Menu

Brief thoughts on the recent Cloudflare outage

Lorin Hochstein is a big name in the LFI (Learning From Incidents) space. He often writes about post-incident reviews, and he has a very interesting write-up of the Cloudflare outage on November 18, 2025 blog post. I especially loved this part:

Companies generally err on the side of saying less rather than more. After all, if you provide more detail, you open yourself up to criticism that the failure was due to poor engineering. The fewer details you provide, the fewer things people can call you out on. It’s not hard to find people online criticizing Cloudflare online using the details they provided as the basis for their criticism.

I think it would advance our industry if people held the opposite view: the more details that are provided an incident writeup, the higher esteem we should hold that organization. I respect Cloudflare is an engineering organization a lot more precisely because they are willing to provide these sorts of details. I don’t want to hear what Cloudflare should have done from people who weren’t there, I want to hear us hold other companies up to Cloudflare’s standard for describing the details of a failure mode and the inherently confusing nature of incident response.

Source: Brief thoughts on the recent Cloudflare outage

The price of admission

Some tough love here about what it means to have “executive presence”.

When someone tells you that you need more business sense, or that you’re not ready for more scope, or that you need to level up, this is typically what they’re trying to communicate. That you’re more concerned with how work happens than with what work should happen in the first place.

Source: The price of admission

How I give the right amount of context (in any situation)

A great list of things to keep in mind when communicating via writing. The article is focused on “managing up” but these principles are relevant in a much broader context as well.

What questions does your manager usually ask? Answer those questions yourself. If you take anything away from this article, make it this. Every manager has their own idiosyncrasies, worldview, values, etc. That’s why the best thing to do is to pattern match. Consider what they’ve asked you in the past, when talking to you or others. Try to give context through that lens.

Source: How I give the right amount of context (in any situation)

Selling Lemons

This is an essay I think everyone should read, front to back. It’s about all the things we are living through right now, but it’s especially about work (and AI):

I’m not sure hiring can ever be much more efficient, because neither side has reason to show themselves as they really are, warts and all. Idealistically, both would come straight; pragmatically, it is a game of chicken. Candidates polish résumés and present curated versions of their abilities, listing outcomes and impact statistics with dubious accuracy and provenance. Companies do the same, putting culture and mission front and center while hiding systematic dysfunctions and looming existential risks. When neither side is forthcoming, you’re left with proxies: a famous logo on a resume, a polished culture deck.

Source: Selling Lemons

ChatGPT Is Blowing Up Marriages as It Goads Spouses Into Divorce

Wild story:

Multiple people we spoke to for this story lamented feeling “ganged up on” as a partner used chatbot outputs against them during arguments or moments of marital crisis. One of these sources, a man who’s now in the process of selling his home as he and his spouse barrel toward divorce, recounted feeling voiceless as his partner turned to ChatGPT to pathologize their relationship. “I was really hurt by the way [ChatGPT] was being used against me,” said the man, speaking through tears. “I felt like it was being leveraged… like, ‘I didn’t feel great about whatever happened, and so I went to ChatGPT, and ChatGPT said that you’re not a supportive partner, and this is what a supporting partner would do.’”

I think we have to realize that non-tech people don’t have a good understanding of the sycophantic nature of LLM bots, so we’ll see more and more examples like this.

Source: ChatGPT Is Blowing Up Marriages as It Goads Spouses Into Divorce

Requiem for a Beam

This is a beautifully-written love letter to the CD—and I agree completely:

The commitment for the listener is light—one press of the button—and the challenge for the artist is pleasantly tough. You have to make all the songs work in a row, and there is a very good chance the listener will hear the entire album. One long unbroken work is also like a stage play, which is what I knew best in high school. […] The CD still delights me and helps me frame the idea of a collected set of songs.

Source: Requiem for a Beam

The illegible nature of software development talent

This resonates so hard. The tech industry’s obsession with LARPing roles in the public sphere has really hurt our ability to work with people who care and want to do the best work of their lives without distractions.

I think it’s unlikely the industry will get much better at identifying and evaluating candidates anytime soon. And so I’m sure we’ll continue to see posts about the importance of your LinkedIn profile, or your GitHub, or your passion project. But you neglect at your peril the engineers who are working nine-to-five days at boring companies.

