Helicone takes the simplest possible approach to LLM monitoring: it's a proxy. Change your OpenAI base URL from api.openai.com to oai.helicone.ai, add your Helicone API key as a header, and every LLM request is logged — latency, tokens, cost, prompts, and completions. No SDK integration, no code changes beyond a URL swap. - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago

You're monitoring production traffic. You need Langfuse / Phoenix / Helicone / Braintrust for that. Online eval is a different problem class: implicit feedback, drift detection, hallucination rates on your data, not on HellaSwag. - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago

For many teams, especially those starting out or with simpler needs, commercial solutions like Portkey, Helicone, OpenPipe, or LiteLLM Proxy offer off-the-shelf capabilities that cover many common proxy use cases (caching, logging, cost tracking). NeuroLink itself can be seen as an SDK that complements these, allowing you to integrate with them or build similar features on top. - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

TL;DR: Go with Langfuse if you want open-source and self-hosted. Pick Helicone if you want the fastest setup (2 minutes, no SDK). Stick with LangSmith if your stack already runs on LangChain. And if your org already pays for Datadog, their LLM module slots right in. - Source: dev.to / 4 months ago

Hey HN, we're Justin and Cole, the founders of Helicone (https://helicone.ai) or self-deploy with our new fully open-source helm chart (https://helicone.ai/selfhost). Yet even with detailed traces, probabilistic systems are notoriously hard to debug at scale. So, we released evaluators (either via LLM-as-judge or custom Python evaluators leveraging the CodeSandbox SDK - https://codesandbox.io/docs/sdk/sandboxes).... - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

Not literally. And I would hardly say it was a matter of language superiority. I love Ruby myself. But Github was a lot simpler when it was still just a Rails app. But Rails was SSR by default, and most of the frontend was just Embedded Ruby (ERB) template files all over the place. And way back when, it was even relatively common to use Javascript supersets like CoffeeScript[1] and Opal[2]. The latter being Ruby... - Source: Hacker News / about 1 month ago

Surely coffeescript would have been more appropriate? [0]: https://coffeescript.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago

My personal take is this would be like JavaScript adopting an optional Coffeescript[1] syntax. It's so different that it seems odd to make it an option vs a new language, etc. [1] https://coffeescript.org/#introduction. - Source: Hacker News / 7 months ago

JS isn't perfect, but it's good enough. And there is ongoing effort to make it even better. Also, many other languages compile to JS (without WASM). Notably: - https://www.typescriptlang.org/ - https://coffeescript.org/ - https://clojurescript.org/ - https://www.transcrypt.org/ I wrote https://multi-launch.leftium.com, which is only 6% JS. The majority is Svelte (65%) + TypeScript (27%). ( - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

As a front-end web developer, do you still use CoffeeScript or jQuery? Unlikely, as TypeScript, ES/TC39 and Babel (and the retirement of Internet Explorer thanks to @codepo8 and his EDGE team) have helped to transform JavaScript into some kind of a modern programming language. - Source: dev.to / over 3 years ago