https://blog.alswl.com/2023/11/build-blog-comment-system-based-on-free-cloud-service/

如何免费用云服务搭建博客评论系统

问题​

https://twitter.com/punk2898/status/1728926744261075248

在遵循创作的康庄大道上，若我的文字不慎踏入了他人的花园，请告之我，我将以最快的速度，携带着诚意和尊重，将它们从您的视野中撤去。

马斯克说的 50 种认知偏差，你中了几条？🤔️ 他还建议所有年轻人都要学习 📑 共 7 张图 🖼️

在遵循创作的康庄大道上，若我的文字不慎踏入了他人的花园，请告之我，我将以最快的速度，携带着诚意和尊重，将它们从您的视野中撤去。

https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/570140268

全部代码​

https://www.volcengine.com/theme/4241214-R-7-1

在Notion中，可以通过Python的Notion API 来获取页面的块和子块。首先需要安装Notion API 的Python库：

pip install notion-client

在代码中引入notion_client库和相关模块，并设置访问 数据库 所需的token和datab as e的id：

from notion_client import Client

# 认证
notion = Client(auth="YOUR_API_KEY")

# 数据库ID
database_id = "DATABASE_ID"

接下来，使用notion.pages.get() 函数 来获取指定页面的块和子块：

# 获取页面信息
page = notion.pages.get(page_id="YOUR_PAGE_ID")

# 获取块和子块
block_ids = page.get("content")
for block_id in block_ids:
  block = notion.blocks.retrieve(block_id)
  print(block)

运行以上代码后，就可以打印出指定页面中的所有块和子块的信息。 请注意，在代码中需要替换相应的YOUR_ API _KEY、DATAB AS E_ID和YOUR_PAGE_ID。 免责声明 本文内容通过AI工具匹配关键字智能整合而成，仅供参考，火山引擎不对内容的真实、准确或完整作任何形式的承诺。如有任何问题或意见，您可以通过联系 service@volcengine.com 进行反馈，火山引擎收到您的反馈后将及时答复和处理。 展开更多

开发者特惠​

https://juejin.cn/post/7083147111897923614

目的：每天都要通过微信公众号进行发送文章，但是每次仅仅是修改图文信息，其他设置并无不同，故通过自动化可节省大量时间，实现一键发文。 在这过程中，也遇到了一些问题，总结如下： （1）切换窗口操作时遇到 wd.title的名字一模一样（暂时使用了选择最近打开窗口解决） （2）不能准确定位到元素，后来通过copy_xpath解决，之前一直手写，后续要加强手写能力 （3）有一个输入框一直定位不到，原来是iframe中的，切换了一下就解决了 （4）下拉选项元素定位不到，要加等到时间（sleep（3）） （5）一个元素定位不到，原因是不处于可视界面，将滚动条拖动到元素位置，便可以定位到

from selenium import webdriver
from selenium.webdriver.common.by import By
from selenium.webdriver.common.action_chains import ActionChains
import time
wd = webdriver.Chrome()
wd.maximize_window()
wd.implicitly_wait(5)
#浏览器打开微信公众号平台
wd.get('https://mp.weixin.qq.com/cgi-bin/home?t=home/index&lang=zh_CN&token=835840104')
#点击登录
element = wd.find_element(By.ID,'jumpUrl')
element.click()
#点击使用账号密码登录
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,"//a[@class='login__type__container__select-type']")
element.click()
#输入账号
element = wd.find_element(By.CSS_SELECTOR,"input[name='account']")
element.send_keys('账号')
#输入密码
element = wd.find_element(By.CSS_SELECTOR,"input[name='password']")
element.send_keys('密码')
#点击登录
element = wd.find_element(By.CLASS_NAME,'btn_login')
element.click()
#等待10秒给用户扫码验证时间（微信公众号平台登录需要使用微信扫码）
time.sleep(10)
#点击图文消息
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,"//*[@id='app']/div[2]/div[4]/div[2]/div/div[1]/div")
element.click()
#窗口跳转，切换到新窗口
handles = wd.window_handles  #获取句柄，得到的是一个列表
wd.switch_to.window(handles[-1]) #切换至最新句柄
#可以开始定位新窗口的元素了
#点击输入标题  //*[@id="title"]
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,"//*[@id='title']")
#这里是标题
element.send_keys('标题')
#这里输入作者 //*[@id="author"]
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,"//*[@id='author']")
element.send_keys('作者')
#切换到iframe小窗口
wd.switch_to.frame(wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="ueditor_0"]'))
#这里输入文章内容
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,"/html/body/p")
element.send_keys('文章内容')
#跳出iframe
wd.switch_to.default_content()
#拖动滚动条，到可见的元素去
target = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_cover_area"]/div[1]/span')
wd.execute_script("arguments[0].scrollIntoView();", target)
#鼠标悬停在’拖拽或者选择封面‘
ac = ActionChains(wd)
#//*[@id="js_cover_area"]/div[1]
ac.move_to_element(wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_cover_area"]/div[1]/span')).perform()
time.sleep(1)
# #冻结页面，选择’从图片库选择‘  setTimeout(function(){debugger}, 5000)  //*[@id="js_cover_null"]/ul/li[2]/a
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_cover_null"]/ul/li[2]/a')
time.sleep(5)
element.click()
#选择第一张图片
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_image_dialog_list_wrp"]/div/div[1]/i')
element.click()
# #点击下一步
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="vue_app"]/div[2]/div[1]/div/div[3]/div[1]/button')
element.click()
#点击完成
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="vue_app"]/div[2]/div[1]/div/div[3]/div[2]/button')
element.click()
#清除简介信息 因为需求是不需要填写简介信息从而预知文章的
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_description"]')
element.clear()
#鼠标悬停在新建消息
ac = ActionChains(wd)
ac.move_to_element(wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_add_appmsg"]/i')).perform()
#点击’写新图文‘ /html/body/div[18]/div/ul/li[1]/a
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'/html/body/div[18]/div/ul/li[1]/a')
element.click()

