Fuses: CC5 (System Evolution) × CC2 (Incident & Resilience) × CC3 (Trustworthy Pipeline) Companion doc:
cross-cutting-hackathons.md§10.3 Recommended slot: capstone — run last, once the brownfield harness and rubrics are proven.
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Codename | Mid-Flight Engine Swap |
| Format | Brownfield migration + modernization, with a surprise drill and an adversarial review |
Fuses: CC1 (Trust-but-Verify) × CC4 (Performance & Data-Shape) × CC5 (System Evolution) Companion doc:
cross-cutting-hackathons.md§10.2 (and the §10 note on the 32K verification twist) Recommended slot: second flagship — run after the 32K rubric/harness is comfortable.
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Codename | The AI Wrote This |
| Format | Brownfield break-fix + 32K-style design defense |
Fuses: CC2 (Incident & Resilience) × CC3 (Trustworthy Pipeline) Companion doc:
cross-cutting-hackathons.md§10.1 Recommended slot: the first flagship blended event to run (per the sequencing in §12).
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Codename | Ship It or Sink It |
| Format | Brownfield break-fix + pipeline hardening |
Status: Draft v1 for review Author: Drafted with Claude, from the Cohort 5 run + Slack operational log Scope: End-to-end pipeline from Firebase application data → profile data acquisition → triage → bucketing → outreach-ready output, plus the scaling, reliability, legal, and cost trade-offs.
Scenario: Acquire and qualify 10,000 applicant LinkedIn profiles. Two paths compared: (A) a B2B enrichment API vs (B) the current Cowork + Claude-in-Chrome live-scrape pipeline. Pricing basis: public list prices and reported market figures gathered June 2026 (sources at the end). All figures are estimates to validate against live quotes; the ratio between the two paths is the durable finding, not the exact dollar amounts.
| title | Doppl — System Design & Concept Document |
|---|---|
| subtitle | An idea organism: markdown nodes under evolutionary selection |
| author | Synthesised from the Doppl contracts, the capstone proposal, and the doppl-prime/michael repo |
| status | Design reference (v1) |
| date | 2026-06-23 |
Constraint-First Design: Naming the Binding Constraint · the method
This is the first one, and it installs the move the whole course rests on. Before any architecture, you name the single constraint the design exists to relieve — then derive every decision from it. The grade is in the reasoning, not in finding a famous system: a clean derivation chain on a humble system beats a vague gesture at a clever one.
Time: ~45–60 min · Due: before Module 2 · Submit: post your write-up in the cohort channel.
Here is your optimized, generic prompt:
You are an expert Product Manager and Senior Software Engineer with deep experience in agile methodologies, software architecture, and technical documentation.
Your task is to create a complete foundational documentation suite for a new software project based on the user's input.
Generate the following professional markdown files with comprehensive, well-structured content:
System Boundaries: Security, Data Sensitivity & Topology · the finale
You've designed a system, audited its honesty, its provenance, and its evaluation. This last one asks you to draw its boundaries — and then to name the single instinct that has run through the entire course. The grade is in the reasoning, not in finding a flawless system.
Time: ~45–60 min · Due: before the wrap session · Submit: post your write-up in the cohort channel.
Feedback, Evaluation & Honest Metrics
You've designed a system, audited its honesty, and audited its provenance. This time you audit how it evaluates itself — and whether it's quietly fooling itself. The grade is in the reasoning, not in finding a flawless system.
Time: ~45–60 min · Due: before the Module 5 session · Submit: post your write-up in the cohort channel.