adriaanmulder

How does docker sandbox solve the docker-in-docker issue? Can Claude running in docker sandbox spin up other docker containers, without having privileged access?

Is this really so hard to read?

  updateWhere(
    thing => thing?.guid === postId,
    post => ({...post, title: newTitle}),
    networkCache
  )

The alternatives as far as I can tell are:

- normalize network responses, so you can get the post directly by id. But this is notoriously painful to do well

- or the code that handles this name change needs to know every request that references the post with that id, and update those titles manually

That's a great point

I disagree. For example, It's useful if you have a bunch of cached network requests that each list some resources and you want to update all of the instances of a specific resource (matching by uuid).

This is a simple function that I find quite useful. Crawl through an object to update some specific nested value. Useful for things like optimistic updates in a cache (eg. Find every instance of an object with some guid in any random data structure and update a field in it).

Is this function known by any other name?

Thanks for the quick response. I think this should really be explicitly stated in the docs, along with a link to VGS. The diagram didn't make it obvious to me that the "security provider" block is actually storing the secrets, rather than just converting them into tokens.

Hey Tom! I see in the security section it says "We secure your data at rest through a mechanism called tokenization, which ensures our systems only store references to your secrets. In the event of a data breach, attackers would only gain access to the references." If this is the case, then where are the secrets stored? How can you view the secrets from the web console if they aren't stored anywhere? Thanks!

I don't really follow, care to elaborate?

That's great to hear! Can't say it was intentional, I haven't honestly even gotten to my routine accessibility-pass I do on most apps.

Me too, I will probably add this in the future. In the meantime, you can kind of get around this by creating subtasks of the task that is blocked by more than one thing, and each subtask can be blocked by a different task. The benefit of this is that you end up being more explicit about what is causing a task to be blocked.