Hacker News Reader

Comment by slopinthebag | Hacker News Reader

Their reply doesn't make much sense, they're supposedly soc2 compliant. How are they compliant but letting a single engineer push out a change like that?

I'm sure Claude didn't literally ship the feature itself with no oversight, but I also find it hard to believe that their approach to adopting AI didn't factor in at all. Even just like, the mental overhead of moving faster and adopting AI code with less stringent review leading to an increase in codebase complexity could cause it. Couple that with an AI hallucinating an answer to the engineer who shipped this change, I'm not sure why people are so quick to discount this as a potential source of the issue. Surely none of us want our infra to become less secure and reliable, and so part of preventing that from happening is being honest about the challenges of integrating AI into our development processes.

View on HN

> I'm not sure why people are so quick to discount [AI] as a potential source of the issue.

Because (per the link above) the CEO said that (1) it was their fault, and (2) it had nothing to do with AI.

I understand that on this forum statements like this are inevitably greeted with some amount of skepticism, but right now I'm seeing no particular reason to disbelieve Jake, and the reason that "if they did use AI they'd deny it" should frankly not be considered good enough to fly around here. Like probably everyone in this comment section I'm open to evidence that they used AI to slop-incident themselves, but until we can reach that standard let's please calm down and focus on what we actually know to be true.

Come on man, their CEO is a massive vibe coding proponent and his company spent $300,000 on Claude this month. But yeah, I'm sure Claude had nothing to do with any of it. I bet they don't use it to write any code.

https://xcancel.com/JustJake/status/2030063630709096483#m

Both things can be true: they’re doing a lot of vibe coding, and this was a human error that didn’t involve AI.

I have no skin in the game but that is a very charitable perspective.

During this whole incident, Railway have made a wide range of misleading and straight out false claims to cover themselves, so them saying it wasn't AI is pretty much meaningless

Would you mind pointing out these claims? Happy to address them personally

So on the one hand you have a direct statement from the source that the cause of this incident is humans. On the other hand, while we all agree there is no specific evidence that AI caused the issue, the guy who made that statement, like, really loves AI.

In my life I have gone back and forth on the idea that 12 angry men is a kind of facile representation of how people think and what kinds of evidence really form the basis of a reasonable society. This comment section is doing a really good job of stretching my resolve to believe we are getting at least better.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com