Live data from Hacker News

Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

github.com

111–120 of 128 posts

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, Windows 7 was quite good in my opinion. Wait, what year is it?

windows 2000 server and windows 2003 server were their last great desktop OSs

Yes, but they're close to 10 years old at this point.

10? 10.

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#113
post #109

Sorry for breaking it to you but this actually doesn't work, even though the documentation makes it seem like it should. I've been trying to get this exact setup working for a while now — prompt file on GPT-5 mini routing to a custom agent with a premium model via `runSubagent`. Followed your example almost exactly. It just doesn't work the way you'd expect from reading the docs. ### The tool doesn't support agent ro…

I'm the same person who commented on the issue in response to you lol.

I couldn’t reproduce this (even though I wanted it to work). That said, the fact that we can run sub-agents now (I've always used the default VS Code build and didn’t realize Insiders had a newer GHC Chat) already improves the experience a lot.

It’s pretty straightforward to set up an orchestrator that calls multiple sub-agents (all configured to use the same model on the first call) and have it loop through plan → implement → review → test indefinitely. When the context window hits its limit, it automatically summarizes the chat history and keeps going, until you finish the main agent’s plan. And that all costs a single Opus (or any other main chat model) request.

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#114
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world would not actually be improved by having 1000s of customer service reps genuinely authentically feel sorry. You're literally demanding real people to experience real negative emotions over some IT problem you have.

People authentically, genuinely, naturally care about other people; empathy - founded at least partly in mirror neurons - is the most fundamental human nature. It's part of being social animals that live, survive, and thrive only in groups. It's even important for conflict - you need to anticipate the other person's moves, which requires instintively understanding their emotions. The exceptions are generally when peo…

This point is hard to get across to some HN users sometimes

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#115
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People authentically, genuinely, naturally care about other people; empathy - founded at least partly in mirror neurons - is the most fundamental human nature. It's part of being social animals that live, survive, and thrive only in groups. It's even important for conflict - you need to anticipate the other person's moves, which requires instintively understanding their emotions. The exceptions are generally when peo…

This point is hard to get across to some HN users sometimes

Is it? Either way that's really missing the point. Empathy being authentic and genuine and natural doesn't change the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad.

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paying per token also encouragages reduced quality only now you pay. If they can subtbtly degrade quality or even probability of 1shot solutions, they get you paying for more tokens. Under current economic models and incentive structures, enshitification is inevitable, since we're optimizing for it long term.

What if there is actual competition, though? That’s the hope I keep having. If there is a cheaper, better model, I can switch.

For that to work it requires a free market, llms in their current format are a neccesarily closed market. It's like mobile phones. You'll get a sleek somewhat passable product increasingly dated and dysfunctional which every year serves you less and someone else more. Given I can't decide smart phones in their current form are shit, i'll make something better (without enromous capital) meams we're failing open market conditions. Do you see the point i am trying to make?

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This point is hard to get across to some HN users sometimes

Is it? Either way that's really missing the point. Empathy being authentic and genuine and natural doesn't change the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad.

> the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad.

People require empathy and compassion; we need others to mirror our emotions and indeed to share them with us. We are social creatures and it is not normal, healthy or effective to experience (strong) emotions alone. Connecting emotionally with others is not a luxury or weakness, and certainly not "bad"; it's how humans naturally and essentially function.. Yes, it can be done badly and you don't need to be powerless - if your partner comes to you terrified about a cancer diagnosis, acting terrified yourself isn't helpful; but accepting their emotions, seeing them, and responding with genuine emotions appropriate to the situation is essential.

Many highly analytical people - to use a vague, undefined term - tend to think that anyone who comes to them with a problem must want their problem analyzed and solved - if you have a big hammer then all problems are nails, I suppose. Sometimes that is desired but certainly not always, and it can work against what people really need.

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#118
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Either way that's really missing the point. Empathy being authentic and genuine and natural doesn't change the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad.

> the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad. People require empathy and compassion; we need others to mirror our emotions and indeed to share them with us. We are social creatures and it is no…

[dead]

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#119
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Either way that's really missing the point. Empathy being authentic and genuine and natural doesn't change the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad.

> the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad. People require empathy and compassion; we need others to mirror our emotions and indeed to share them with us. We are social creatures and it is no…

That's a fine general purpose attitude, but did you forget we were talking about customer support? It's unfair to them if they're getting invested beyond the surface level (unless we pay them a lot more) and the explicit purpose of talking to them is to get the problem analyzed and solved.

My last comment was intended to be read in that context too, not about interacting with the people you're close to.

Re: Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

#120
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the basic idea that all else equal dragging other people into your problems is a negative. If it helps them solve it, or helps lead to the problem being avoided in the future, that's great. If they're joining you in feeling bad from a place of powerlessness, that's bad. People require empathy and compassion; we need others to mirror our emotions and indeed to share them with us. We are social creatures and it is no…

That's a fine general purpose attitude, but did you forget we were talking about customer support? It's unfair to them if they're getting invested beyond the surface level (unless we pay them a lot more) and the explicit purpose of talking to them is to get the problem analyzed and solved. My last comment was intended to be read in that context too, not about interacting with the people you're close to.

Very good point, I did forget the context.

I still think you can have empathy on support calls; I'd even say it's important for the customer to be satisfied. They may be panicked, frustrated, exhausted, etc. Ignoring people's emotion gets bad results; it feels rude.

Of course there are limits, especially time; long stories are inappropriate. Still, I've had many empathetic, brief conversations with strangers on trains (literally) and elsewhere.

Post reply on HN