#点击群发
element = wd.find_element(By.XPATH,'//*[@id="js_send"]/button/span')
element.click()

在遵循创作的康庄大道上，若我的文字不慎踏入了他人的花园，请告之我，我将以最快的速度，携带着诚意和尊重，将它们从您的视野中撤去。

本地部署:​

• Docker启动部署
• 访问: 127.0.0.1:8080
• 输入: 解锁文章网址内容

文章内容:​

Ladder是什么​

Ladder是一个绕过付费墙工具，这是1ft.io和12ft.io的自托管版本，灵感来自13ft，可以帮助用户免费阅读各种付费内容，并从任何 URL 中删除 CORS 头，例如彭博社新闻，金融时报、金融时报、纽约格拉布街新闻网、哈佛商业评论、Quora、华尔街日报、华盛顿邮报等等，具体的可以自己试试，复制链接粘贴即可解锁绕过付费墙。支持Windows、macOS和linux等等。

绕过付费墙工具Ladder使用方法​

1、 在这里 下载二进制文件， 网盘搬运 （国内同学网络不好可以下载网盘搬运版） 2、解压并运行二进制文件 ./ladder Ladder-绕过付费墙工具 免费阅读各种付费内容 1

3、打开浏览器（默认： http://localhost:8080 ） Ladder-绕过付费墙工具 免费阅读各种付费内容 2

绕过付费墙工具效果对比​

使用前​

Ladder-绕过付费墙工具 免费阅读各种付费内容 3

使用后​

Ladder-绕过付费墙工具 免费阅读各种付费内容 4

绕过付费墙工具GitHub下载地址​

下载地址： 国内网盘搬运 GitHub地址： https://github.com/everywall/ladder

👍其他类似绕过付费工具​

1、 Bypass Paywalls-开源免费外媒新闻杂志阅读扩展 突破付费订阅限制 支持160+网址 2、 跳过付费墙网页工具 解锁各种付费内容-Webpage archive 本文链接： https://www.ahhhhfs.com/50379/

猜你喜欢​

• Keyviz-开源实时键鼠输入可视化软件 实时显示输入按键
• Spacedrive-开源跨平台文件管理器
• AI换脸软件离线版 支持Mac和Windows
• TTime-简洁高效截图 划词翻译软件
• ActivityWatch-免费开源时间跟踪器 记录屏幕使用时间
• 免费绕过苹果MDM配置锁/密码界面工具-Hackt1vator Unlock
• ClashPro-跨平台海外上网工具
• v2A-易用而强大的跨平台V2客户端
• 转载请保留原文链接谢谢！
• 本站所有资源文章出自互联网收集整理，本站不参与制作，如果侵犯了您的合法权益，请联系本站我们会及时删除。
• 本站发布资源来源于互联网，可能存在水印或者引流等信息，请用户擦亮眼睛自行鉴别，做一个有主见和判断力的用户。
• 本站资源仅供研究、学习交流之用，若使用商业用途，请购买正版授权，否则产生的一切后果将由下载用户自行承担。
• 联系方式（#替换成@）：feedback#abskoop.com

