Live data from Hacker News

Shall I implement it? No

gist.github.com

261–270 of 603 posts

Re: Shall I implement it? No

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had some luck taming prompt introspection by spawning a critic agent that looks at the plan produced by the first agent and vetos it if the plan doesn't match the user's intentions. LLMs are much better at identifying rule violations in a bit of external text than regulating their own output. Same reason why they generate unnecessary comments no matter how many times you tell them not to.

How does one integrate critic agent to a Codex/Claude?

You can just say spawn an agent as the sibling says. I didn't find that reliable enough, so I have a slightly more complicated setup. First agent has no permissions except spawning agents and reading from a single directory. It spawns the planner to generate the plan, then either feeds it to the critic and either spawns executors or re-runs the planner with critic feedback. The planner can read and write. The critic agent can only read the input and outputs accept/reject with reason.

This is still sometimes flaky because of the infrastructure around it and ideally you'd replace the first agent with real code, but it's an improvement despite the cost.

Re: Shall I implement it? No

#263
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Codex, on the other hand, will follow something I said pages and pages ago, and because it has a much larger context window (at least with the setup I have here at work), it's just better at following orders. Can you speak more to that setup?

Claude Code goes through some internal systems that other tools (Cline / Codex / and I think Cursor) do not. Also we have different models for each. I don't know in practice what happens, but I found that Codex compacts conversations way less often. It might as well be somehow less tokens are used/added, then raw context window size. Sorry if I implied we have more context than whatever others have :)

Codex does something sorta magical where it auto compacts, partially maybe, when it has the chance. I don’t know how it works, and there is little UI indication for it.

Re: Shall I implement it? No

#267

[flagged]

It does, when any of these actually try to write to a file, it will ask for permissions. The issue is that its so annoying to constantly approve correct code that most people just auto accept everything and review later.

Re: Shall I implement it? No

#268
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you also notice the evolution of average developers over time? I mean, if you take code from a developer ten years ago and compare it with their output now, you can see improvement. This makes little sense to me. Yes, individual developers gets better. I've seen little to no evidence that the average developer has gotten better. > However, LLMs might reduce that effort to zero — we just don't know how developer…

After 30 years in front of the desktop, we are processing dopamine differently. When I speak about 10 years from now, I’m referring to who will become an average developer if we replace the real coding experience learning curve with LLMs from day one. I also hear a lot of tool analogies — tractors for developers, etc. But every tool, without an exception, provides replicable results. In the case of LLMs, however, rep…

Right, I've seen a lot of facile comparisons to calculators.

It may be true that a cohort of teachers were wrong (on more than one level) when they chastised students with "you need to learn this because you won't always have a calculator"... However calculators have some essential qualities which LLM's don't, and if calculators lacked those qualities we wouldn't be using them the way we do.

In particular, being able to trust (and verify) that it'll do a well-defined, predictable, and repeatable task that can be wrapped into a strong abstraction.

Post reply on HN