"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.
Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
31–40 of 41 posts
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#32The '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.
It's got all the indicators of being AI generated, so really not surprising at all. I lost track of how many "this, not that" and "this, but also" within a few paragraphs. LLMs tend to prefer sounding clever over simple terminology.
What I mean to say is that AI ghost writing is fine (I see the comment by the author). Deciding not to read poorly written content is also fine (and there's a reason why writing style has been discussed as long as the printed page has existed).
With the speed at which HN readers can identify mass produced, AI-generated word salad, it is insightful to look at a what users aren't able to stand back from their outputs and view them from the intended audience perspective
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#33The '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
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#34Please fix your writing and make it more user friendly to the users you want to read it. As of now, it reads like unedited AI slop.
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#35The '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.
It's got all the indicators of being AI generated, so really not surprising at all. I lost track of how many "this, not that" and "this, but also" within a few paragraphs. LLMs tend to prefer sounding clever over simple terminology.
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#36The '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
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#37The '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.
Which then gives you great insights like
"a team can only be effective if it carries no more complexity than it can absorb."
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#38The '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.
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#39The '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.
It's got all the indicators of being AI generated, so really not surprising at all. I lost track of how many "this, not that" and "this, but also" within a few paragraphs. LLMs tend to prefer sounding clever over simple terminology.
Yes, what it's doing is using continuation phrases. It wants to continue, and these token-combos, like Tekken 4, let it move from one gradient descent to the next, and like Tony Hawk, perform combo after combo, so it can just keep producing tokens.
Because thats how they're trained. In another thread, someone wished they'd taught the models "I dont know" and were extremely convinced that some how you could train a model to stop producing tokens, or whatever. You can't both train the model to generate output and also teach it not to. That's their whole bag of tricks.
But it's not trying to be clever, it's trying to keep generating.
Re: Who Does What? Team Topologies for the Agentic Platform
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
And for the love of reading, please do not bold stuff all the time. It's the single worst thing for reading attention. I can't help but jump from bolded text to bolded text and in the end I'm not reading anything.