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

Agent swarms and the new model economics

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 159 posts

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#141

Post by IceDane »

smoyer wrote: post #136
IceDane wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything Steve yegge has done has been trash. That's why nobody is talking about beads or gas town. It was clear even in the beginning that it was a borderline AI-psychosis-fueled trash fire.

Agreed ... I'm not talking about the implementation but rather the idea that this research is novel.

I think if you're suggesting that Steve Yegge somehow invented having agents collaborate, you're way off base. People started talking about agents collaborating very, very early on, and people have been doing experiments like this for ages. There have been libraries to build e.g. graph-based (possibly multi-agent) workflows from the early days, before even structured output was a standard thing in the APIs.

The only thing Yegge did was come up with really stupid, convoluted and anthropomorphized language to describe the process and then write unhinged articles about it

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#142

Post by solumunus »

nhggb wrote: post #111
solumunus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My app is written in TypeScript. With agents I could rewrite it in Rust, I just don’t need to so I don’t. It doesn’t warrant that level of performance and the business logic is more digestible in its current form. Given the amount of reviewing I need to do now, readability is worth more than performance. There are always tradeoffs. Are you implying that them attempting a Rust rewrite would fail, and this is why they’…

Anthropic was saying that you don't need to review the code anymore. If that was the case, it just makes no sense at all to use JS. Take the free performance gain and don't read the code.

True.

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#143

Post by solumunus »

thewhitetulip wrote: post #115
nhggb wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic was saying that you don't need to review the code anymore. If that was the case, it just makes no sense at all to use JS. Take the free performance gain and don't read the code.

Yep they can just prompt Fable or Mythos! Here is the prompt they can use: Claude, migrate Claude Code into Rust. Make no mistakes!

Genuinely Fable would do a decent job.

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#144

Post by h2aichat »

htrp wrote: post #2

>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…

What would have happen if you do not commit at all?

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#145

Post by Footprint0521 »

LostMyLogin wrote: post #130
dctwin wrote: post #118

Am I reading this right? Opus + Composer did a comparable job to Fable, at ~1/19th the price, and half the LoC?

I'm struggling to use Fable correctly. Everything I do ends up getting flagged and reverted back to Opus. Need to do some digging.

Anthropic wants it that way so they can’t be sued… the correct answer is don’t, switch to Kimi K3 for much more usage, the same quality of model, and no hidden practices :/

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#146

Post by dakolli »

brap wrote: post #112
dakolli wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I call this junk "meta-agentic engineering", it reminds me of people who have the coolest nvim configs, spend hundreds of hours customizing it but ultimately get less work done than the guy with minimal workflows, if any at all. 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 fro…

I think many of us engineers (including myself) are suffering from AI-induced procrastination. Fixing that pesky bug in production isn't fun. Building a harness/workflow that detects and fixes pesky bugs in production on its own is way more fun (especially when your employer pays for tokens), and it feels just as important, if not more! So what if it didn't actually fix that pesky bug in production on its own...

I'd rather anyone using llms to fix pesky bugs in production gets fired and I work at a shop that cares about quality and craftsmanship. There are handmade swiss watchmakers, and then there are assembly line workers in China also making watches, which worker do you think goes home happier at night (and who's company is actually beloved), you have a choice.

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#147

Post by stillpointlab »

Today it is SQLite, tomorrow Linux?

I'm not sure of the long-term viability of these brute force swarm approaches, but clearly the AI companies dig the marketing they get out of it. But the fact that they get so far at this stage suggests we have a very interesting 2 years coming up.

Re: Agent swarms and the new model economics

#149

Post by solumunus »

thewhitetulip wrote: post #101
solumunus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My app is written in TypeScript. With agents I could rewrite it in Rust, I just don’t need to so I don’t. It doesn’t warrant that level of performance and the business logic is more digestible in its current form. Given the amount of reviewing I need to do now, readability is worth more than performance. There are always tradeoffs. Are you implying that them attempting a Rust rewrite would fail, and this is why they’…

> business logic is more digestible in its current form. Well, Anthropic spent many $ teling everyone that code is dead so this doesn't matter to them does it? Their business logic can be written in English!

What do you mean by “they spent $ telling everyone that”? If anything, they told everyone that to receive $ in investments. Those statements are pure PR hype.
Post reply on HN