Another crazy TypeSafe AI Jev example: Predictive spreadsheets Spreadsheets... recalculate numbers, not meaning. Jev reads intent. Type "Urgency" at the top of a column and, as you type, it figures out you want each row rated from "no follow-up needed" to "urgent" in ~100 ms.show more

nader dabit
277,424 次观看 • 1 个月前
Also have been playing with TypeSafe AI Jev, insane!... So many immediate use cases and new apps are possible. What a time to be a builder! Sharing some experiments here starting with: Keystroke oracle / predictive launcher: Your launcher ranks by aliases, fuzzy match, and habit. Jev reads intent: type "the pdf I just downloaded" and the newest PDF is already the top hit with a full confidence on every keystroke, in ~100 msshow more

nader dabit
433,658 次观看 • 1 个月前
You can now classify documents with open-weight VLMs at... ultra-low cost with our TypeSafe AI Jev-compatible API in the VLM Run gateway! $1 buys you 6700+ pages, and the full 1,651-page OmniDocBench run cost 25 cents. It reads the page as pixels (no OCR->LLM hacks) and hands back one typed, calibrated decision per page - ~180ms p50 e2e. Jev really opened developers' eyes to re-thinking how we process data at the cost-pareto front. A week later we're bringing that to our APIs with vision as a first-class citizen. Try our gateway today - free to sign-up and try!show more

Sudeep Pillai
20,816 次观看 • 20 天前
Analyzed a few thousand hours of agentic runs with... TypeSafe AI Jev - turns out it's: • The best option I've tested at measuring progress and estimating completion • Dangerous if you use it for detecting harmful commands (more on that below) and • Not very good at catching models being lazy Actual prompts and results in the article:show more

Hrishi
28,429 次观看 • 28 天前
Jev + Kimi K3 for fraud detection! TLDR: Jev... classified 100 emails in 1.42 seconds, then I routed the uncertain cases to Kimi K3. The full pipeline got 96/100 correct for only ~$0.07. Video is not sped up, check out the live run! Here was my process: I gave Jev 100 emails to classify (a mix of 50 legit & 50 fraudelent emails). It classified all of them in 1.42 seconds. An underrated feature about Jev is it will give you the confidence score for a classification, so I routed any prediction under 95% confidence to Kimi K3 to be fully sure. 31 emails fell below that threshold. After routing those to Kimi K3, the combined pipeline reached 96% accuracy. The full run took 16 seconds & ~$0.07 in inference costs: - $0.068 from Kimi K3 on Together AI - $0.003 (1/3 of a cent) from Jev on TypeSafe AI. I think this is a really interesting pattern: use a fast specialized model like Jev for the narrow task, then route the uncertain cases to a larger LLM. I feel like this kind of approach could be a game changer for use cases like fraud or anything realtime. You can use the speed & low cost of Jev while having a larger LLM as a fallback to ensure high accuracy.show more

Hassan
60,994 次观看 • 1 个月前
Opus 5.5 + GrokBot + Jev... I can't believe... that I build it I packed the best of AI into ONE agent - now 99% of people’s AI agents look dumb, slow, and expensive Try here (free): prompt → GrokBot → Jev chooses LLM → Claude / GPT working on GrokBot's computer 24/7 → result → Jev sends only the tasks Grok is weak at to Opus or GPT → Jev picks the best model for each task - for example, Claude for motion design and Codex for web design → runs on the ChatGPT and Claude subscriptions you already pay for (API also work) → works on GrokBot computer while you keep chatting → checks every result against the goal before you see it → GrokBot gets smarter and cheaper at the same time → And plenty more features in a bot everyone will call "obvious" by 2030 Try Jevopus, thank me later - then read the article on the full Jev architecture ↓show more

codila
272,469 次观看 • 20 天前
I used Jev to classify 1,018 AI research papers.... The result: $0.08 total cost and 256ms median end-to-end latency per paper. The pipeline was: 1. Summarize each paper with DeepSeek V4 Flash 2. Send the title + summary + 24 possible topics to Jev 3. Use Jev to classify each paper 4. Visualize everything on The summaries cost $3.99 on Together AI. The classifications cost $0.08 on TypeSafe AI. So for just over $4 of inference, I ended up with a pretty useful way to explore the top AI research papers from the past year. I think this is where things are heading: different models for different parts of the workflow, instead of using one model for everything. I’m running evals on the Jev classifications before replacing the current ones, but the site is already live:show more

