81–90 of 206 posts
Hiring humans to do a consistent job is gonna be a nightmare and a limit on the scalability of the service. How are you defining your service level agreements?
"hiring humans is a nightmare"
Good LLord
P.S. nobody asked but since you made it this far - the next big problem in this space is fast becoming, what else do we need to be able to build these "headless" or "outer loop" AI agents? Most frameworks do a bad job of handling any tool call that would be asynchronous or long running (imagine an agent calling a tool and having to hang for hours or days while waiting for a response from a human). Rewiring existing f…
The MCP[1] that was announced by Anthropic has a solution to this problem, and it's pretty good at handling this use case. I've also been working on a solution to this problem via long-polling tools. [1] https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol
Again, genuinely looking to learn - where does MCP fit in for async/headless/ambient agents, beyond a solid protocol for remote tool calls?
This is a great idea- I hope that you are wildly successful. I’m an AI skeptic mostly because I see people rushing to connect unreasoning LLMs to real things and as a result cause lots of problems for humans. I love the idea of human-in-the-loop-as-a-service because at least it provides some sort of safety net for many cases. Good luck!
Loving you guys have Typescript support from day one!
hah thanks dude! I am very bullish on TS as the long term thing, Not to turn this into a language vs language thread but I spend a lot of time thinking about why ppl struggle so much with python...so far I came up with concurrency abstractions keep changing (still transitioning / straddling sync+threads vs. asyncio) - this makes performance eng really hard package management somehow less mature than JS - pip been aro…
So much corruption on this website.
Proud to have helped edit an earlier draft of this — go Dexter go!
Hiring humans to do a consistent job is gonna be a nightmare and a limit on the scalability of the service. How are you defining your service level agreements?
This really makes you take a step back and just consider the world we're in now: someone critiques a company's approach as unscalable because... "hiring humans is a nightmare" Good LLord
Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is fascinating and resonates with me on a deep level. I'm surprised I haven't stumbled across this yet. I think we have this problem with all AI systems, e.g. I have let cursor write wrong code from time to time and don't review it at the level I should...we need to solve that for every area of AI. Not a new problem but definitely about to get way more serious
This is something we frequently saw at Uber. I would say it's the same as there's already an established pattern for this for any sort of destructive action. Intriguingly, it's rather similar to what we see with LLMs - you want to really activate the person's attention rather than have them go off on autopilot; in this case, probably have them type something quite distinct in order to confirm it, to turn their brain…
I also like that idea of:
not just a button but like 'I'm $PERSON and I approve this action' or type out 'Signed-off by' style semantics
The thing that got me thinking... how do you make sure an LLM won't eventually hallucinate approval -- or outright lie about it, to get going?
Anyway, congrats, this sounds really cool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh man, the API call for hl.human_as_tool() is a little ominous. Obviously approving a slack interaction is no big deal, but it does have a certain attitude towards humans that doesn't bode well for us...
so what I'm hearing is, if the approval is transparent and the agent doesn't see it, thats cool, but tell the agent "hey use the human as needed" and now we're getting into sci fi territory ?! either way i don't totally disagree