what, they're not going to name it Delamain?
I came here to post this!
Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
241–250 of 279 posts
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#242I published a book awhile back called HEADCOUNT ZERO: how to build a company with zero employees. It's free on github.
https://github.com/AnthonyDavidAdams/zero-employee-company-b...
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#243To what end?
To replace all the exquisitely paid executives with AIs.
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They have no intelligence. These are very very very refined prediction engines. Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? Also, you need to understand that language evolves over time, and people often use a word to describe a thing that is newly discovered or invented that's similar to the word being used, because it's a helpful way of describing it that the listener will…
> Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? It matters because, we're still sorting out what intelligence means for an AI agent. As you pointed out, language evolves over time. The question remains whether or not attributing intelligence to the current iteration of models is correct. This is not settled and I don't see why it's wrong to bring it up.
It's not wrong to bring it up, but the other comment did not "bring it up". It purported to correct someone by categorically stating "it is not intelligence, you are wrong and I am right", while not once saying what, then, intelligence is.
One thing is clear: LLMs at least already are capable of 1) not making the same mistake that person made, and 2) clearly seeing why the other person's post was "wrong" in both reasoning and tone.
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#245Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#246There was surprisingly little information on how they actually do this, but we run our business with a large number of, what we call "AI employees" in addition to regular employees, and they act in interesting ways. We've been building out orchestration tools to handle this, and we'll probably do a write-up or blog post on it soon. May even open source some of it. The preview is that the problem with most agents (and…
> we direct them to build as much software as possible
That's not a cure-all. Sometimes not writing software is the better choice.
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They have no intelligence. These are very very very refined prediction engines. Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? Also, you need to understand that language evolves over time, and people often use a word to describe a thing that is newly discovered or invented that's similar to the word being used, because it's a helpful way of describing it that the listener will…
> Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? It matters because, we're still sorting out what intelligence means for an AI agent. As you pointed out, language evolves over time. The question remains whether or not attributing intelligence to the current iteration of models is correct. This is not settled and I don't see why it's wrong to bring it up.
So let's say we make up a new word, machilligence to serve as a parallel term to intelligence but strictly for machines. How is the world different in that case vs. if we call it intelligence?
Or I guess to put it another way, if we want to coin a new term for the intelligence-esque thing that AI has, but the key differentiator is that it's an AI thing and not a human thing, then what linguistic value does the new word have? If I said "Claude is intelligent" then the fact that we're talking about AI "intelligence" is already captured in the sentence anyway; no new word needed
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They have no intelligence. These are very very very refined prediction engines. Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? Also, you need to understand that language evolves over time, and people often use a word to describe a thing that is newly discovered or invented that's similar to the word being used, because it's a helpful way of describing it that the listener will…
> Silly and pointless criticism. Why do the semantics of the word intelligence matter? It matters because, we're still sorting out what intelligence means for an AI agent. As you pointed out, language evolves over time. The question remains whether or not attributing intelligence to the current iteration of models is correct. This is not settled and I don't see why it's wrong to bring it up.
Language is indeed evolving.
Being good in chess was (and still is) associated with being intelligent. But if a computer does it, it is just a calculator (and it is).
Then go, the great game for intelligence, too complex for calculators to have a chance against intelligent humans. Until it was solved.
And then text, the original Turing test solved, AI capable enough to fool humans. And now already replacing humans in jobs strongly associated with intelligence - programming.
I find it hard to debate, that we don't have created artificial intelligence, by the way we used to use the word "intelligence" before.
So if AI is really understanding something?
Likely not in the way we use that term. But it definitely shows intelligent behavior and actions.
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#249I'm missing the repo link here but is it similar to Paperclip or Genosyn?
Re: Pion, an agent designed to run any company autonomously
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
What worries me most are questions like this: these autonomous AI employees or automations - it doesn't change the essence - consume a lot of LLM tokens. Please tell me, how do you pay for this? Do you use, for example, the Anthropic or OpenAI API directly, or do you connect, for example, a Codex subscription?
Our control panel is on a server but individual agents actually are run on anyone’s machine. This allows us to use the native harnesses including subscriptions. Yes it uses a lot more tokens, but i have have Claude $200, OpenAI $200, and SuperGrok Heavy $300 (or whatever it is called) that includes Cursor Ultra. My machine runs most of them, but some other team members have agents running on their machines using 1-2…
Do I understand correctly that by using your machine and Claude Code or something like it you are avoiding API pricing?