Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Parallel AI agents are a game changer

morningcoffee.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 88 posts

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#31

Post by ScotterC »

electroglyph wrote: post #25
ambicapter wrote: post #11

Obviously I'm an AI-tools skeptic, but this is hilarious: > 1. Prepare issues with sufficient context > Start by ensuring each GitHub issue contains enough context for agents to understand what needs to be built and how it integrates with the system. This might include details about feature behavior, file locations, database structure, or specific requirements such as displaying certain fields or handling edge cases.…

lmao, "good writting skills" =)

I lol'ed too but then thought - at least he actually wrote this!

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#32

Post by [deleted] »

electroglyph wrote: post #25
ambicapter wrote: post #11

Obviously I'm an AI-tools skeptic, but this is hilarious: > 1. Prepare issues with sufficient context > Start by ensuring each GitHub issue contains enough context for agents to understand what needs to be built and how it integrates with the system. This might include details about feature behavior, file locations, database structure, or specific requirements such as displaying certain fields or handling edge cases.…

lmao, "good writting skills" =)

[deleted]

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#35

Post by tptacek »

So:

(1) I feel like most people call these async agents, though maybe "parallel" is the term that will stick.

(2) Async is great for reasons other than concurrent execution.

(3) Concurrent execution is tricky, at least for tightly defined projects, because the PRs will step on each other, and (maybe this is just me) I would rather rewrite an entire project than try to pick through a complicated merge conflict.

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#36

Post by shiroyasha »

tptacek wrote: post #35

So: (1) I feel like most people call these async agents, though maybe "parallel" is the term that will stick. (2) Async is great for reasons other than concurrent execution. (3) Concurrent execution is tricky, at least for tightly defined projects, because the PRs will step on each other, and (maybe this is just me) I would rather rewrite an entire project than try to pick through a complicated merge conflict.

I agree, async does feel like a better description. I wish I used that term for the title.

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#37

Post by aisizbzbzh »

shiroyasha wrote: post #29
asdev wrote: post #23

Context switching between more than 2 threads of work is untenable if you want to really review code in depth. And with AI, you need to go through everything with a fine toothed comb

The same work as any senior software engineer reviewing his teams work, imho.

[dead]

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#38

Post by osn9363739 »

_345 wrote: post #24
osn9363739 wrote: post #12

Can this guy, or someone else post a full days (4-8 hours, or what ever is spent in the weeds) stream of work to youtube or something. I just want to watch the process to see what I'm missing. Or if there is anyone that already does that can they recommend it to me. I would appreciate it.

Are you saying that because you're also skeptical? I haven't had the best time switching to agent coding. I mean for throwaway work its fine but its kind of boring and aider still messes up from time to time

I probably lean on the sceptical side of the spectrum. I'm not against giving it a go if I can get value out of it but I'm not having the wonderful experience that these people are having. - The asynchronous nature of it slows me down and it feels the opposite of what this bloke is saying around getting into a flow. - I miss things because I'm not thinking it all the way through. - The issues with errors or hallucinations. - It does not feel faster (I might blow through a couple of things really fast, but the issues created elsewhere sometimes eat all that saved time up). - The quality of work is all over the shop. Bigger projects just fall apart after a while. I also wonder if the way I think is hindering me. I don't like natural language. I struggle to communicate at the best of times. All my emails are dot points. If someone asks me for a diagram I write it in plantuml or using a python library. I work in DevOps and love declarative manifests and templates.

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#39

Post by krapp »

modarts wrote: post #33

It still amuses me how literally people took Kapathy's famous tweet around vibe coding https://x.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383 If people were to actually read beyond the first sentence, it would become clear very quickly that this was meant to be tongue in cheek.

People took it seriously because that's exactly how a lot of LLM users think and exactly what they want 'coding' to be. Honestly I'm not even certain it is satire.

Re: Parallel AI agents are a game changer

#40

Post by muratsu »

conradkay wrote: post #30
muratsu wrote: post #27

I find Codex and Claude Code to have different strength/weaknesses and wanted to be able to use them from a single interface. Currently hacking on https://devfleet.ai to make agent management more easy on myself. Briefly mentioned on the article but async agents really thrive on small and scoped issues. Imagine hooking them up to your feedback tool (eg canny) and automatically having a PR as you review the customer f…

Cool project! Do you think a lot of Codex's strengths are just from using GPT-5 as the model?

The codex model is trained differently than the normal models. It has extra training on how to use cli and I find it to be better at project scope tasks (eg running tests, migrations, etc). Whereas in my experience Claude is the better coding model.
Post reply on HN