在遵循创作的康庄大道上，若我的文字不慎踏入了他人的花园，请告之我，我将以最快的速度，携带着诚意和尊重，将它们从您的视野中撤去。

https://stratechery.com/2023/openais-misalignment-and-microsofts-gain/

I have, as you might expect, authored several versions of this Article, both in my head and on the page, as the most extraordinary weekend of my career has unfolded. To briefly summarize:

• On Friday, then-CEO Sam Altman was fired from OpenAI by the board that governs the non-profit; then-President Greg Brockman was removed from the board and subsequently resigned.
• Over the weekend rumors surged that Altman was negotiating his return, only for OpenAI to hire former Twitch CEO Emmett Shear as CEO.
• Finally, late Sunday night,
• Satya Nadella announced via tweet
• that Altman and Brockman, “together with colleagues”, would be joining Microsoft. This is, quite obviously, a phenomenal outcome for Microsoft. The company already has a perpetual license to all OpenAI IP ( short of artificial general intelligence ), including source code and model weights; the question was whether it would have the talent to exploit that IP if OpenAI suffered the sort of talent drain that was threatened upon Altman and Brockman’s removal. Indeed they will, as a good portion of that talent seems likely to flow to Microsoft; you can make the case that Microsoft just acquired OpenAI for $0 and zero risk of an antitrust lawsuit. Microsoft’s gain, meanwhile, is OpenAI’s loss, which is dependent on the Redmond-based company for both money and compute: the work its employees will do on AI will either be Microsoft’s by virtue of that perpetual license, or Microsoft’s directly because said employees joined Altman’s team. OpenAI’s trump card is ChatGPT, which is well on its way to achieving the holy grail of tech — an at-scale consumer platform — but if the reporting this weekend is to be believed, OpenAI’s board may have already had second thoughts about the incentives ChapGPT placed on the company (more on this below). The biggest loss of all, though, is a necessary one: the myth that anything but a for-profit corporation is the right way to organize a company.

OpenAI’s Non-Profit Model​

OpenAI was founded in 2015 as a “non-profit intelligence research company.” From the initial blog post : I was pretty cynical about the motivations of OpenAI’s founders, at least Altman and Elon Musk; I wrote in a Daily Update : Whatever Altman and Musk’s motivations, the decision to make OpenAI a non-profit wasn’t just talk: the company is a 501(c)3; you can view their annual IRS filings here . The first question on Form 990 asks the organization to “Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities”; the first filing in 2016 stated: Two years later, and the commitment to “openly share our plans and capabilities along the way” was gone; three years after that and the goal of “advanc[ing] digital intelligence” was replaced by “build[ing] general-purpose artificial intelligence”. In 2018 Musk, according to a Semafor report earlier this year , attempted to take over the company, but was rebuffed; he left the board and, more critically, stopped paying for OpenAI’s operations. That led to the second critical piece of background: faced with the need to pay for massive amounts of compute power, Altman, now firmly in charge of OpenAI, created OpenAI Global, LLC, a capped profit company with Microsoft as minority owner. This image of OpenAI’s current structure is from their website : OpenAI's corporate structure OpenAI Global could raise money and, critically to its investors, make it, but it still operated under the auspices of the non-profit and its mission; OpenAI Global’s operating agreement states: Microsoft, despite this constraint on OpenAI Global, was not only an investor, but also a customer, incorporating OpenAI into all of its products.

