Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

nesbitt.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 108 posts

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#21

Post by RaSoJo »

piterrro wrote: post #13

(I know its a satire, but could be seen as an actual post mortem of the future incident) This report made me realize there's no place for humans, as it is right now, in the process of building software systems in the future. Reading this incident made me dizzy after few paragraphs because of the cognitive context overload and I lost track multiple times.

I kinda felt it was satire, but then the below quote threw me off:

> one vendor’s marketing team, cc’d on the cost anomaly alert, issues a press release citing “a 430% YoY increase in adversarial multi-agent security reasoning.” The stock opens up 6%.

That happens! That is not satire. So i had to visit the comments here to be sure :)

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#23

Post by unknownfuture »

piterrro wrote: post #13

(I know its a satire, but could be seen as an actual post mortem of the future incident) This report made me realize there's no place for humans, as it is right now, in the process of building software systems in the future. Reading this incident made me dizzy after few paragraphs because of the cognitive context overload and I lost track multiple times.

You're absolutely right!

(In all seriousness it seems this is the dream of a huge number of AI pilled execs dreaming of infinite velocity at a fraction of the cost... velocity pointed where, you ask? Well stop asking or you'll be next.)

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#24

Post by mawadev »

bilekas wrote: post #4

> Duration: 96 hours (billable: 2.1 trillion tokens) Now there's a metric that would make my boss nervous. > Total inference spend across all parties during the incident window was $1.7M, which Marketing has asked us to start describing as “a record investment in autonomous customer assurance.” This is too funny.

I think at some point we need a different or split up currency/economy, because these values make no sense. Just consider how this inference cost 1.062.500 tomatoes ($1.6) in the physical world.

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#26

Post by Octoth0rpe »

The entire post is great, but the acknowledgements section is particularly excellent:

> Kubernetes (the dog), who was not involved in this incident but whose photo in the #incident-response channel was auto-tagged by the Slack image classifier as “container orchestration diagram (confidence: 0.31)”

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#27

Post by john_strinlai »

hk__2 wrote: post #20
john_strinlai wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its tagged as satire at the very top of the page, first thing under the title (also, CVEs are numeric only, so the "LGTM" (looks good to me) and CVE "YIKES" is also a big giveaway, on top of ~all of the text being outlandish)

> its tagged as satire at the very top of the page, first thing under the title Not the first thing, it’s buried in the tags as grey on light grey on white.

>it’s buried in the tags as grey on light grey on white.

if you happened to miss the tags, reading approximately any of the article should make it pretty clear.

"This report was reviewed by Legal, who have asked us to clarify that the fox was depicted as over eighteen and that the sunglasses remained on throughout."

Re: Incident CVE-2026-LGTM

#29

Post by [deleted] »

john_strinlai wrote: post #27
hk__2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> its tagged as satire at the very top of the page, first thing under the title Not the first thing, it’s buried in the tags as grey on light grey on white.

> it’s buried in the tags as grey on light grey on white. if you happened to miss the tags, reading approximately any of the article should make it pretty clear. " This report was reviewed by Legal, who have asked us to clarify that the fox was depicted as over eighteen and that the sunglasses remained on throughout. "

[deleted]
Post reply on HN