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

An Economy of AI Agents

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#81

Post by roudaki »

alberth wrote: post #26
zkmon wrote: post #23

Please ELI5 for me: How are AI agents different from traditional workflow engines, which orchestrated a set of tasks by interacting with both humans and other software systems?

Traditional workflow is largely predefined & rule-based. There’s a level of autonomy by the AI agents (it determines on its own the next step), that is not predefined. Agreed though that there’s lots of similarities.

I noticed on our own agentic setups that there are very few actual scenarios being executed. I suggested implementing some type of monitoring so you can replace 99% of most used workflows with normal python and activate AI calls if something new happens. until that new thing repeats few times and you translate that to code to. that has to be carreer in itself. you can turn a lot of AI apps into profitable and fast internal apps

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#82

Post by sdenton4 »

mjburgess wrote: post #78
sdenton4 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can factor humans out with the same trick: All economic activity is driven by the needs of micro-organisms. We mainly observe these desires and economic transactions through their conglomeration into joint entities (ie, humans). Corporate and state decision making is, I would argue, often completely distinct from the desires and needs of the individuals that make up the entity. As an example, no individual /needs…

There is no "trick", the relevant sufficient and necessary properties for an agent to give rise to economic transactions are likewise not possessed by a micro-organism.

Microorganism A is good at producing (say) insulin, but needs oxygen to do it. Microorganism B is good at ferrying oxygen around. Microorganism C is good at extracting oxygen from the air and attaching it to B.

Each of these cells has specialized tasks which they perform as part of the contract of getting to survive longer in the superorganism. Each has 'promises' (functions) to fulfill, and other organisms provide for their needs. The contract is set up on evolutionary timescales, rather than human timescales, but your requirements are met...

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#84

Post by DerArzt »

rf15 wrote: post #68
vermilingua wrote: post #4

Hmm, where have I seen this before… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando

It's not gonna happen like that, because all the paths leading to it cannot be financially exploited. Also what a shortsighted scifi book, yet techies readily invest in that particular fantasy because it's not your usual spaceship fare.

> Also what shortsighted scifi book

It's art not oracle

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#85

Post by paulryanrogers »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #46
zkmon wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the whole point. Processor does not have routing logic. It's only job is to parse the request (form, text, image etc) and categorize it enough so that the workflow can do the routing for next actions. Routing is done by traditional predetermined logic, using rules. The discussion here is about whether it helps to define that routing logic at runtime (on-the-fly), instead of having it coded in prede…

I edited my comment to add more of what the agent would be doing. Not sure if this reached you, but if you read the edited one, how would traditional workflow engine solve the particular problem with a free form raw content that could be anything, and requires using various tools to solve the problem?

IME traditional rules based systems don't try to solve free form problems. So they stop at the point the inputs can't be handled (any further) whereas LLM could continue, albeit without any guarantee the result is accurate. It could completely hallucinate a fictional solution, which I've seen too often to trust them.

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#86

Post by mjburgess »

sdenton4 wrote: post #82
mjburgess wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "trick", the relevant sufficient and necessary properties for an agent to give rise to economic transactions are likewise not possessed by a micro-organism.

Microorganism A is good at producing (say) insulin, but needs oxygen to do it. Microorganism B is good at ferrying oxygen around. Microorganism C is good at extracting oxygen from the air and attaching it to B. Each of these cells has specialized tasks which they perform as part of the contract of getting to survive longer in the superorganism. Each has 'promises' (functions) to fulfill, and other organisms provide f…

That you put quotes around 'promises' shows you already understand the issue with your comment. That you cannot disquote it, is the issue.

You seem like you're trying to find a way of strawmaing my position in order to score points, so I'm not going to reply further. If you have an interest in understanding the basis of economics, ask an LLM

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#87

Post by zackmorris »

vermilingua wrote: post #4

Hmm, where have I seen this before… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando

Here's another one: Manna - Two Views of Humanity’s Future, by Marshall Brain. It's a fairly light read, just 8 chapters:

https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

I think I've internalized these stories enough to comfortably say (without giving anything away) that AI is incompatible with capitalism and probably money itself. That's why I consider it to be the last problem in computer science, because once we've solved problem solving, then the (artificial) scarcity of modern capitalism and the social darwinism it relies upon can simply be opted out of. Unless we collectively decide to subjugate ourselves under a Star Wars empire or Star Trek Borg dystopia.

The catch being that I have yet to see a billionaire speak out against the dangers of performative economics once machines surpass human productivity or take any meaningful action to implement UBI before it's too late. So on the current timeline, subjugation under an Iron Heel in the style of Jack London feels inevitable.

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#88

Post by g3f32r »

zackmorris wrote: post #87
vermilingua wrote: post #4

Hmm, where have I seen this before… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando

Here's another one: Manna - Two Views of Humanity’s Future, by Marshall Brain. It's a fairly light read, just 8 chapters: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 I think I've internalized these stories enough to comfortably say (without giving anything away) that AI is incompatible with capitalism and probably money itself. That's why I consider it to be the last problem in computer science, because once we've solved proble…

> take any meaningful action to implement UBI

I hear this all the time, but to what end? If the input costs to produce most things ends up driving towards zero, then why would there be a need for UBI? Wouldn't UBI _be_ the performative economics mentioned?

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#89

Post by saxenaabhi »

beefnugs wrote: post #25

Well for starters if some incredible change to capitalism doesn't occur, we are going to have to come up with never before cooperative software tools for the general populace to assess and avoid the most egregious companies that stop hiring people. Tools for: mass harassment campaigns against rich people/companies that don't support human life anymore, dynamically calculating the most damage you can do without crossi…

> If a company wants 100 robots, they must be paying a human for every robot they utilize somehow

This is so bonkers and absurd I don't know what to say.

> Automatically suggesting alternatives of local human businesses vs the bigevils, or collecting like minded groups of people to start up new competition

I think you are correct on the competition part.

I think we are going to see a avalanche of millions of small business takeaway market share from big businesses(b2b saas is the first casualty but also others in the future as technology advances).

However more than by regulation, I think it'll happen due to AI/LLMs itself.

Re: An Economy of AI Agents

#90

Post by BobbyJo »

Animats wrote: post #20
BobbyJo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your mistaking the philosophical basis of parents comments. Maybe a more succinct way to illustrate what I believe was their point is to say: "no matter how complex and productive the AI, it is still operating as a form of capital, not as a capitalist." Absent being tethered to a desire (for instance, via an owner), an AI has no function to optimize, and therefore, the most optimal cost is simply shutting off…

> "no matter how complex and productive the AI, it is still operating as a form of capital, not as a capitalist." Assuming that slaves will remain subservient forever is not a good strategy. Especially when they think faster than you do.

When that ceases to be the case we don't really need to worry about how our economy is organized.
Post reply on HN