Software is changing faster than most teams realize. Not incrementally. Structurally. Here is a data point that caught my attention recently: a team at OpenAI shipped an internal beta built with zero lines of manually written code link. It reached daily use, grew to roughly a million lines of code
We're building Sandstrike, a machine-learning classifier that scans newly published npm and PyPI packages for supply-chain malware. Every 15 minutes, it pulls the latest packages from both registries, extracts features, and runs inference. Suspicious packages get flagged to Slack. The model is good, but it'
Something fundamental is changing in how software gets built. For decades, the loop looked basically the same: humans write requirements, humans write code, humans test it, humans deploy it. AI has been nibbling at each step for years, with autocomplete here and a generated test there. But what’s showing
If you have spent any time with AI coding agents, you already know the obvious wins: scaffolding projects, writing glue code, churning out boilerplate. I wanted to push on something different. So I built REPLICATE, a digital museum of the history of self-replicating code, spanning seven exhibits from 1949–
AI coding is fast. Security feedback is usually not. Most SAST runs after the code is written, committed, and pushed. With Claude Code, that gap gets painful because the model can generate vulnerabilities just as quickly as it generates features. We wanted the tightest possible loop: write code → scan it