Source: The illegible nature of software development talent

The US Population Could Shrink in 2025, For the First Time Ever

Well, today I learned about the consequences of population decline:

The U.S. cannot grow through native-born fertility alone. As immigration collapses, the US population will stagnate and even shrink. Urban economics will buckle. Fields will go unharvested. Homes will go unbuilt. Sick Americans will go untreated. Life-saving medicines will go undiscovered. Many voters hated the era of record immigration. They might hate the era of record deportations even more.

Yes I know this sounds dire. But read the whole essay, Derek brings receipts.

Source: The US Population Could Shrink in 2025, For the First Time Ever

Apple Music’s hi-res audio is *still* standing in its own light

Man. Standing ovation to this quote. I just want to know!!!

I’m not here to debate if the jump from lossy AAC to lossless ALAC is audible. Many people say they cannot hear the difference between the two (lucky them). Others say they can. Most importantly for any comments section, that second group is not seeking permission from the first group to stream losslessly. Apple Music supplies ‘Lossless’ and ‘Hi-Res Lossless’ streams at no extra cost to the subscriber, and some listeners just want to know that their audio hasn’t been lossy compressed along the way, even if they’re not 100% sure they can always hear the benefits. Many of these same people already know that an album’s mastering technique will impact its sound quality more than the delivery format.

Anyway. This article is your reminder that if you’re using AirPlay or Bluetooth with Apple Music you’re not getting lossless.

Source: Apple Music’s hi-res audio is *still* standing in its own light

"The Mountain in the Sea", AI fears, and connectedness

(Mild spoilers ahead for The Mountain in the Sea by Ray Nayler)

I recently finished the novel The Mountain in the Sea by Ray Nayler (see Andrew Liptak’s excellent review here). On the surface it’s about discovering an octopus colony that evolved into a self-aware, intelligent community—and trying to communicate with them. But as with all good novels it’s actually about other things. It’s about loneliness, understanding each other, conservation—and yes, our relationship with AI.

First, to get the AI thing out of the way… I don’t want this blog to sound like I am anti-AI. I use AI every day both at the chat / thinking partner level and the prototyping / vibe coding level. I am a fan of using AI for the things that it’s good at. I just worry that we are not teaching people outside of the tech bubble what those things are. And that’s why we are seeing so many tragic stories right now about chat agents “guiding” people to horrific actions (see, for example, Let’s Talk About ChatGPT-Induced Spiritual Psychosis and ‘I Feel Like I’m Going Crazy’: ChatGPT Fuels Delusional Spirals).

With that as background, the book does a good job of highlighting some of the dangers of using AI for things it’s not good at. First, this is a good point about how with every new technology we have to think about what can go wrong, not just what can go right:

When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck; when you invent the plane you also invent the plane crash; and when you invent electricity, you invent electrocution. Every technology carries its own negativity, which is invented at the same time as technical progress.[1]

Following from that, this quote about the main character “killing” their AI companion stood out to me…

That’s how this works. That’s how addictive this is—this need to feel like there is always someone there, unconditionally. Someone to talk to. Someone who understands. To not have to do the work myself to make myself understood. Instead, I just kept on with this self-deception, pretending I had someone when I did not. I know the doctors who prescribed you to me meant well. They thought they were helping me through a dark time. But in the end, you aren’t anything but a prosthesis. You can’t replace real support.

The other major theme in the book centers around our connectedness with each other and the world, how language can get in the way of connection, and how lonely we’ve become as a society[2]. I love this call to empathy as a way to get ourselves out of that dilemma (emphasis mine):

Are we trapped, then, in the world our language makes for us, unable to see beyond the boundaries of it? I say we are not. Anyone who has watched their dog dance its happiness in the sand and felt that joy themselves—anyone who has looked into a neighboring car and seen a driver there lost in thought, and smiled and seen the image of themselves in that person—knows the way out of the maze: Empathy. Identity with perspectives outside our own. The liberating, sympathetic vibrations of fellow-feeling. Only those incapable of empathy are truly caged.

A book about discovering intelligent life in an octopus species with its own language and culture might seem like a weird premise. But it works really well here. It gets pretty heavy-handed towards the end, but it still made me think a lot about the “loneliness epidemic”, our relationship with AI, and the continuing role of empathy in making sure we stay connected with each other. Recommended!


  1. This line of thinking reminds me a lot of Kevin Kelly’s 2010 (!) book What Technology Wants in which he makes a similar point that technology is never “neutral”. That’s ok, but we have to be prepared for it.  

  2. I don’t think that’s a controversial statement any more. See articles like The Anti-Social Century