- 361comments
- 75comments
- 24comments
- 153comments
- 137comments
- 50comments
- 198comments
- 5comments
- 2comments
- 34comments
- 20comments
- 122comments
- 1comments
- 40comments
- 34comments
- 23comments
- 313comments
- 19comments
- 106comments
- 56comments
- 180comments
- 36comments
- 343comments
- 5comments
- —discuss
- 19comments
- 25comments
- 2comments
- 50comments
- 103comments
Auditing the actual code would build far more trust than any third-party certification. That's the real win here for security-conscious deployments.
Pure slop, completely unadulterated from what I can tell.
Kudos for at least admitting upfront that it’s pure slop, I guess.
Easier than reading the source myself, but I don't think the site makes a good case for why I SHOULD apply CC's patterns to my own systems, besides it being the most used harness. It's clearly useful software, but that doesn't _necessarily_ translate to something to learn from.
It is apparently a vibecoded mess: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47772282