Hassan
341,359 次观看 • 1 个月前
Jev + GrokBot is the best AI agent system... I’ve built in my life It just made my setup CHEAPER and FASTER than what 95% of people are running... setup takes literally 7 minutes: prompt → GrokBot → Jev decision → GrokBot execution → result step 1 → open TypeSafe AI , create API key (keep it off chat paste) step 2 → tell Grok Bot: store TYPESAFE_API_KEY in the secure field step 3 → prompt Grok Bot: install typesafe-sdk on Agent Computer + smoke system_one (Choice) step 4 → tell Grok Bot: build the usage lab (router, dry-run, config, logs) - or clone Github below step 5 → add skill jev-usage-router: before browser / research / retry / extra bot → call the router, honor action step 6 → stay shadow first, read logs, then active when you trust it - kill switch: bypass jev or enabled: false step 7 → flip active: GrokBot obeys route - Jev decides - GrokBot executes - humans control irreversible actions the result: Jev + GrokBot the best and fastest agent running directly on your computer rn, I’ve already tested it on routine tasks - and the results are genuinely incredible You can come up with endless ways to use Jev + GrokBot - but the most important thing is to install it as soon as possible Copy this 2028 setup, explore my repo below - then read the full Jev deep dive ↓show more

codila
386,524 次观看 • 29 天前
Jev + GrokBot is the best GTM system I've... ever built It just made my GTM x200 CHEAPER and x400 FASTER than what 95% of teams are running... setup takes literally 9 minutes: prompt → GrokBot → Jev routes every candidate → GrokBot opens only survivors → campaign step 1 → open TypeSafe AI, create API key (keep it off chat paste) step 2 → tell GrokBot: store TYPESAFE_API_KEY in the secure field step 3 → prompt GrokBot: install typesafe-sdk on Agent Computer + smoke system_one (Choice) step 4 → point it at a target: "read end to end, pull positioning, ICP, every proof point. no copy yet" step 5 → add skill gtm-router: every candidate from X / LinkedIn / YouTube gets 6 typed questions → CHEAP SKIP / OPEN FULL / FLAG KOL step 6 → let Jev rank hook archetypes by viral rate, not by how often people post them - this is where the whole playbook comes from step 7 → GrokBot assembles the KOL shortlist and the 7-day plan - you stay in control of anything irreversible the result: → 3,412 candidates, X, LinkedIn and YouTube. → 15.7 seconds. $0.41. → me doing the same reading: 6h 12m. 8 grok bots brief it, Jev decides, GrokBot executes. no fine-tuning, no embeddings, no vector db - 6 typed questions and a schema. Setup your GrokBot JEV GTM today, then read the article below to learn how to build an agent team with JEV.show more

Movez
86,763 次观看 • 28 天前
We gave Jev 2,029 real phone calls. No transcripts... or audio; it never heard a word. Our AI receptionist's calls were reduced to pure structure, meaning turns, tool calls, workflow stages and timing. During the calls, Jev made 38,012 turn-level forecasts at 118 ms median latency, reviewed every call with five typed questions and produced 10,145 answers in 26 seconds with 256 requests in flight. The experiment was zero-shot, with no fine-tuning or examples from our data. We compared Jev's forecasts with what actually happened in the EHR. By the halfway point, Jev could meaningfully separate calls that would book from those that wouldn't (AUC 0.78), and near the end it ranked them correctly 94% of the time. Even though Jev over-focused on visible errors our agent usually overcomes, it's still pretty incredible that it analyzed thousands of real calls in seconds for only $3.show more

Muratcan Koylan
373,519 次观看 • 19 天前
this is certified f*cking gold a 23-year-old from China... runs 300 Claude Code agents at once with Jev engineering, and not one of them gets to lie to him he opens the dashboard live: 300 Claude Code agents running in parallel Jev checking every output against its source in about 100 milliseconds pointed at 100 companies in the EV market: > pass 1 - 12 rejected: wrong revenue, dead citations, empty fields > pass 2 - 3 rejected > pass 3 - zero. every row filed straight into an Obsidian vault the whole trick is the split Claude Code does the work, Jev decides whether each claim actually matches the source Jev never writes a second opinion. it answers yes or no with a confidence score, at $0.042 per million tokens in and the loop won't stop while anything is still wrong an analyst team bills weeks for 100 verified company profiles. he gets them in one run one model writes, a cheaper one decides, and nothing ships until it says yesshow more

