And here's the thing that makes all of this matter commercially: coding agents make up the majority of actual AI use cases right now. Anthropic is reportedly approaching profitability, and a huge chunk of that is driven by Claude Code, a CLI tool. Not a chatbot. A tool that reads and writes files on your filesystem.
Reviving Edison's battery design
，推荐阅读新收录的资料获取更多信息
During development I encountered a caveat: Opus 4.5 can’t test or view a terminal output, especially one with unusual functional requirements. But despite being blind, it knew enough about the ratatui terminal framework to implement whatever UI changes I asked. There were a large number of UI bugs that likely were caused by Opus’s inability to create test cases, namely failures to account for scroll offsets resulting in incorrect click locations. As someone who spent 5 years as a black box Software QA Engineer who was unable to review the underlying code, this situation was my specialty. I put my QA skills to work by messing around with miditui, told Opus any errors with occasionally a screenshot, and it was able to fix them easily. I do not believe that these bugs are inherently due to LLM agents being better or worse than humans as humans are most definitely capable of making the same mistakes. Even though I myself am adept at finding the bugs and offering solutions, I don’t believe that I would inherently avoid causing similar bugs were I to code such an interactive app without AI assistance: QA brain is different from software engineering brain.
根据AAA的数据，自2月下旬以来，美国柴油价格上涨了约61美分，年初至今累计上涨约76%。这种紧张局面预计还会持续，柴油裂解价差已上升至约22美元，而汽油仅约5美元。，这一点在新收录的资料中也有详细论述
Последние новости，详情可参考新收录的资料
В стране БРИКС отказались обрабатывать платежи за российскую нефть13:52