131–140 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why agentops specifically? doesnt the oai first party one also do it?
The OpenAI dash is great but is clearly missing a lot of features (i.e. data export, alerts, non-oai model compatibility). Believe it or not, but they don't even report response API costs on spans
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is already a definition in agent oriented programning. It has something to do with own sensors of environment and react autonomously. I find that definition fits agentic AI too. My rudimentary interpretation is anything with its own inner (event) loop.
So it’s just a program?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because the economy, life and everything is about humans interacting with humans. How many hand crafted, clay bowls, baked in a human powered kiln are you using everyday? Or how many weaved baskets, made out of hand picked sticks? History has showed that anything that can be automated, will be automated. And everything that can be made "cheaper" or "faster" will as well.
That's not the point though, I'm not anti-automation or anything like that. The point is, using robots on interfaces and systems made for people is not the way to go. Why would you want to have your swipes on Tinder and your trip planning to Rio be automated through human interface? If it was for legit reasons it would have happened as from machine to machine communications. I'm big fan of the AI agent concept, my ob…
Ah, my bad I missread your initial post.
If I now understand what you're saying, I think there's a paralel in manufacturing, where "custom made bots" on assembly line will win against "humanoid bots" every time. The problem there is that you have to first build the custom-made bots, and they only work on that one task. While a "humanoid" bot can, in theory, do more general things with tools already in place for humans.
I think specialised APIs and stuff will eventually be built for AI agents. But in the meantime everyone wants to be first to market, and the "human facing" UI/UX is all we have. So they're trying to make it work with what's available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do they compare?
MCP is a protocol, and Anthropic has provided SDKs for implementing that protocol. In practice, I find the MCP protocol to be pretty great, but it leaves basically everything except the model parts out. I.e. MCP really only addresses how "agentic" systems interact with one another, nothing else. This SDK is trying to provide a bunch of code for implementing specific agent codebases. There are a bunch of open source o…
It does not specify how “agentic” systems interact with each other. Depending on what you mean there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not the point though, I'm not anti-automation or anything like that. The point is, using robots on interfaces and systems made for people is not the way to go. Why would you want to have your swipes on Tinder and your trip planning to Rio be automated through human interface? If it was for legit reasons it would have happened as from machine to machine communications. I'm big fan of the AI agent concept, my ob…
> my objection is that at in its current state people don't think out of the box and propose using the current infrastructure to delegate human functions instead of re-imagining the new world that is possible when working together with AI. Ah, my bad I missread your initial post. If I now understand what you're saying, I think there's a paralel in manufacturing, where "custom made bots" on assembly line will win agai…
They just need to go a few steps back and evaluate why this system was needed in first place. Awful lot of software and all kinds of interfaces exists only to accommodate humans who need to be in the loop when working with machines and are not actually needed if you are taking the human out of the loop. You can be taking humans off the loop for legit or nefarious reasons and when its legit there's usually opportunity to coordinate with the other machines to remove the people specific parts to make things more efficient.
In programming this is even more evident, i.e %100 of the programming libraries exist only to make developers do stuff easier or prevent re-inventing the wheel.
The part about making the developers life easier is quite substential and can be removed by making the AI write the exact code needed to accomplish the task without bothering with human developer accommodations like libraries to separate the code into modules for maintainability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mirror this sentiment. Even their "function calling" abstraction still hallucinates parameters and schema, and the JSON schema itself is clearly way too verbose and breaks down completely if you feed it anything more complex than 5 very simple function calls. This just seems to build upon their already broken black box abstractions and isn't useful for any real world applications, but it's helpful for getting small…
> Even their "function calling" abstraction still hallucinates parameters and schema huh? sample code please? this should not be true since Structured Outputs came out - literally prevented from generating invalid json (more: https://www.latent.space/p/openai-api-and-o1 )
You have to set 'strict' to True manually to use the same grammar-based sampling they use for structured outputs.
https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/function-calling?api...
I have built myself a much simpler and powerful version of the responses API and it works with all LLM providers. https://github.com/Anilturaga/aiide
I wonder what justifies this drastic difference in price.
$25 per thousand searches seems excessive
I have built myself a much simpler and powerful version of the responses API and it works with all LLM providers. https://github.com/Anilturaga/aiide