We are investigating unauthorized access to GitHub’s internal repositories. While we currently have no evidence of impact to customer information stored outside of GitHub’s internal repositories (such as our customers’ enterprises, organizations, and repositories), we are closely monitoring our infrastructure for follow-on activity.
Did you know about Clear-Site-Data header? 👀
One HTTP header to clear cookies, storage, or cache for your site. Perfect for logout flows.
Learn more 👇
https://t.co/T31Pu6Prry
"my WeBSitE wAs cOmplEtElY crEaTEd wiTH aI anD iT doEsN'T lOOk liKE Ai"
it does... we can see it
it looks like you let a 5-year-old loose with a cookie cutter, and that's before we even look at the code...
@letandrewcook LLM has never suggested Tailwind as I’ve programmed it to focus on performance and accessibility and I use it to optimize SCSS/CSS daily.
“Infer everything from raw data and markup” is hardly a breakthrough. It’s a rather elaborate way of rediscovering what WP already hands you in a structured XML export, and what is built in to Jekyll and could be done in matters of seconds.
Pointing out that the db is the source of truth doesn’t elevate the approach it simply means you bypassed the existing solution and built your own importer instead, basically reimplementing existing tooling with more steps.
Read the blogpost again. Instead of using the native WP XML export and a Jekyll importer, which already handles structured content and images, it generated a BeautifulSoup scraping script, an SQL dump parser, an image rewrite/cleanup routine, and rebuilt the stack around Jekyll, Tailwind, and Vercel.
That’s a lot of custom plumbing to recreate functionality that already exists in a deterministic XML to Jekyll pipeline.
If it was vanilla before and it rewrote everything to Tailwind, that’s means it bloated the markup too.
Did it actually generate proper layouts/partials, or just distribute utility classes across markdown templates?
I’d still like to see the actual input/output. When you say “SQL + HTML wins,” do you mean you bypassed the structured export and had it infer everything from raw data and markup? If so, how is that better than a clean XML to front matter to layout pipeline? Or is that effectively what it ended up doing under the hood?
I’d be interested in seeing the initial input (before intervention), i.e the data folder, _config.yml, whether it generated proper layouts/partials (ex, conditional logic in the header/footer based on cats present in yml). To see how structured and maintainable the result actually are.
Also curious whether it rewrote any posts, unless you provided an XML export and it simply parsed that into front matter + content via a python script.
WP already exports everything as XML including full HTML inside the_content plus structured fields like title, date, author, taxonomies
I did see in your video different styles for different posts but it’s not clear whether it actually generated reusable layouts, includes, proper asset structure, or simply converted each post into standalone html into the md file
I’d love to see the code if you’re open to sharing it or open sourcing it. I work with WPVIP and have contributed to Jekyll over the years, so I’m really interested in both sides of this.
Why not use the default WordPress XML export and then import it? It doesn’t look like it did any liquid logic or static component / yml. There’s already a purpose-built tool for this: https://t.co/C5vkBrUPCu. Feels like using an LLM for this isn’t efficient at all. Impressive it didn’t rewrite any content tho.