As a result of running LLM agents daily: 1. My Github is now in vigilant mode. I'm signing all commits from now on. 2. My gpg signing key is on a yubikey which requires touch for confirmation. Verified on GH == Nate reviewed it and pushed a button with his meaty finger.

Done github.com/nateberkopec...

In the age of LLM agents, the intruder is already inside the house. If you're running Claude Code in dangerous mode, a prompt injection attack is one bash call away from exfiltrating almost anything that's unlocked on your machine, or using your (auth'd) gh cli to steal your repo

I'm constantly thinking about and auditing my own moral life. I think it's our duty as human beings, but particularly as technologists and wielders of capital. But I don't the solution is ever to pull back; to withdraw. Exclusion is ineffective as a means of creating change. It admits defeat.

Welcome aboard Joshua Young to the Puma maintainers team 🫡

What's the state of the art for OSS merch? We want to print some Puma stuff to hand out at conferences.

Useful OSS work that doesn't show up as a GH contribution: This person quickly prototyped a pure-Ruby HTTP parser, just to give us some ballpark of performance. We said "interesting, the results show this isn't great, thank you!" github.com/puma/puma/p...

I need a macOS desktop app for monitoring GH actions runs across multiple repositories, and get system notifications when they either pass or fail. Anyone also have this workflow?

Prosopite + LLMs create a powerful workflow automation where you can get a PR fixing an N+1 with zero humans writing code

If you want to make change or add new feature to Ruby, I suggest to read www.a-k-r.org/pub/howto-pe... Ruby's decision-making process isn't democratic or based on voting. It's more like a game of persuading Matz and Module maintainers.

Vibe check: I use LLMs for about 80% of my coding work now. That work is done with Claude Code, in the terminal. I run 1 to 2 agents at a time, dangerous mode. I rarely edit the code directly, but instead talk to the LLM until I get what I want, or write code/rules to corral it.

If you have any control over it, you should be running your CI with NVMe/attached storage. 10-30% faster tests vs network-attached block storage (i.e. EBS) for about ~2% more expensive instances. Test suites are highly bottlenecked on disk.

Bloomberg terminal, but for AWS spot instance pricing in multiple regions

Using coding agents effectively is about brute-forcing. Your task is turn tedious coding tasks into something than be brute-forced by $5 worth of GPU time. You are setting up a loop which an agent can pass/fail itself against, and churn the loop until it passes.

Unsurprisingly, every "AI" product I've ever used is extremely buggy. Because, of course, they're building it "with AI".

Rails "DIYstack" (kamal, hetzner, etc) hasn't yet solved reliability and trust for the data layer. People running a business on Rails want backups, push-button recovery, zero-config HA (like Heroku PG premium). You can do a managed DB but you're stuck on hyperscalers then.

@mikemcquaid.com why does brew bundle check take so long? on a scale of 1 to 10 spitballing how hard do you think it would be to make it faster?

Frostpunk 2 is a must-play for fans of citybuilders. The mechanics are solid but the cinematic presentation is the best the genre has ever seen.

If we learn anything from all this, I hope it's that governance of an OSS project doesn't need to be complicated, process-heavy or even democratic at all, but it does need to be written down. Governance != RFCs, 5000+ words of Markdown. It always exists, just write it down.

If I'm following RC correctly: 1) RC Did Nothing Wrong b/c it always had the right to the GH org, RC always owned Rubygems; Bundler merged into Rubygems, so they own Bundler too. 2) But, we're gonna hand it back to Ruby core. 3) Nobody has to sign a CLA So what was the point?

The problem with scaling based on utilization is that no one knows what a good number is. "Will our customers be happy if we use our machines at 80% or 40%" is an unanswerable question. Queue times make the impact on customers clear: "will my users accept +200ms of latency?"