ChatGPT Tribes​

The third critical piece of background is the most well-known, and what has driven those ambitions to new heights: ChatGPT was released at the end of November 2022, and it has taken the world by storm. Today ChatGPT has over 100 million weekly users and over $1 billion in revenue; it has also fundamentally altered the conversation about AI for nearly every major company and government. What was most compelling to me, though, was the possibility I noted above, in which ChatGPT becomes the foundation of a new major consumer tech company, the most valuable and most difficult kind of company to build. I wrote earlier this year in The Accidental Consumer Tech Company : The platform I was referring to was ChatGPT plugins ; it’s a compelling concept with a UI that didn’t quite work, and it was only eight months later at OpenAI’s first developer day that the company announced GPTs, their second take at being a platform. Meanwhile, Altman was reportedly exploring new companies outside of the OpenAI purview to build chips and hardware, apparently without the board’s knowledge. Some combination of these factors, or perhaps something else not yet reported, were the final straw for the board, which, led by Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever, deposed Altman over the weekend. The Atlantic reported : This tenuous equilibrium broke one year ago almost to the day, according to current and former employees, thanks to the release of the very thing that brought OpenAI to global prominence: ChatGPT. From the outside, ChatGPT looked like one of the most successful product launches of all time. It grew faster than any other consumer app in history, and it seemed to single-handedly redefine how millions of people understood the threat — and promise — of automation. But it sent OpenAI in polar-opposite directions, widening and worsening the already present ideological rifts. ChatGPT supercharged the race to create products for profit as it simultaneously heaped unprecedented pressure on the company’s infrastructure and on the employees focused on assessing and mitigating the technology’s risks. This strained the already tense relationship between OpenAI’s factions — which Altman referred to, in a 2019 staff email, as “tribes.” Altman’s tribe — the one that was making OpenAI into much more of a traditional tech company — is certainly the one that is more familiar to people in tech, including myself. I even had a paragraph in my Article about the developer day keynote that remarked on OpenAI’s transition, that I unfortunately edited out. Here is what I wrote: What gives me pause is that the goal is not an IPO, retiring to a yacht, and giving money to causes that do a better job of soothing the guilt of being fabulously rich than actually making the world a better place. There is something about making money and answering to shareholders that holds the more messianic impulses in check; when I hear that Altman doesn’t own any equity in OpenAI that makes me more nervous than relieved. Or maybe I’m just biased because I won’t have S-1s or 10-Ks to analyze. Obviously I regret the edit, but then again, I didn’t realize how prescient my underlying nervousness about OpenAI’s structure would prove to be, largely because I clearly wasn’t worried enough.

Microsoft vs. the Board​

Much of the discussion on tech Twitter over the weekend has been shock that a board would incinerate so much value. First off, Altman is one of the Valley’s most-connected executives, and a prolific fund-raiser and dealmaker; second is the fact that several OpenAI employees already resigned, and more are expected to follow in the coming days. OpenAI may have had two tribes previously; it’s reasonable to assume that going forward it will only have one, led by a new CEO in Shear who puts the probability of AI doom at between 5 and 50 percent and has advocated a significant slowdown in development . Here’s the reality of the matter, though: whether or not you agree with the Sutskever/Shear tribe, the board’s charter and responsibility is not to make money. This is not a for-profit corporation with a fiduciary duty to its shareholders; indeed, as I laid out above, OpenAI’s charter specifically states that it is “unconstrained by a need to generate financial return”. From that perspective the board is in fact doing its job, as counterintuitive as that may seem: to the extent the board believes that Altman and his tribe were not “build[ing] general-purpose artificial intelligence that benefits humanity” it is empowered to fire him; they do, and so they did. This gets at the irony in my concern about the company’s non-profit status: I was worried about Altman being unconstrained by the need to make money or the danger of having someone in charge without a financial stake in the outcome, when in fact it was those same factors that cost him his job. More broadly, my criticism was insufficiently expansive because philosophical concerns about unconstrained power pale — at least in the case of business analysis, Stratechery’s core competency — in the face of how much this structure made OpenAI a fundamentally unstable entity to make deals with. This refers, of course, to Microsoft, and as someone who has been a proponent of Satya Nadella’s leadership, I have to admit that my analysis of the company’s partnership with OpenAI was lacking. Microsoft had, to its tremendous short-term benefit, bet a substantial portion of its future on its OpenAI partnership. This goes beyond money, which Microsoft has plenty of, and much of which it hasn’t yet paid out (or granted in terms of Azure credits); OpenAI’s technology is built into a whole host of Microsoft’s products, from Windows to Office to ones most people have never heard of (I see you Dynamics CRM nerds!). Microsoft is also investing massively in infrastructure that is custom-built for OpenAI — Nadella has been touting the financial advantages of specialization — and has just released a custom chip that was tuned for running OpenAI models . That this level of commitment was made to an entity not motivated by profit, and thus un-beholden to Microsoft’s status as an investor and revenue driver, now seems absurd. Or, rather, it did, until Nadella tweeted the following at 11:53pm Pacific: Satya Nadella's tweet announcing the hiring of Sam Altman The counter to the argument I just put forth about Microsoft’s poor decision to partner with a non-profit is the reality of AI development, specifically the need for massive amounts of compute. It was the need for this compute that led OpenAI, which had barred itself from making a traditional venture capital deal, to surrender their IP to Microsoft in exchange for Azure credits. In other words, while the board may have had the charter of a non-profit, and an admirable willingness to act on and stick to their convictions, they ultimately had no leverage because they weren’t a for-profit company with the capital to be truly independent. The end result is that an entity committed by charter to the safe development of AI has basically handed off all of its work and, probably soon enough, a sizable portion of its talent, to one of the largest for-profit entities on earth. Or, in an AI-relevant framing, the structure of OpenAI was ultimately misaligned with fulfilling its stated mission. Trying to organize incentives by fiat simply doesn’t account for all of the possible scenarios and variable at play in a dynamic situation; harvesting self-interest has, for good reason, long been the best way to align individuals and companies.

