contrarian-question@1.0.3
CAUTIONPublisher claims: "Activate when: user says 'contrarian question,' 'the Thiel question,' 'what important truth do very few people agree with you on,' 'is this actually contrarian,' or 'what valuable company is nobody building'; user is drafting or stress-testing a startup thesis, pitch 'secret,' or investment view that claims to be non-consensus; user is preparing for an interview or pitch where they must defend an unpopular claim; user suspects their bold-sounding claim is really consensus in edgy clothing. Do NOT activate when: the user needs the broader portfolio-level discipline of hunting for edges across many bets (use non-consensus-thinking instead); the claim is a matter of taste or values with no evidence path to being right or wrong; the user wants validation or applause for a provocative take rather than a gate that might fail it. More: deciqai.com/c/contrarian-question" Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-02 and scored it 67/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
No findings across 213 lines in 2 files.
What would make this Verified
13 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim deciqai: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
- New publisher≈ +3 on the totalTime clears this on its own after 14 and 30 days. Claiming the handle (+50) is the fastest way past it.