OSS codes of conduct should be: 1. Shorter 2. More focus on "do"s rather than "don't"s 3. Less faux-legalistic 4. Allow more discretion to moderators 5. Be tools of building culture 6. Be unique to the project (because all communities are unique), not copy-pasted

Ah yes, another slow day moderating /r/ruby

Anybody use a hardware firewall at home? Specifically I'm considering Netgate/pfSense or Ubiquiti, would be interested in anyone else who's done it.

you either die a hero or your react app becomes big enough that you need to virtualize your tables

VCR, but for your database state in your tests

A generational fumble by Ruby Central is now complete. Anyway, I'm happy that the people who disagreed decided to get up and Do Something By Coding. I love to see that and can 100% get behind it 👍

The lion does not concern himself with the opinions of those who cannot memorize the correct order of arguments to assert_equal

The only thing holding me back from buying a 57" Samsung Odyssey 2x4K ultrawide is the lack of ultrawide-QOL features in Aerospace. Ultrawides seem cool but you'll have to tear my tiling window manager from my cold, dead fingers.

I made a utility to combine the llm CLI tool with Monologue's voice transcription by Every. Brain-dump the WHY using your voice, let the LLM summarize the WHAT using git diff, and have it combine both into a complete, useful commit message.

Ruby community: Look, we can be angry about what's happening, we can raise our complaints, but under no circumstances should anyone _ever_ harass someone's families, coworkers, or friends. That is completely unacceptable, and wholly against the ethos of the language. We must do better.

I had three people from Brazil on a call recently because they wanted to start contributing to Puma but were unsure of where to start. This is something I've done for years and I've always loved it. We sometimes get really important new contributors from these convos.

Some of the code these AI models put out is truly an abomination

It's incredible how this whole thing has cut to literally every important cultural and political question in OSS. These are the big questions, the values you build communities around. We should be clear about the things we believe. We coasted on the status quo and differences are now clear.

Ruby Central believed they needed to take control of the Rubygems Github organization in order to sell their access and control to funders. This is about organizations monetizing their rights to open source projects, and the kind of contribution structure that creates.

The only thing I know for sure about OSS is that no one is irreplaceable. When someone leaves, someone else steps up. A project dies, another one takes it's place.

I absolutely love that the second point in Rust's CoC is "stop being so horny in project spaces". We love you, Rustaceans. Without you, OSS would be so much more boring.

If you have not put jemalloc on all your production Ruby systems yet, you should probably clear your schedule.

In what sense is/was rubygems and bundler in the "portfolio" of Sam G and Andre? This pitch reads like: "this critical project is unsustainable unless it is maintained by ME with YOUR MONEY".

People who went to conferences with each other for 15 years eventually found things they don't like about each other, news at 11. Live by the (money) sword, die by the (money) sword though. If you insert money into OSS but then the funders change and the new folks don't like you...

I went through Ruby Together's old Form 990s with the IRS: 1. Andre never reported more than $60k in compensation to himself in a year. Seems pretty reasonable to me. 2. Meals/travel/IT expenses are about $20k year, roughly ~6.6% of revenue, which to me is reasonable.

My view on all the LLM-powered code review processes I've seen: 90% of it is just creating text slop absolutely nobody reads. Doing it yourself, before you push to GH, is fine. But making your co-workers interpret this noisy slop is wasting their time.

Puma utilization is not busy_threads/max_threads when you're using MRI. "1 thread busy out of 5" isn't 20% utilization b/c those other 4 threads may be unusable due to GVL contention.

Normally Datadog is an absolute moneypit, but their Database Monitoring product is an incredible value at $70/mo. It's a supercharged AWS Performance Insights dashboard, but far more useful and integrated with the rest of DD. Price doesn't change if you've got a 192 core DB.

If you're Ruby Central, where do you go from here?

Observing test runtimes and then trying to binpack examples into N number of jobs doesn't work. Test time is highly variable, and this approach assumes no variance in test exec time. No matter what you do, you end up w/50-100% variation in job time. Use queues (i.e. Knapsack)

Just to be clear, Ruby Central has not taken money from DHH/Basecamp.

Everything can be high availability on a long enough timeline. We've only been down for 1 day this decade - that's 5 nines of uptime!

Most teams are doing "performance theater", where any micro performance improvement is celebrated w/o context. The problem is that the product side eventually gets frustrated because you keep stacking micro-wins with no measurable/noticeable difference to customers.