21–30 of 41 posts
With all the roles and harnessing and boiler plate, it kind of makes me wonder if we shouldn't just spend a year or two doing genuinely good software development and then everything trained on it would be good by default?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Op here) I genuinely think that multi-agent is a probable future to enable coding at the scale of a big corporation. I agree and I did not see it work yet, but the trial were most likely on small scale where it is simply over engineering. (Btw : I do not sell tokens. I I think distributed the work through agents in a plateform is a way to control costs by optimizing specialised agents)
I like the topic and I think orgs are struggling with the question: What do our teams look like now? But I have some big concerns with your approach here. This post is written like an authoritative summary but you admit it's not been seen working. Why is there so much untested conjecture presented as best practice here? If you had tested it you would realize this proposal is not possible in most orgs. Their "platform…
The 'reading effort : meaning' ratio of this post is a bit painful. There are about 3 named concepts in every paragraph. There are about 15 claims about named concept being the solution to a problem that's never explained. At some point, if you try to make 20 different points, you make no point at all.
Thank you for the feedback. I actually use AI as a ghost writer, but I am guilty: I usually tend to add too many concepts for a single article (even without AI). I usually follow Divio’s documentation to reference explanations and references, but it is not suitable for a blog post
"Building an application used to mean orchestrating roles over time: one person designed, another challenged the architecture, a third tested, a fourth deployed." What? That's not my experience at all, this lost me very quickly.
I agree with you. I'm sure the author means well, but it comes off as someone who lacks real-world experience sharing what they think is an ideal team structure when building apps. That's just my opinion, but yeah, the article doesn't resonate with my experience at all, and I've been at this a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Op here) I genuinely think that multi-agent is a probable future to enable coding at the scale of a big corporation. I agree and I did not see it work yet, but the trial were most likely on small scale where it is simply over engineering. (Btw : I do not sell tokens. I I think distributed the work through agents in a plateform is a way to control costs by optimizing specialised agents)
It would be nice to see some metrics. I think the missing layer here is evaluation. If agents are going to produce applications, the platform needs not only guardrails, but public-ish evidence that those guardrails actually catch failures
The 'reading effort : meaning' ratio of this post is a bit painful. There are about 3 named concepts in every paragraph. There are about 15 claims about named concept being the solution to a problem that's never explained. At some point, if you try to make 20 different points, you make no point at all.
The 'reading effort : meaning' ratio of this post is a bit painful. There are about 3 named concepts in every paragraph. There are about 15 claims about named concept being the solution to a problem that's never explained. At some point, if you try to make 20 different points, you make no point at all.
Thank you for the feedback. I actually use AI as a ghost writer, but I am guilty: I usually tend to add too many concepts for a single article (even without AI). I usually follow Divio’s documentation to reference explanations and references, but it is not suitable for a blog post
With all due respect, it shows. You have the ability to write way better than this.
I was halfway through and thought to myself, "Why is this so fucking hard to understand the author's point?"
The subject sounds extremely timely and important and is something HN readers really crave, but the rambling article just isn't doing it justice.
Every time I read in some blog about an unproven technique which is profitable for token sellers I'm reminded of those overpriced restaurants that became "instagram popular" because the cool kids got paid a bundle of money to promote them. In real life the only time I saw somebody try this "multiagentic coding" the results were...underwhelming.
In real life only a minority of teams achieved good results according to Circle CI report. And there is one notable anecdotal source proving that it is possible - https://ideas.fin.ai/p/2x-nine-months-later
"Productivity is the efficiency with which resources (like time, labor, and capital) are converted into useful goods and services"
So they increased productivity "number of PRs". Shipping more does not guarantee shipping better or more impactful features. Many orgs are constrained by product decisions, not engineering speed.
If there was so much value to unlock through AI then why did Intercom/Fin sell to Salesforce?
ref: https://www.salesforce.com/news/press-releases/2026/06/15/sa...