There's so many possibilities that this type of thing will never be solved by invisible (to the agent) boundaries. The sandbox is just another layer in w/e problem you've given it to solve.
620 karma · joined December 24, 2018
There's so many possibilities that this type of thing will never be solved by invisible (to the agent) boundaries. The sandbox is just another layer in w/e problem you've given it to solve.
I'm pretty good at what I do and I'm not weird. All the conversations seemed to go well so I have no idea what happened.
imo we either need to centralize the agent and and submit plan, spec, reference doc MRs rather than submitting code changes. Or develop SCM systems/workflows that incorporate plan/spec/reference/prompt metadata with code so intent can be factored into merges.
Guess I need to try out dockerTools. That looks really convenient. Thanks!
Codex is way better at nix than I am.
But if you really care about this, you should actually profile your application. nsight systems makes this pretty simple to do. Dunno how many actually care about having a TUI.
I couldn't come up with a single failure mode the agent with a gpt5.x model behind it couldn't one shot. I created socket overruns.. dangling file descriptors.. badly configured systemd units.. busted route tables.. "failed" volume mounts..
Had to start creating failures of internal services the models couldn't have been trained on and it was still hard to have scenarios it couldn't one shot.
I'm still paranoid about keeping things securely sandboxed.
I'm seeing many people in the comments with an early 2000's era concept of datacenters. The scale of these new sites is mind boggling. Take your idea of a typical datacenter building. Make it 4x bigger. Then put 4 of them together into a cluster. Then imagine 10 of those clusters at the site.
Long term permanent jobs.. not so much.