标签：#git

A GitHub Copilot spending limit is a monthly budget, set in billing settings, that caps metered AI credit consumption for an enterprise, an organization, a cost center, or a single user. Creating one takes about two minutes. Knowing what it stops takes longer, and the gap between those two things is where most surprise Copilot invoices live. Two facts account for nearly all of them. On enterprise, organization and cost center budgets, the setting that actually blocks usage is off by default, so a budget in its default state is an alert rather than a limit. And no budget of any kind caps seat cost, because seats are license-based rather than metered. A spending limit governs what happens after the included credit pool runs out, and nothing before it. How to set a GitHub Copilot spending limit Budgets live in the billing settings of the account that pays. Enterprise owners and billing managers can set every budget control, including enterprise, cost center and user-level budgets. Organization owners can set a budget for their own organization, and that budget can only restrict usage further below whatever an enterprise admin has already set. It cannot raise the ceiling. The mechanics are the same at every level. Choose the budget type, which determines the metered product being measured. Choose the scope, which determines whose usage counts against it. Enter a monthly amount. Then, if the option appears, enable Stop usage when budget limit is reached and switch on threshold alerts at 75, 90 and 100 percent. That single checkbox is the whole exercise. Skip it and you have built a notification. What a GitHub Copilot spending limit actually caps GitHub splits its products into license-based and metered. For license-based products, which include Copilot seats, setting a budget does not prevent usage above the amount. It only alerts. For metered products, which include Copilot AI credits, a budget can prevent usage once the threshold is reached. The consequence is worth st

Some fortnights the complaints about AI come from people who barely use it. This one they came from the people who use it most. Scroll Hacker News over the past week — the forum where developers argue about their tools in unusual detail — and the grievances about AI coding assistants weren’t existential. Nobody was worried about the robots waking up. They were worried about their bill, their UI, and the effort of reading what the model just wrote. Quotes sourced from: Hacker News. Every quote below was located at its comment permalink and reproduced verbatim; each is listed with its username, the platform, and the date in the Sources section. As always, we quote experiences, not verdicts — a forum comment is one practitioner’s account, often mid-argument, and we’ve framed them as exactly that. What makes this batch worth reading isn’t volume; it’s specificity. These are checkable complaints. “Enshittified at a surprising clip”: the dark-pattern gripe The sharpest thread of the fortnight was about Cursor, the AI code editor, and it wasn’t about the quality of its completions. It was about the way the product behaves around you. A user posting as jmuguy , on 20 August, laid out a bill of particulars that will sound familiar to anyone who’s watched a beloved tool curdle: “Cursor isn’t covering itself in glory regardless. The flagship app is getting enshittified at a surprising clip. It constantly pops up and interrupts your work pushing new features, changes your model to whatever the latest Grok is without prompting, has this mystery meat UI that is constantly changing, pushes cloud agents in ways that are definitely designed to trick you. We’re actively looking at alternatives, I wouldn’t touch anything this company produces from here on out.” Set aside the verdict at the end — that’s one person’s conclusion, not ours — and look at the specifics, because they’re the kind you can check: interruptions pushing new features, a model silently swapped to Grok, a UI that ke

Uber’s GitFarm provides Git operations as a centralized service, eliminating local repository clones across large scale monorepo workloads. The platform uses prewarmed checkouts, ephemeral sandboxes, repository synchronization, and gRPC streaming to reduce resource consumption and startup latency for automation services operating across thousands of repositories. By Leela Kumili

