11–20 of 67 posts
Sub Question : IS there a real successful agent product today that uses a library for harness(like langgraph etc)? Building our own worked for us. Works with our components(postgres, events ...) and scales naturally with our system.
This is why "I made it think in a loop" doesn't result in significant improvement in LLM performance. It's not learning. You need RLAIF, STAR, IDPO, etc to retrain the model to learn from its mistakes. And you need a human to review it so it's not compounding mistakes. It's expensive and time-consuming. Doing it wrong leads to bad outcomes. But not doing it leads to no significant improvement.
Humans aren't scheduling a wake-up to the next thought. Ideally, a sub second agentic loop with no FINAL / wake-up, always "spinning" would get closer. I'm conscious about the waste of resources this would drag with it (because of current architectures), but exciting still.
PS. I love the take on using bash instead of Python (one less abstraction layer!) and using UNIX fundamentals as stepping stone when composing tools as agents are naturally drawn to using it on a box anyways.
If you wonder what the Rust is for: It is the Ratatui TUI.
"turn -> FINAL -> schedule wake-up", this is where my excitement has faded unfortunately. Many of us are probably wondering about the same idea: bridging the gap between a reactive agent and my daily workflow or existence. But, this still feels too close to how Claude (or any other agent) runs as a process in the background ( always ON ), where you can use a custom channel to feed the dialog with external signals lik…
Very fascinating, super interesting engineering. Although i do find it very funny how they just bypass a massive vulnerability, basically zero data isolation (even between good actors, let alone bad ones) with 3 sentences. Only in the llm space you can slap a massive limitation like this in the middle of the article and continue like nothing happened > Whatever anyone tells Audel becomes part of the single experience…
Where are the interesting engineering parts at? Seems to be an interesting idea and perhaps design, but to call the implementation/engineering itself bad seems to be an understatement.