Welcome to Gas City

eab- wrote: post #3

is there examples of the sort of things that's been built with these systems? it often feels like complication and abstraction for its own sake

He's very transparent about his addiction to agentic coding. He's doing it for the giggles as far as I can tell. Trolling and being a personality. I don't mean that in a bad kind of assessment. He's said as much.

Re: Welcome to Gas City

#9

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, May 04, 2026, 9:40 PM UTC

apsurd wrote: post #8

eab- wrote: post #3

is there examples of the sort of things that's been built with these systems? it often feels like complication and abstraction for its own sake

He's very transparent about his addiction to agentic coding. He's doing it for the giggles as far as I can tell. Trolling and being a personality. I don't mean that in a bad kind of assessment. He's said as much.

> his addiction to agentic coding

Why would it be an addiction versus obsession? Getting obsessed with something and building things around it, even if it's nonsense, is artistically genuine.

Re: Welcome to Gas City

#10

Post by thurn » Mon, May 04, 2026, 9:41 PM UTC

I really fundamentally do not understand what problem Gas City solves that is not already solved by normal subagent orchestration patterns. If you want to call your main LLM session the "mayor" and have it delegate its work out to planners and coders and reviewers and QA and so on, this is already a thing you can do! If you want to do this in a reusable way you can create skills and subagent definitions and use /commands, etc. Why do we need hundreds of thousands of lines of opaque Go code to accomplish any of this?