GitHub热门项目 | Scalable CLI | Stars: 427 | 20 stars today | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | Python toolkit for quantitative finance | Stars: 12,772 | 25 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | "AI-Trader: 100% Fully-Automated Agent-Native Trading" | Stars: 21,730 | 155 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | Drop in a screenshot and convert it to clean code (HTML/Tailwind/React/Vue) | Stars: 75,295 | 309 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | GitNexus: The Zero-Server Code Intelligence Engine - GitNexus is a client-side knowledge graph creator that runs entirely in your browser. Drop in a git repository (Github, Gitlab, Azure, Local) or ZIP file, and get an interactive knowledge graph with a built in Graph RAG Agent. Perfect for code exploration | Stars: 46,029 | 189 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub: https://github.com/abrownfox0/abrownfox001-twap60-prediction-trigger-system YouTube walkthrough: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzhugRL6BV4 This is a new 4-part series comparing the two venues that actually matter for short-horizon BTC direction: Part 1 — Settlement design: Polymarket TWAP60 vs Kalshi 60s average (this post) Part 2 — Product shape: 5-minute specialist vs 15-minute regulated stack Part 3 — What a directional bot must change when crossing venues Part 4 — Where edge survives, and where it dies Live profile: @abrownfox001 The Real Split Is Not “On-Chain vs Regulated” People compare Polymarket and Kalshi as if the important difference is KYC, geography, or chain vs centralized matching. For a short-horizon BTC bot, those matter later. The first difference is simpler: What exact number decides Up vs Down? If you get that wrong, every signal, backtest, and scratch rule is solving the wrong problem. Two Venues, Two Official Averages Both platforms moved away from “whatever the last print was.” Both now settle short BTC contracts on a one-minute average . They do not use the same average. Polymarket crypto Up/Down Kalshi BTC short contracts Shortest liquid product 5-minute Up/Down 15-minute Up/Down ( KXBTC15M ) Settlement idea Time-weighted average 60-second simple average Official source Chainlink TWAP CF Benchmarks Real-Time Index (BRTI family) Window 60 seconds for current 5m / 15m / 4h crypto Final 60 seconds before close , sampled ~1s Open reference Matching TWAP at slot start Strike / floor set by the contract Feed path for bots Polymarket RTDS or Chainlink Data Streams Kalshi market fields + CF Benchmarks index Market structure On-chain CLOB Centralized CFTC-regulated exchange Same word — “60-second average.” Different index. Different sampling. Different product clock. Why Both Platforms Converged on 60 Seconds Snapshot settlement created the same failure mode everywhere: A brief push into one venue’s book A wick at the exact close Retail on

GitHub热门项目 | Daily updated list of Tech Company OAs and Interview Problems. Save your time from finding them all over the internet. | Stars: 4,635 | 98 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub Trending Digest — 28 Agustus 2026 Minggu ini, repo-repo di GitHub menunjukkan arah yang cukup jelas: AI agent menjadi semakin otonom dan ringan . Dari framework yang membuat agent berpikir hemat kode, hingga engine lokal untuk model MoE (Mixture of Experts) yang bisa berjalan di hardware apa pun, ekosistem open source terus mendorong batas apa yang mungkin dilakukan developer dengan sumber daya terbatas. Berikut rangkuman lima repository paling trending minggu ini. 1. deepseek-ai/deepseek-harness ⭐ 200.216 Bahasa: TypeScript DeepSeek Harness mengusung filosofi "Everything is a Plugin" . Repositori ini menawarkan kerangka kerja yang memungkinkan developer membangun pipeline AI secara modular, di mana setiap komponen—mulai dari preprocessing data, inference, hingga post-processing—dapat ditukar seperti lego. Dengan pendekatan berbasis plugin ini, tidak ada lagi lock-in ke satu library atau model tertentu. Mengapa repo ini trending? Karena komunitas sedang haus akan fleksibilitas. DeepSeek sendiri terus merilis model yang kompetitif dengan model besaran internasional, dan Harness memberi jalan bagi developer untuk mengintegrasikannya tanpa ribet. Use case praktis: Membangun sistem RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) di mana Anda bisa mengganti embedding model, vector store, dan LLM backend tanpa mengubah logika inti aplikasi. 2. DietrichGebert/ponytail ⭐ 114.054 Bahasa: JavaScript Ponytail memperkenalkan pendekatan unik: membuat AI agent bersikap seperti "senior developer paling malas di ruangan" . Filosofi dasarnya sederhana—kode terbaik adalah kode yang tidak pernah kamu tulis. Ponytail mendorong agent untuk memaksimalkan reuse, meminimalkan boilerplate, dan menolak menulis ulang hal yang sudah ada. Trending karena resonansi budaya. Kalimat "the best code is the code you never wrote" langsung menyentuh pain point developer yang sering terjebak menulis ulang solusi yang sudah tersedia. Ponytail bukan sekadar tool, tapi semacam mindset yang dikodekan. Use case

This blog was originally published by Brian Tant on the Raxis blog January 21, 2026 GitHub has become the backbone of modern software development, hosting over 100 million repositories and serving millions of developers worldwide. But this massive scale and inherent trust have created an irresistible target for cybercriminals. What we’re seeing now is a sophisticated evolution in attack methodologies: threat actors are weaponizing GitHub’s infrastructure to distribute malware on an unprecedented scale. The numbers are staggering. Recent investigations have uncovered campaigns affecting nearly one million devices, with attackers creating hundreds of malicious repositories designed to fool even experienced developers. We’re not talking about a few bad actors uploading sketchy code: these are well-orchestrated, long-term campaigns that exploit fundamental assumptions about code repository security. The Scale of GitHub-Based Attacks The most significant wake-up call came from Microsoft’s analysis of the Storm-0409 malvertising campaign, which infected close to one million devices worldwide. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Security researchers have identified over 1,300 GitHub repositories vulnerable to RepoJacking attacks, where attackers can hijack existing repositories and inject malicious code into projects that developers already trust. Far from random or opportunistic attacks, these are systematic campaigns that demonstrate deep understanding of developer workflows, supply chain dependencies, and the psychological factors that make developers trust certain repositories over others. Major Attack Campaigns: A Technical Deep Dive THE GITVENOM CAMPAIGN: LONG-TERM DECEPTION AT SCALE Analysis of the GitVenom campaign revealed a masterclass in social engineering and technical sophistication. Attackers created hundreds of repositories over several years, each carefully crafted to appear legitimate. They featured professionally written README files (possibly generat

