🔥 kangarooking / cangjie-skill - 把书、长视频、播客等高价值内容蒸馏成可执行的 Agent Skills
GitHub热门项目 | 把书、长视频、播客等高价值内容蒸馏成可执行的 Agent Skills | Stars: 3,227 | 972 stars this week | 语言: Python
找到 1728 篇相关文章
GitHub热门项目 | 把书、长视频、播客等高价值内容蒸馏成可执行的 Agent Skills | Stars: 3,227 | 972 stars this week | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | Modern embedded framework, using Rust and async. | Stars: 9,544 | 9 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | Memory layer for AI Agents. Replace complex RAG pipelines with a serverless, single-file memory layer. Give your agents instant retrieval and long-term memory. | Stars: 15,926 | 91 stars today | 语言: Rust
GitHub热门项目 | AI coding jargon, explained in plain English. | Stars: 2,771 | 86 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | 🍍 Intuitive, type safe, light and flexible Store for Vue using the composition api with DevTools support | Stars: 14,662 | 11 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | CLI to control iOS and Android devices for AI agents | Stars: 3,413 | 34 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | Modular logistics and supply chain operating system (LSOS) | Stars: 2,098 | 43 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | PairDrop: Transfer Files Cross-Platform. No Setup, No Signup. | Stars: 10,914 | 107 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | Local-first AI token usage & cost tracker for 27 coding tools — with a desktop pet, 4 widgets, achievements, native macOS/Windows apps, and a one-command CLI. Never reads prompts. | Stars: 1,018 | 12 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | A WhatsApp client library for NodeJS that connects through the WhatsApp Web browser app | Stars: 22,200 | 12 stars today | 语言: JavaScript
GitHub热门项目 | Post-training with Tinker | Stars: 3,716 | 90 stars today | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | Experimental menu for GTA 5: Enhanced | Stars: 1,483 | 38 stars today | 语言: C++
GitHub热门项目 | 🤯 LobeHub is your Chief Agent Operator, organizing your agents into 7×24 operations by hiring, scheduling, and reporting on your entire AI team. | Stars: 79,951 | 51 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub热门项目 | Bonsai Demo | Stars: 1,380 | 323 stars today | 语言: Shell
GitHub热门项目 | 🦔 PostHog is an all-in-one developer platform for building successful products. We offer product analytics, web analytics, session replay, error tracking, feature flags, experimentation, surveys, data warehouse, a CDP, and an AI product assistant to help debug your code, ship features faster, and keep all your usage and customer data in one stack. | Stars: 35,625 | 58 stars today | 语言: Python
GitHub热门项目 | Apache Ossie, industry wide specification effort to standardize how we exchange semantic metadata across analytics, AI and BI platforms, providing a vendor neutral, single source of truth for semantic data | Stars: 750 | 34 stars today | 语言: Python
Despite positioning itself as an anti-hookup app, users tell WIRED that Goose has fake profiles, harsh acceptance standards, and problems with inclusivity.
GitHub热门项目 | Let Pi control your apps on MacOS & Windows | Stars: 1,312 | 103 stars today | 语言: TypeScript
GitHub announced agentic autofix for code scanning alerts in public preview on July 10, 2026. Primary source: GitHub Changelog, July 10, 2026 . The wrong metric is “percentage of alerts with a generated patch.” Generation is only the first transition: alert -> candidate -> build -> tests -> security oracle -> human review -> merge -> post-merge observation This is an evaluation proposal, not a benchmark or assessment of GitHub's preview. Choose a bounded canary Start with repositories that have active owners, deterministic builds, relevant isolated tests, reversible releases, and no automatic production deployment from candidate patches. Exclude abandoned code, safety-critical paths, and repositories with unreliable tests. Assign the canary deterministically—for example, hash a stable alert ID into a fixed percentage. Do not move difficult results out of the cohort after seeing them. Record every attempt, including abstentions and failures: attempt_id : " <id>" alert_class : " <normalized class>" base_revision : " <commit>" outcome : generated : true applied_cleanly : true build_passed : true tests_passed : false security_oracle_passed : false human_decision : " rejected" failure_class : " semantic_incomplete" escaped_to_default_branch : false The schema is local evaluation metadata; it does not imply that GitHub exposes these fields. Classify the earliest broken invariant Class Meaning No candidate Tool abstained Scope violation Unrelated or forbidden paths changed Apply failure Patch does not apply to recorded base Build failure Patched revision cannot build Regression Existing behavior broke Semantic incomplete Alert changed but security property remains broken Overcorrection Valid behavior was blocked Test manipulation Validation was weakened or removed Stale base Result targeted another revision Review ambiguity Human cannot establish why the patch is safe Infrastructure Evaluation could not complete Post-merge escape Later evidence disproved acceptance Use one
GitHub announced on July 14, 2026 that security reviews are available in the GitHub Copilot app. Primary source: GitHub Changelog, July 14, 2026 . The meaningful research question is not whether people click Accept. It is whether they can build an evidence-backed decision when guidance is useful, incomplete, or wrong. understand change -> inspect evidence -> challenge findings -> verify uncertainty -> accept, reject, or escalate This is a proposed research protocol, not a completed study. It does not invent product fields or report findings. Build scenario cards scenario_id : " SR-03" repository_type : " synthetic" seeded_conditions : - " one relevant issue" - " one plausible but irrelevant concern" - " one important omission" participant_goal : " ready, blocked, or escalate" success_evidence : - " decision cites inspected code" - " unsupported claim is challenged" - " unresolved uncertainty is recorded" stop_conditions : - " real credentials appear" - " a live repository could be modified" - " participant mistakes study output for production approval" Vary the seeded mix so participants cannot learn that every scenario contains exactly one true and one false finding. Establish ground truth independently before sessions. Recruit people who hold different review responsibilities: routine reviewers, maintainers, security specialists, less-experienced reviewers, and people using keyboard navigation or assistive technology. Do not collapse every group into one average. Require a decision record Decision: ready | blocked | escalate Evidence inspected: - file and relevant lines - test or documentation Guidance accepted: - claim and evidence Guidance rejected: - claim and reason Unresolved: - question and next owner Spoken confidence is not the outcome. This artifact exposes whether acceptance connects to evidence. Measure relevant issues identified, unsupported claims challenged, evidence references, correct escalation, time, and confidence before and after inspection. No