<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: sergio_valencia</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sergio_valencia</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 13:40:16 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=sergio_valencia" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sergio_valencia in "Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There’s one thing here that I’m really curious about, and that is what happens in between detection and the decision to pause. Basically, it’s about monitoring any system and the authority over its actions. For humans, 30 minutes to investigate might be considered reasonable, but what if during an investigation there’s a high-risk tool call? If the tool execution happens in real time, then the monitoring becomes retrospective, and if the execution is held, then monitoring latency and uptime are a part of the security contract. Isolation controls may limit damage. So, where is the action gate really placed?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 19:58:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49351761</link><dc:creator>sergio_valencia</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49351761</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49351761</guid></item></channel></rss>