information, when it exists. Previous support messages about the same order. For a connected WooCommerce store, eveningDesk can sync an order record into the support workspace. The agent still reviews the information and decides what to promise. The software provides context. It does not invent delivery dates or approve refunds on its own. Use a Repeatable Reply Process Most store questions fall into a small set of categories: d

Nvidia’s Vera Rubin platform combines CPUs and GPUs into a single system, reflecting the company’s growing ambition to power every layer of AI infrastructure.

Stellantis will use technology from Intel's Mobileye to power its Level 2 hands-free driving features for its vehicle brands, the companies announced Tuesday. Starting in 2027, Stellantis will begin using Mobileye's EyeQ system-on-a-chip and a data crowdsourcing program called the Road Experience Management, or REM, which uses real-time data from Mobileye-equipped vehicles to build out […]

The FDA could decide whether to loosen rules around peptide production this week. Some telehealth players are already seeing dollar signs.

Deezer said more than 90,000 AI-generated tracks were uploaded daily on the platform in June.