Testing this quiet corner of the web. I collect small notes about everyday tools �� file formats, tiny utilities, offline workflows. First post is just a hello; longer notes will follow once I settle in. Plain text feels good after years of heavy editors.
Any conversation
Really glad to be using Haskell for work - especially in today's climate with agentic coding.
Our team uses containers to keep our development environment consistent across team members, though, and most agent sandbox approaches want to either offload your work fully to the cloud or they want to sandbox the agent harness process itself.
We're not ready for full cloud based development (yet?) and sandboxing just the agent doesn't work for us when the agent needs to run docker.
... because letting the agent run docker gives them a too-easy escape hatch from their sandbox.
So we're currently stuck with using VMs. This turns out to be tricky but seems do-able.
My current approach is to provision a VM image and use Incus for the execution. My main goal is to keep my current workflow of local/non-agent dev working seamlessly and share the source with the VM/agent.
This means sharing my working dirs with the agent VM but overlaying artifact dirs from VM-owned block devices so we don't take too big of an IO perf hit.
I also don't want the agent to be able to
git push so that means we need some quirky git config to rewrite origin paths and thread through some agent specific PATs ("thanks" GitHub) for read-only repo access. These ALSO need to be threaded through to the development containers - they need to clone private repos.... in the end, this seems to work but I haven't lived with it for long.
There are still some quality of life issues to work out, but I think it'll work out.
At this point, I've removed all coding agents from my host - and that's nice.
Curious, why does using Haskell make a difference here?
It's tangential to the sandboxing topic, really. I started the first post with a broader intent in mind and then elaborated on the sandboxing setup I'm working on.
For AI-assisted coding, though, it's nice because Haskell provides a lot of feedback earlier in the development process compared to lots of other languages. It tends to work once it compiles (obviously not all the time).
I wonder if there is a way, sane and friendly way, to prove that a piece of software is only accessing whatever it claims it will access.
Like network addresses or file system access. I want to be able to claim in my software that it only touches this or that file and I can prove it
I believe the sanest and friendliest way would be for it to be open-source so it can be audited.
I know, and that's totally fine, but it is not always friendly. I guess an agent can "audit" it.
Just the fact that it can be audited plus your word is enough. Noone would need to look any further, because they could if they had to.
I think a trusted piece of software such as your operating system should be in charge of managing permissions. For example, I believe with Wayland on gnome you no longer need to promise you aren't secretly taking screenshots of the whole monitor and shipping it somewhere because to do that Wayland requires you to get user permission.
It doesn’t have the high but it will make you more alert, kind of like tea or coffee.
I just took a look on it yesterday and seems like the stimulant effect is there, so seems like at this point there are mix results on if it actually helps with anxiety and sleep issues. For me personally seems to work just fine but Im not 100% sure how much does it actually does something for me or is just a placebo effect. My thinking is that if I do it from time to time, I can let my body get use to the feeling of a sleep schedule without create dependency on external melatonin dosis or CBD.