Altman Questions​

There is one other angle of the board’s actions that ought to be acknowledged: it very well could have been for cause. I endorse Eric Newcomer’s thoughtful column on his eponymous Substack : My understanding is that some members of the board genuinely felt Altman was dishonest and unreliable in his communications with them, sources tell me. Some members of the board believe that they couldn’t oversee the company because they couldn’t believe what Altman was saying. And yet, the existence of a nonprofit board was a key justification for OpenAI’s supposed trustworthiness . I don’t think any of us really knows enough right now to urge the board to make a hasty decision. I want you to consider a couple things here: Newcomer notes the board’s charter that I referenced above, the fact that Anthropic’s founders felt it necessary to leave OpenAI in the first place, Musk’s antipathy towards Altman, and Altman’s still somewhat murky and unexplained exit from YCombinator . Newcomer concludes: Altman had been given a lot of power, the cloak of a nonprofit, and a glowing public profile that exceeds his more mixed private reputation. He lost the trust of his board. We should take that seriously. Perhaps I am feeling a bit humbled by the aforementioned miss in my Microsoft analysis — much less my shock at the late night reversal in fortunes — but I will note that I have staked my claim in opposition to AI doomers and the call for regulation; to that end, I am wary of a narrative that confirms my priors about what drove the events of this weekend. And, I would note, I remain concerned about the philosophical question of executives who seek to control incredible capabilities without skin in the game. To that end, a startup ecosystem fixture like Altman going to work for Microsoft is certainly surprising: that Microsoft is the one place that retains access to OpenAI’s IP, and can combine that with effectively unlimited funding and GPU access, certainly adds credence to the narrative that power over AI is Altman’s primary motivation.

The Altered Landscape​

What is clear is that Altman and Microsoft are in the driver seat of AI. Microsoft has the IP and will soon have the team to combine with its cash and infrastructure, while shedding coordination problems inherent in their partnership with OpenAI previously (and, of course, they are still partners with OpenAI!). I’ve also argued for a while that it made more sense for external companies to build on Azure’s API rather than OpenAI’s; Microsoft is a development platform by nature, whereas OpenAI is fun and exciting but likely to clone your functionality or deprecate old APIs. Now the choice is even more obvious. And, from the Microsoft side, this removes a major reason for enterprise customers, already accustomed to evaluating long-term risks, to avoid Azure because of the OpenAI dependency; Microsoft now owns the full stack. Google, meanwhile, might need to make some significant changes; the company’s latest model, Gemini, has been delayed, and its Cloud business has been slowing as spending shifts to AI, the exact opposite outcome the company had hoped for. How long will the company’s founders and shareholders tolerate the perception that the company is moving too slow, particularly in comparison to the nimbleness and willingness to take risks demonstrated by Microsoft? That leaves Anthropic, which looked like a big winner 12 hours ago, and now feels increasingly tenuous as a standalone entity. The company has struck partnership deals with both Google and Amazon, but it is now facing a competitor in Microsoft with effectively unlimited funds and GPU access; it’s hard not to escape the sense that it makes sense as a part of AWS (and yes, B corps can be acquired, with considerably more ease than a non-profit). Ultimately, though, one could make the argument that not much has changed at all: it has been apparent for a while that AI was, at least in the short to medium-term, a sustaining innovation, not a disruptive one, which is to say it would primarily benefit and be deployed by the biggest companies. The costs are so high that it’s hard for anyone else to get the money, and that’s even before you consider questions around channel and customer acquisition. If there were a company poised to join the ranks of the Big Five it was OpenAI, thanks to ChatGPT, but that seems less likely now (but not impossible). This, in the end, was Nadella’s insight: the key to winning if you are big is not to invent like a startup, but to leverage your size to acquire or fast-follow them; all the better if you can do it for the low price of $0.

在遵循创作的康庄大道上，若我的文字不慎踏入了他人的花园，请告之我，我将以最快的速度，携带着诚意和尊重，将它们从您的视野中撤去。

https://github.com/liruifengv/daily-poetry-image

daily-poetry-image​

https://github.com/abi/screenshot-to-code

screenshot-to-code

This simple app converts a screenshot to HTML/Tailwind CSS. It uses GPT-4 Vision to generate the code and DALL-E 3 to generate similar-looking images. Details Youtube.Clone.mp4 See the Examples section below for more demos.

🚀 Try It Out!​