<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Site Reliability Engineering on Ulveon's Thoughts</title><link>https://ulveon-thoughts-f210db.gitlab.io/tag/site-reliability-engineering/</link><description>Recent content in Site Reliability Engineering on Ulveon's Thoughts</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-IE</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 14:00:00 +0100</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://ulveon-thoughts-f210db.gitlab.io/tag/site-reliability-engineering/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Why did AI destroy my production database?</title><link>https://ulveon-thoughts-f210db.gitlab.io/p/2026-05-05-why-did-ai-destroy-my-production-database/</link><pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 14:00:00 +0100</pubDate><guid>https://ulveon-thoughts-f210db.gitlab.io/p/2026-05-05-why-did-ai-destroy-my-production-database/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I already posted &lt;a href="https://ulveon-thoughts-f210db.gitlab.io/p/2025-08-10-ai-is-not-a-fad-its-here-to-stay/"&gt;my thoughts on AI&lt;/a&gt; and why I don&amp;rsquo;t think it&amp;rsquo;s going away any time soon. Unfortunately, it seems some people who don&amp;rsquo;t like LLMs are using AI-induced outages and deletions as an opportunity to reaffirm their biases, and, in doing so, may be missing part of the picture.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>