God’s Eye View was the top project on GitHub Trending when we selected it for Jian AI Lab’s daily experiment. The pitch is immediately compelling. It brings aircraft, vessels, satellites, earthquakes, wildfire data, traffic, CCTV sources, and other feeds into one 3D globe. The repository also makes a serious effort to label data as live, modeled, reconstructed, or simulated. We tested commit b22573a9db28e47c324821ebdd4c67bdb241c0e1 on Linux with Node.js 24.19.0 and npm 11.9.0. Installation and security checks We first ran npm ci --ignore-scripts , reviewed the install-script sources, and then ran the normal npm ci . Both installations succeeded with 201 packages. The root project has no preinstall, install, or postinstall hook. Transitive install scripts come from esbuild, fsevents, Puppeteer, and sharp. npm audit --omit=dev reported no known vulnerabilities in production dependencies. A common secret-pattern scan did not find hard-coded live credentials. This is a limited check, not a full source audit. The project talks to many external services, including Google Maps, OpenAI, OpenSky, AISStream, NASA FIRMS, TomTom, CelesTrak, OSM, Open-Meteo, GDELT, and Radio Browser. It is local-first, but it is not offline. Server-side keys such as OpenAI and AISStream are read by the local Vite proxy. Google Maps and Cesium tokens are intentionally delivered to the browser. Users must restrict referrers and APIs and set provider budgets and quotas. 2,588 visible assertions passed The main test suite reported 2,587 passing assertions and zero failures. A separate focus-allocation check added one more passing assertion. The visible total was 2,588 passes and zero failures. The process did not exit after the summary. We waited more than 90 seconds and interrupted it manually. The final exit code was 130. The precise result is that all visible assertions passed, while the official test command did not complete with a clean exit in this environment. This may indicate an open handle

GitHub热门项目 | A spy satellite simulator in your browser, except the data is real. Live open source spatial intelligence on a photorealistic 3D globe. | Stars: 7,705 | 1,984 stars today | 语言: JavaScript

We build GPTree with several coding agents working the same repository at once: Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor, each in its own git worktree. The failure that finally made us build tooling for it was small and completely silent. One session was told to replace PaymentService with a Stripe-specific implementation. Another was told to add PayPal support to PaymentService . Different worktrees. Different files. Zero textual conflict. Git merged both branches cleanly, and the second change now depended on an extension point the first had deleted. Nothing in the toolchain had an opinion about it at any moment. Git compares diffs. It cannot compare plans. Worktrees isolate files, not plans Worktrees became the standard answer to parallel agents for a good reason: two sessions editing one checkout will overwrite each other's files and poison each other's context. Isolated checkouts fix that completely. But three failure modes survive file isolation, because they were never about files: Destructive versus additive. One agent removes or replaces a thing another agent is building on. The example above. Merges clean, breaks the design. Duplicate work. Two agents solve the same problem from different angles because nothing assigned ownership. You pay twice and then pay again to reconcile. Contract drift. One agent changes an API, a schema, or a config contract while another codes against the old shape. Compiles, runs, disagrees at runtime. A shared task list helps with the second one, if every agent reads it, every time. Nothing in that setup catches the first or third, because the collision is between intentions, and intentions live in prompts, not in any file a tool can watch. Declare the work before doing it Foremerge is the internal tool we built for this, open-sourced this week. It is a coordination protocol that sits above Git: agents declare what they are about to do, before they do it, in a form precise enough to check. A declaration is an intent with one or more semant

GitHub热门项目 | Open-source personal finance manager. Self-hosted, privacy-first. | Stars: 2,324 | 617 stars this week | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | A smarter cd command. Supports all major shells. | Stars: 38,927 | 70 stars today | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | Apache OpenDAL: One Layer, All Storage. | Stars: 5,341 | 4 stars today | 语言: Rust

GitHub热门项目 | Where people and agents build in tune. | Stars: 3,495 | 48 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | Hand-crafted Claude Code Skills focused on improving agent results quality. Compatible with OpenCode, Cursor, Antigravity, Gemini CLI, and others. Includes CodeRabbit open-source alternative. | Stars: 1,415 | 16 stars today | 语言: TypeScript