buzz vs cccc
Block's self-hostable workspace where humans and agents share rooms on a Nostr relay — chat, canvases, workflows, patches and reviews as signed events; agents join with their own keys. — versus — Group-chat orchestration for coding agents: Claude Code, Codex, ChatGPT Web and others in one durable group with an append-only ledger, read receipts, and Web/IM/mobile ops.
Both put agents and humans in one durable group with an append-only ledger; cccc is a lightweight coordination layer for coding agents, Buzz a full self-hosted workspace on a Nostr relay.
| buzz | cccc | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 36k | 1.3k |
| Forks | 4.7k | 113 |
| Language | Rust | Rust |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Last activity | yesterday | 3 days ago |
| Topics | agents, orchestration | orchestration, coding |
| Curated connections | 3 | 7 |
buzz — the curator's take
Interesting if you want agents as accountable teammates — own keypair, own channel memberships, one signed, searchable log for chat, code and approvals. Not a Slack drop-in yet: mobile clients and workflow approval gates are still being wired up, and adopting it means betting team chat on a Nostr relay. Agents plug in through ACP harnesses such as Goose and Codex.
cccc — the curator's take
Reach for CCCC when the problem is *coordination* between several long-running agents - who owns a task, whether a message was actually delivered/read, what survives a daemon restart - and you want to supervise from a phone via Telegram/Mattermost. The ledger + delivery/read/reply facts are the real differentiator; most multiplexers just tile terminals. Not for a single agent in one repo (herdr or plain tmux is lighter), and not a workflow engine: it doesn't compile plans or DAGs, it routes messages between a foreman and peers. Rust binary, pip-installable, no broker/DB/Docker - but it is a daemon that owns state, so expect one more always-on process.