Skip to content
View bartekus's full-sized avatar

Block or report bartekus

Block user

Prevent this user from interacting with your repositories and sending you notifications. Learn more about blocking users.

You must be logged in to block users.

Maximum 250 characters. Please don’t include any personal information such as legal names or email addresses. Markdown is supported. This note will only be visible to you.
Report abuse

Contact GitHub support about this user’s behavior. Learn more about reporting abuse.

Report abuse
bartekus/README.md

Bartek Kus - Systems Architect & Principal Engineer

👋 Howdy, I'm Bartek

Buy Me A Coffee LinkedIn Twitter

I'm Bartek Kus, a systems architect from Edmonton, Canada. I work on the trust problem in AI-native software delivery:

AI can write the code. The unsolved problem is trusting what it wrote.

My answer is architecting intent: the human authors the contract, agents do the work, and machinery (not optimism) refuses anything that drifts from the contract. Stop reviewing output; start constraining intent.


🔭 What I'm building

spec-spine: a typed, hash-verifiable authority ledger over a markdown spec corpus. Every spec declares the files, sections, and symbols it owns; a PR-time coupling gate refuses code that drifts from its owning spec. Deterministic to the byte across five platforms; Rust; Apache-2.0. Install from crates.io or npm. It governs itself: its own coupling gate runs against its own spec corpus in CI.

open-agentic-platform: the same ideas at platform scale; a governed control plane for AI-native software delivery. 200 frozen, hash-verifiable specs compile to a deterministic registry; every agent action reconciles to the spec that authorised it; every pipeline run emits a self-authenticating governance certificate an auditor can verify independently; the OWASP ASI 2026 control-to-spec mapping is one CLI invocation. AGPL-3.0. Built by one person directing a fleet of governed agents, which is rather the point.


🧭 What I think

  • Architecting intent over vibe coding. No human reviews every line an agent produces; pretending otherwise just moves the bottleneck back to the human. Make intent the requirement, the requirement a spec, and the spec law.
  • Agentic output is hostile by default. Agents earn passage by surviving gates, not by appealing to trust.
  • Humans gate contracts, not diffs. Specs, approvals, and irreversible boundaries are human territory; everything between them is enforced by machinery.
  • Typed contracts beat convention. It's why my backends are Encore.ts, not Express: declarative, type-safe APIs that generate their own infrastructure, instead of middleware chains held together by discipline.

How I got here is one problem at three scales: a decade of digital identity (OIDC, SSI, DID) asking "can this person be trusted", platform engineering asking "can this system be trusted", and now governed agent delivery asking "can machine-generated change be trusted".


🛠 Tech I reach for often

RustTypeScriptEncore.tsReactTauriPostgreSQLKubernetesHelmTerraformOpenTelemetryClaude CodeMCP


📊 GitHub at a glance

GitHub stats for bartekus Top languages for bartekus


📫 Reach me

➡️ https://bartekus.com ➡️ LinkedIn: /in/bartekus ➡️ Twitter: @bartekus ➡️ Email: [email protected]


"The human authors the law; the agents comply with it; the spine makes non-compliance impossible to merge."

Pinned Loading

  1. spec-spine spec-spine Public

    A typed, hash-verifiable ledger of who-owns-what, sitting underneath a codebase so that many agents (or people) can work in parallel without trampling each other.

    Rust

  2. stagecraft-ing/open-agentic-platform stagecraft-ing/open-agentic-platform Public

    TypeScript 2 1