>The browser swarm from earlier this year peaked at roughly 1,000 commits per hour on Git. The new system peaks at around 1,000 commits per second. >To facilitate this rate of activity, we built a new version control system (VCS) from scratch. Throughput was not the only reason to own this layer. Every change in the system passes through the VCS, so it is where collisions first become visible, and several of the coor…
Agent swarms and the new model economics
11–20 of 159 posts
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#12I guess that makes sense since the harness is the product in the case of Cursor.
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#13> To test that progress, we returned to a task the old swarm had struggled with: building SQLite from scratch, in Rust, from nothing but its documentation. Isn't SQLite's source code in its training data?
not in Rust. might be different enough ...
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#14I find these blog posts (and the originals, with Anthropic's C compiler and Cursor's browser) somewhat funny, as if they have this enormous power to build ... but they can't build something unique or new. Like the software sucks, but look how powerful the process is (the models are indeed powerful). And it's a bit of a shame: by virtue of their position (their embedding in the fabric of venture capitalism), it seems…
Yes, that's true, but in the post, they even mention that building the spec is the scarce resource. For that to work, the swarm has to actually follow the spec, which is what much of this post is about. We gave the swarm 835 pages of prose and it came back with a database. What was scarce in this experiment, and what we expect to be scarce in software engineering going forward, is the right description of intent.
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#15I find these blog posts (and the originals, with Anthropic's C compiler and Cursor's browser) somewhat funny, as if they have this enormous power to build ... but they can't build something unique or new. Like the software sucks, but look how powerful the process is (the models are indeed powerful). And it's a bit of a shame: by virtue of their position (their embedding in the fabric of venture capitalism), it seems…
Yes, that's true, but in the post, they even mention that building the spec is the scarce resource. For that to work, the swarm has to actually follow the spec, which is what much of this post is about. We gave the swarm 835 pages of prose and it came back with a database. What was scarce in this experiment, and what we expect to be scarce in software engineering going forward, is the right description of intent.
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#16I find these blog posts (and the originals, with Anthropic's C compiler and Cursor's browser) somewhat funny, as if they have this enormous power to build ... but they can't build something unique or new. Like the software sucks, but look how powerful the process is (the models are indeed powerful). And it's a bit of a shame: by virtue of their position (their embedding in the fabric of venture capitalism), it seems…
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#17Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#18I would have loved to see more of the harness engineering shared as code. Instead we are left with only the outcome. I guess that makes sense since the harness is the product in the case of Cursor.
I look on twitter and it's just people building tools for agents to use agents, some weird customization loop going on in the LLM space right now. Ultimately these are trends pushed on us from model providers because they 10x token consumption. Its literally just BS trends to increase revenue at these companies, most of it is largely useless.
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#19I find these blog posts (and the originals, with Anthropic's C compiler and Cursor's browser) somewhat funny, as if they have this enormous power to build ... but they can't build something unique or new. Like the software sucks, but look how powerful the process is (the models are indeed powerful). And it's a bit of a shame: by virtue of their position (their embedding in the fabric of venture capitalism), it seems…
Well, the tool works well. I am grateful that Nature has seen fit that the same kind of person who can make it doesn’t also have the ability to identify what needs exist in the market because then all software would flow out of OpenAI and Anthropic and the rest of us would run about their legs and peep about. Whether product development will survive the next generation of models is still unknown.
Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics
#20I find these blog posts (and the originals, with Anthropic's C compiler and Cursor's browser) somewhat funny, as if they have this enormous power to build ... but they can't build something unique or new. Like the software sucks, but look how powerful the process is (the models are indeed powerful). And it's a bit of a shame: by virtue of their position (their embedding in the fabric of venture capitalism), it seems…
Yes, that's true, but in the post, they even mention that building the spec is the scarce resource. For that to work, the swarm has to actually follow the spec, which is what much of this post is about. We gave the swarm 835 pages of prose and it came back with a database. What was scarce in this experiment, and what we expect to be scarce in software engineering going forward, is the right description of intent.