Hanako
36,798 次观看 • 12 天前
Jev + Muse is the first AI agent system... that actually automate 100% of my life 99% of people pay 200x more for slower AI agents - while 1% run this 2030 setup just 5 min and setup is ready: prompt → Muse → Jev decision → Muse execution → result step 1 → create your Jev API key (typesafe website) step 2 → clone and install the complete router from Github below python3 -m venv .venv && .venv/bin/pip install -r requirements.txt && cp config.example.yaml config.yaml step 3 → export the key before running anything: export TYPESAFE_API_KEY='YOUR_KEY' add the same export to ~/.zshrc or ~/.bashrc if you want it to survive a new terminal session step 4 → give your agent skill/jev-decision-layer.SKILL.md and connect it to src/router.py + recipes/ , raw Jev returns probabilities - the router converts them into executable actions step 5 → test the entire chain, not the raw Jev API: .venv/bin/python -m src.cli '{"goal":"what is 2+2?","kind":"chat"}' the final JSON should contain action, reason, mode, jev_used and confidence details step 6 → keep mode: shadow for 20–50 real decisions: the agent works normally while Jev’s routes are logged and checked; promote only reliable question packs step 7 → switch to mode: active with hard confidence gates: ≥0.80 act automatically, 0.50–0.79 advisory only, <0.50 escalate to the human the result: Jev + Muse is a system that decides what to do, what to skip and when to bring in - I’ve tested it across my daily workflows, and it’s the best setup I’ve found for automating routine Take the exact stack I built, run it yourself from the repo - then read the full Jev architecture behind it ↓show more

codila
95,490 次观看 • 26 天前
🌎Build the AI Worlds You Want to Play In... World Engine makes creating 3D worlds as easy as typing a prompt. Say “gimme animals” or “build a jungle village” and it fills out your world instantly. You can auto-generate environments, characters, and even ideas for quests or scenes. No coding or game dev skills needed. Just type, tweak, and play. Whether you're building games, hangout spots, or streamable experiences, World Engine helps you move fast. Want a closer look at World Engine? Check it out 👉show more

RYFT CORP
19,375 次观看 • 1 年前
I GAVE JEV A CRAWLER + ONE GPT AGENT... AND ASKED WHERE THE ONLINE MONEY IS RIGHT NOW it read 5,137 open jobs and found 3 niches where clients pay and almost nobody bids everyone asks chatgpt for side hustle ideas everyone gets the same 10 answers so i made it read what clients are actually paying for this week a crawler is a bot that reads the internet for you jev is the ai that answers every question with a number, under a second, under a cent gpt is the expensive brain, it only gets called when jev says a niche is worth it the crawler reads, jev decides, gpt researches honestly gpt alone just guesses, jev is what turns 5,137 jobs into 3 answers what the three of them did: -> crawler read all 5,137 open jobs on freelancer, budgets, skills, how many people already bid -> jev checked every one: real job? doable online by one person? 684 got cut -> gpt named 30 niches from 600 of them, jev sorted all 4,453 into those niches -> jev looked at each niche's numbers and sent only 12 to gpt -> gpt researched those 12 on the open web: other platforms, real prices, how crowded it is -> 3 came back with real demand and fewer bids than the typical job (14): 01 chrome extension · 85 jobs this week · median $545 · 11 bids each · ~$4,671/mo 02 tiktok shop setup · 91 jobs this week · median $232 · 6.5 bids each · ~$1,984/mo 03 notion setup · 95 jobs this week · median $181 · 3 bids each · ~$1,551/mo potential = your fair share of this week's jobs (budget ÷ (bids + 1)), max 2 jobs a week not every pick held up, excel dashboards looked great on freelancer but gpt found it crowded everywhere else jev made 9,617 calls for $0.13, gpt on every job would have cost ~$58.66, the whole run cost $6.53 i wrote up why the cheap brain decides and the expensive one only gets called when it's worth it, it's below ↓ costs nothing bookmark this, empty niches don't stay empty show this to the one friend who keeps asking chatgpt for side hustle ideas should i run it on upwork next, or is chrome extension the one?show more

Paone
52,416 次观看 • 13 天前
this is pure f*cking treasure TypeSafeAI engineers spelled out... in their docs exactly how Jev fits inside an agent, and these patterns are perfect one rule behind all of them: the LLM thinks, jev decides, code acts I mapped them into 9 live schemes: > model routing jev picks the cheapest model that can do the step > guardrails screens what your agent reads before it acts > tool-call gating every tool call gets allow, ask or deny before it runs > inbox triage the agent only opens what actually needs a reply > reranking jev scores 30 passages, the agent gets the best two > llm evals grades the output and sends it back if it falls short > bulk labeling one question fanned out over a huge table, the agent reads the counts > real-time control games, bots, trading loops: a decision every tick > confidence gate act, confirm or hand it to a human. your code sets the thresholds, not the LLM why it works: > ~100 ms per decision > $0.042 per 1M input tokens, output tokens free > calibrated probabilities on every answer one LLM does the thinking. jev makes the thousand small calls in between save this before you wire your next agentshow more

