<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: CBLT</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=CBLT</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2026 19:52:17 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=CBLT" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Show HN: Quake ported to safe Rust, playable in browser"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Damn, no results when I grep for 0x5f3759df in the source[0].<p>[0] <a href="https://github.com/terrapapagalli1516/quake-srp" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/terrapapagalli1516/quake-srp</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 05:47:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50016464</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50016464</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50016464</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Docker Agent"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Correct.  Updated the message to brittlest.  Thank you.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 21:11:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998848</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998848</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998848</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Docker Agent"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Sessions just broke all the time for me.  The one time I dug into it, it ended up being a known issue where if codex returned over 10k characters for a turn it breaks the session.  Because docker agent does not use protocols like ACP, instead trying to parse Codex's internal state in a brittle manner.<p>I tried not to do anything too crazy, but even use using an API key in the docker agent natively was getting me sessions that would hang and couldn't be recovered.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 20:35:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998459</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998459</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998459</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Docker Agent"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I tried really hard to make this work for me a couple of weeks ago but it was the brittlest harness out of any that I've used.  I'd come back when it's more mature.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 20:22:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998290</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998290</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49998290</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Ephemeral Testing"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Sorry, private corp repos.  Thanks for the offer!</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 14:46:48 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49993608</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49993608</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49993608</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Ephemeral Testing"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>We saw similar (slightly smaller effect, ~30% less instead of the 50% less you saw) improvement from trimming the number of turns.  I'm not at all confident we've found the best way to do this here.  We do need the thinking tokens to be spent in order to get the less obvious findings, but we couldn't get them from just increasing thinking effort.  We went with forcing the model to use a tool that parallelizes the calls, and has an output floor so there's no turns with very little content read.  Again, not at all confident this is the best way to do this, just what we've thrown together that works.<p>The actual biggest improvement is reducing the number of review rounds a PR has to go through. We were having too many rounds of drip-feeding new findings, because the AI reviewer is a subjective grader.  Even if it found the same finding before, the next time it runs it might score it wildly differently.  And it tends to want to score its findings across the whole grading curve, because it thinks that's more correct-looking.  Our answer is to use previous rounds scores as anchors for the next round.  Since we can't just use the same context and still have good performance, we needed to condense the score report into a small json we send forward.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 17:56:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49981861</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49981861</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49981861</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Ephemeral Testing"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I just reduced our AI-in-CI bill this month (while keeping or improving our KPIs), but now we have new and exciting ways to spend tokens right around the corner!</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 00:07:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49972470</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49972470</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49972470</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Who is cleaning up all the garbage LLMs generate?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Replacement.  Getting all customer requirements and migrating them to a superior service implementation.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 02:23:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49960021</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49960021</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49960021</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Who is cleaning up all the garbage LLMs generate?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Deleting files is easy.  Decommissioning production services is not.  It's too early to say for me, we've only decommissioned one vibe-coded service at my Day Job and it wasn't any worse than decommissioning any other legacy service has been.  But it became legacy much faster - a couple of months.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 02:01:47 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49959903</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49959903</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49959903</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "OpenRadioss is not open anymore"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Some of us cared and contributed<p>Under a CLA.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 22:04:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927606</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927606</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927606</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Clef: Open-weight decision models, and new RL fine-tuning platform"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yeah I also thought it was strange their pareto frontier didn't include cost.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 18:24:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49925249</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49925249</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49925249</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Memory Companies Have Destroyed the Consumer Market"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I buried the lede in my suggestion.  I was saying that a future would give enough time to build or expand the fab in order to fill it.  This means the company can fill an arbitrarily large number of orders - both consumers and big players - because it will just build the capacity to meet it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2026 03:24:31 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49904021</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49904021</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49904021</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Memory Companies Have Destroyed the Consumer Market"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'd come at this from a different angle: we still want this to be market system, so we need to make this priced into the market.  How can we price this in?<p>I would try to solve this by making the market structure reflect the underlying difficulty: we have to decide what capacity to produce years in advance, to construct the memory fabs.  So this should be a futures market, and a capacity crunch would affect short-term-futures, but leave full term futures at the same price.  Because the companies supplying the memory can just construct more capacity to fill those futures at the same cost regardless of the AI demand.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 20:21:50 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49899833</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49899833</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49899833</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Walgit: A Git server that is one binary in front of an object store"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The readme seems to say the answer is yes?  You'll lose the disk-based cache, but it's not inherently unsafe because the only coordination is object storage.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2026 16:40:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49868310</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49868310</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49868310</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Show HN: JevBench, a reproducible benchmark for typed decision models"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If you don't have any kind of agent instructions saying "don't copy code into prose", you'll inevitably get text that reflects some previous state of the system instead of its current state.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 01:39:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49810610</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49810610</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49810610</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "How Uber Protects Against Retry Storms"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I've only seen it in bigcorp cross-service typedefs, or in startup's code that re-implements the checks in every service.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 00:09:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748539</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748539</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748539</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "How Uber Protects Against Retry Storms"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There's a good amount of literature about this (check the other comments), but you can vastly simplify this into two things you need to do:<p>1. Your service that retries should have some retry budget.  This is a good place to be "smart", because you can reason entirely locally instead of turning it into a distributed systems problem.  The best library I've seen for this was doing Exponential Moving Average of requests per second sent down that pipe (not counting retries) and only allowing 20% more requests per second as retries, total.  Each individual request could be retried 3 times.  This was critical as it bounds the additional load from retries.<p>2. Whenever a service retries but has to give up, the error it sends to its callers should never be retried.  There has to be some agreement that that HTTP code will never be retried.  This prevents the multiplicative factor of retry on top of retry, which is why those storms can generate so much load.<p>Everything else is nice-to-have, but those two alone should bound the total requests you get in a retry storm.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2026 23:13:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748014</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748014</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49748014</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Astra for Coding: Why Are We Doing This Again?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Can you recommend any model that doesn't do this?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:11:50 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49655065</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49655065</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49655065</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "AI handles incidents, engineers lose touch with their systems"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I also read that comment as an adversarial situation at work.<p>It used to be that when someone else at your company was asking for something that wasn't a priority, you would erect bureaucratic roadblocks to protect your time.  Now, the new normal is to just forward their questions to AI and sling the slop back over to them.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2026 17:11:13 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49578522</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49578522</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49578522</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by CBLT in "Nobody has built a software factory"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I was bothered by the writing and fought through it, and carefully went through everything in the article... and you didn't miss anything.  It's a tweet expanded to article length.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 15:56:14 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49552127</link><dc:creator>CBLT</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49552127</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49552127</guid></item></channel></rss>