Live data from Hacker News

Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

runtimewire.com

171–180 of 383 posts

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. A workspace admin or 2. by permission of all on thread, or AI inspects contents and gates on 1 or 2 if anything sensitive. This isn't 1990, we can program stuff now.

The OPs comments weren’t just a hypothetical. We’ve already seen numerous instances where agents have leaked private data. Even GitHub’s own Copilot has been found guilty of these vulnerabilities.

I agree. We have a leadership channel at work for well, the leadership team. Those conversations are sensitive. Evaluations, hiring bands, salaries, future product planning, markets, funding, etc. Access to that channel is strictly controlled. I am not worried about anyone taking a screenshot. In the case of allowing an AI agent to participate in the channel, I would be worried about that AI using information from that channel to answer a question outside of that channel. Keeping the agents "learnings" clearly behind a "firewall" would be of great importance.

Beyond that, the team are free to have private conversations between themselves. This is NOT something we log. At the end of the day, hiring good people and trusting them is important. The logic of making sure the AI does not leak those conversations also applies.

It is a new world, re:AI. It has its uses and things are changing at a rapid pace. It is not clear to be the protections we have implemented in todays paradigms are well implemented yet in the new AI world.

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#173
post #60

That screenshot is some Lynchian horror. "#engineering. New direction, team – we're moving the prototype to Flutter" and then the humans and agent bots engage in flirty emoji-filled chats with cutesy names "I nailed the physics, UI shell @Honeybot?" I'm trying to imagine a world in which this makes sense as a way to organize software development work, but coming up short. It's on a blockchain or something though, so…

Yeah just need to tell the system prompt to not do that. A grumpy senior engineer agent that pushes back on constant tech stack changes would be good too.

Are you making a joke? Not being snarky, I actually can't tell if it's a real suggestion or satirical.

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#176

Maybe I'm missing something, but it feels like the economics of software are shifting. If companies can afford software tailored to their exact workflows for less than the annual cost of a single engineer, what does the moat of a traditional SaaS company become?

Convenience. Most companies aren't software companies and know this intimately. Even if they can build a prototype using LLMs, they now have to at a bare minimum hire someone who can maintain it (additional cost). Not to mention compliance with regulations. Far easier (and cheaper) to just pay someone else to make all of that their problem and extract the value from the product (even if it's not a perfect fit for their business).

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But who is allowed to press it? If anyone, then anyone can expose career ruining messages from someone else, even inadvertently.

Can’t anyone already do that with a screenshot or a log dump? I’m always assuming company provided comms platforms are fully readable by the admins

That's a good operating assumption, and I usually think this way too.

It turns out Slack actually requires legal process or consent of parties to provide private messages to admins: https://slack.com/help/articles/204897248-Guide-to-Slack-imp...

But of course yes, another party could simply take a screenshot

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah just need to tell the system prompt to not do that. A grumpy senior engineer agent that pushes back on constant tech stack changes would be good too.

Are you making a joke? Not being snarky, I actually can't tell if it's a real suggestion or satirical.

Half joking, half serious. We need AI to challenge assumptions to not just "you are absolutely correct" all the time.

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#179

Hi, folks There's a brief write-up on Buzz here https://engineering.block.xyz/blog/buzz

You start with this premise > It’s great and works really well for us, but it raises lots of questions. Does everyone get a bot? If people share one, whose credentials does it use? Eventually you throw in this admission in the middle of other stuff: > Buzz gives each agent its own key. The agent’s owner signs a narrowly scoped authorization. The agent then signs its own work with its own identity. So you're explicitl…

Hi!

> So you're explicitly picking a bot per person, you're just calling them an agent. But you never really admit this because you call it 'an agent' rather than "the user's agent". You're still ending up with lots of agents each owned by people, you're just writing another orchestration layer yourself.

Giving everyone their own agent/bot/app in Slack is nontrivial because of how Slack apps work. If you're okay with them impersonating you, it's easy, but that's weird and I don't like having to guess/discern if I'm talking to you or a bot wearing your face

> How? How is this resource managed or limited? Do I have to assume Buzz will just borrow my laptop's CPU & GPU at random?

This is opt in. It's an integration with https://github.com/Mesh-LLM/mesh-llm that scopes shared compute to your Buzz community. This is very early right now and we're working to get it right. But the idea of a totally self-sovereign, self-hosted community providing its own inference is exciting.

Re: Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But who is allowed to press it? If anyone, then anyone can expose career ruining messages from someone else, even inadvertently.

Can’t anyone already do that with a screenshot or a log dump? I’m always assuming company provided comms platforms are fully readable by the admins

[deleted]
Post reply on HN