NO1ennn
24,699 次观看 • 18 天前
You've probably scrolled past a dozen posts about Jev... this week without anyone telling you what it actually is. It's the first model from TypeSafe, a lab started by one of the researchers behind ChatGPT. It's a decision engine: you give it options, it picks one and tells you how sure it is. It cannot write a single word, and that is the interesting part. Every other AI you use writes. That is the whole interface. So when software needs a plain yes or no, we make a model write a paragraph and then dig the answer back out of it. Fine in a chat window where a human reads it. Bad inside software, where code has to act on it. The bet is that the valuable half was never the writing. It was the deciding. That problem showed up in WordPress years ago, and it is the reason WPVibe works the way it does. The AI does the work. Anything permanent stops and waits, because a delete that skips the trash is not something software should decide on its own.show more

John Turner
21,029 次观看 • 1 个月前
Smartest AI update for Chrome You can now use... Gemini from anywhere: - Type "@" in the top bar - Select "Chat with Gemini" - Write your prompt next Press Enter and Chrome will answer you directly using Gemini! No longer need to open a new tab, access Gemini and then finally type your prompt. Everything is done directly from the top bar in one go: a huge productivity boost!show more

Paul Couvert
62,535 次观看 • 2 年前
I shared 10 Jev use cases for marketers. Here... are 10 more: 11. Ad creative scoring - Feed it 100 ad variations. Jev can score which hooks, headlines, or angles are most worth testing first. 12. Social post filtering - Monitor thousands of posts. Jev can flag the ones worth replying to, reposting, or using as sales signals. 13. ICP detection - Give it a company, profile, or website. Jev can score how closely it matches your ideal customer. 14. Buying signal detection - Someone posts that they're switching tools, hiring, raising money, or struggling with a problem. 15. Comment prioritization - Get hundreds of comments across LinkedIn, X, YouTube, or Product Hunt. Jev can score which ones deserve a reply first. 16. Review analysis - Feed it thousands of customer reviews. Jev can classify sentiment, complaints, feature requests, and purchase intent. 17. Influencer matching - Give it 5,000 creators. Jev can score which ones best match your product, audience, and campaign. 18. Sponsorship qualification - Feed it newsletters, podcasts, or creator media kits. Jev can score audience fit, relevance, and whether they're worth reviewing. 19. UGC selection - Give it dozens of videos, screenshots, and testimonials. Jev can score which ones are strongest for ads or landing pages. 20. Product Hunt monitoring - Scan launches, comments, and makers to find competitors, customers, partners, or interesting products. The more repetitive marketing decisions you have to make at scale, the more interesting Jev becomes.show more

Yum⋆₊˚
670,963 次观看 • 29 天前
THIS IS A PURE F*CKING GOLDMINE the best REA... trick almost nobody runs yet. The idea: REA takes the app apart, Jev keeps only what's proven, and a fresh Opus 5.5 rebuilds the feature from that alone. Nothing gets copied and no guess makes it into the code, because the builder never sees the original, only the spec Jev signed off on. You just connect REA like this: npx rea-agents setup here's the split: → REA reads the feature down to the binary and writes every rule into SPEC.md → Jev checks each rule against REA's evidence and sends back anything unproven → a fresh Opus 5.5 session gets only SPEC.md and rebuilds the feature → Haiku 5.5 runs the tests against 3 intentionally broken versions Opus only shows up at three moments: → rebuilding from the approved spec → the checks Jev marks as unclear → signing off before anything ships REA reads. Jev judges. Opus rebuilds. That's the clean-room rule in one line: the model that saw the original never writes the code, and the model that writes the code never sees the original. the full tree > REA reads the app and writes SPEC.md with evidence for every rule > Jev approves or returns each rule > Opus 5.5 rebuilds from the approved SPEC.md in a fresh session > Haiku 5.5 runs the tests and the 3 broken versions > Jev routes unclear checks back to Opus > /goal keeps going until all 3 broken versions fail paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Set up a clean-room rebuild around this tree: 1. Use REA to investigate [FEATURE] in [APP]. Write every behavior and rule into SPEC.md, each with the evidence REA found. 2. Send each rule to Jev. Any rule without evidence goes back to REA. 3. Start a fresh session with only SPEC.md. Rebuild the feature on Opus 5.5 without opening the original. 4. Write tests on Haiku 5.5 plus 3 intentionally broken versions. Use /goal until the rebuild passes and all 3 broken versions fail. Show me SPEC.md first. Nothing gets built until I say go." ↳ save it, it'll come in handy.show more

Archive
58,368 次观看 • 2 天前
funny thing, my original loader doesn’t use keyframes. it... just loops opacity with a per‑pixel delay array + a duration param. less flexible than keyframes, but gives a different effect here is one example in case you want to try to understand it hahah: { name: 'wave-lr', // Delay in ms before each of the 9 grid cells starts animating, indexed as [0,1,2], [3,4,5], [6,7,8] delays: [0, 100, 200, 0, 100, 200, 0, 100, 200], // How long (ms) each cell takes to fade in/out duration: 600, ]show more

Kevin Grajeda
134,435 次观看 • 8 个月前