161–170 of 1001 posts
Interesting story. But despite Cursors or Railways failure, the blame is entirely on the author. They decided to run agents. They didnt check how Railway works. They relied on frontier tech to ship faster becsuse YOLO. I really feel sorry for them, I do. But the whole tone of the post is: Cursor screwed it up, Railway screwed it up, their CEO doesnt respond etc etc. Its on you guys! My learning: Live on the cutting e…
Trying to run a blame game is such a facepalm.
Minor point, but one of the complaints is a bit odd: > curl -X POST https://backboard.railway.app/graphql/v2 \ -H "Authorization: Bearer [token]" \ -d '{"query":"mutation { volumeDelete(volumeId: \"3d2c42fb-...\") }"}' No confirmation step. No "type DELETE to confirm." No "this volume contains production data, are you sure?" No environment scoping. Nothing. It's an API. Where would you type DELETE to confirm? Are the…
AWS actually has a thingy on some services called “deletion protection” to prevent automation from accidentally wiping resources the user didn’t want it to (you set the bit, and then you need to make a separate api request to flip the bit back before continuing). I think it’s designed for things like Terraform or CloudFormation where you might not realize the state machine decided your database needed to be replaced…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that the model can help troubleshoot and debug itself. I argue that the model has no access to its thoughts at the time. Split brain experiments notwithstanding I believe that I can remember what my faulty assumptions were when I did something. If you ask a model “why did you do that” it is literally not the same “brain instance” anymore and it can only create reasons retroactively based on whatever context i…
It does have access to its thoughts. This is literally what thinking models do. They write out thoughts to a scratch pad (which you can see!) and use that as part of the prompt.
The most aggravating fact here is not even AI blunder. It's how deleting a volume in Railway also deletes backups of it. This was bound to happen, AI or not. > Because Railway stores volume-level backups in the same volume — a fact buried in their own documentation that says "wiping a volume deletes all backups" — those went with it.
Yes, that is insane. Or said in another way, they simply didn't had any working backup strategy!
> This is the agent on the record, in writing Yeah... it doesn't work that way.
A similar cohort are discovering, in myriad painful ways, that advances in agentic coding — the focus of a lot of pre and post training — does not translate into other domains.