twistedpair

GitHub simply isn't an agent code building platform. They're a RoR git host from 2008 running on an ancient MySQL setup that by some miracle continues to stay up, some of the time.

Their APIs are garbage from an agentic perspective. Try using Terraform to curate your GH org of a few hundred repos. Just running the `tf plan` will take 10min, because it's making thousands of API calls. Where's the bulk and batch APIs? No such thing. They are simply not agentic scale. Want to rerun the plan for your entire cloud vendor with thousands of VMs, IAM roles, buckets, etc... it'll run faster than checking on your repo labels.

GH needs rewritten from the ground up. The "repo is everything" arch has been creaking and falling over form many years now.

Lack of a local runner is my biggest peeve. Any novel GHA workflow creation results in a PR with 100 commits, until you can finally sort out all the non-obvious idiosyncrasies. For any modestly complex workflow, I move everything to a bash or TS file and call that, and then you can use _coding tools_ and a _local_ dev/eval loop.

How funny that GitHub Actions' lack of tools forces you to make a bunch of billed cloud runs with GitHub for workflow edits. I'm sure their PMs are very concerned about this trend.

My repos and PRs have gone from throwing 500 errors, to now all being 404. Not trending in the right direction here...

Since upgrading to Cloud Enterprise... why didn't my GH uptime get any better? Guess on-prem GHE server is the only way to do that.

They _are_ the LLM coding agent vendor, and are _owned_ by MS, the ~majority~ biggest shareholder of OpenAI. How can you NOT consider that 20x+ scaling in your capacity roadmap projections, where you are trying to get everyone to use these agents as part of your core OKRs?

Or, maybe your #1 IT priority was moving everything to Azure instead ;)

2,523 and counting

Ah, I see your problem there

> This requirement will be progressively enforced over time.

The last several years have been monotonically busier for me, year over year, and I've been a principal contributor in this game for many years. Sure, I can push out 1000 PRs a year by riding 4 concurrent agent hoards, but at some point our heads will simply explode. There's a human limit here, at some point.

I got a new boiler installed recently. $20K. I looked up the _retail_ price for the components/fittings/consumables, ~$6K. Even with overhead, that plumber made a good take for 2 days work. I'm only half kidding when I suggest the kids of today should be destined for the trades.

Honestly, Copilot is the worst of the AI tools at this point. IDK how they lost that lead so handily.

I don't think everyone will easily make the jump to coding at warp speed. Pushing 6 agentic sessions at once, while seeing a half dozen new features/fixes out to prod is more mental gymnastics. If you're the "add a button to a form" enterprise developer, this is going to feel like a dramatic shift in how you're used to working.

This is part of why we help defend Israel, to constrain wars to conventional means.

In the first Gulf War, we placed the Patriot batteries around Israel, as they said that if an Iraqi biological or chemical SCUD attack hit Tel Aviv, they would vitrify Baghdad.

Having nukes doesn't prevent _anyone_ from attacking you, but it does constrain those attacks to conventional means. And what if you pulled off a decapitation attack against Tel Aviv? Well their fleet of nuclear capable subs would make you pay.

> could the military use Anthropic’s Claude AI system to help shoot it down?

What a joke. I suggest folks read up on the very poor performance of US ICBM interceptor systems. They're barely a coin flip, in ideal conditions. How is Claude going to help with that? Push the launch interceptor button faster? Maybe Claude can help design a better system, but it's not turning our existing poor systems into super capable systems by simply adding AI.

I cannot approve PRs because the JSON API is returning HTML error pages. Something is really hosed over there.