4 ms·

The article doesn't talk about any agents outside of coding work. Coding is not the work the world is running on. Agent concept requires much more selling than

by zkmon 10mo ago

The article doesn't talk about any agents outside of coding work. Coding is not the work the world is running on. Agent concept requires much more selling than chat bots, which means they are solutions searching for problems.

manmal 10mo ago
Some of the world is running on emails and excel sheets. That’s doable for an agent already, if you’re willing to let it loose. Problem is, how do you get all your values and unknown knowns into its context?
- irishcoffee 10mo ago
  I can say with absolute certainty that I have never used an LLM to tweak an email, and will never, ever use an LLM “agent” on my email, work or personal. “Hey, how’s that hardware/software integration effort coming? What are your thoughts on the hardware so far?” Fuck me if I let an LLM answer that.
- austinbaggio 10mo ago
  Willing to let them loose is the more salient point. If you let your agents loose on your entire body of output and tools at work, then you'll build that knowledge up pretty quickly. Tall ask right now, with privacy and agency (no pun intended) concerns
  - manmal 10mo ago
    I’d bet that an agent would never be able to act the same on an email as I would. It just lacks my world view. This begs the question, would it really make sense for it to write emails on my behalf? It will certainly “close the loop” one way or the other, but I doubt I would like the outcome. On the clawdbot discord, someone wrote today that, overnight, Claude sent in all iMessage threads from 2019 the message that it will rather ignore such outdated threads.
skeeter2020 10mo ago
the author also starts with "The fundamental difference with AI agents is that they take the human completely out of the loop, and this changes everything.", then focuses on coding. Is anyone actually having success with completely autonomous agents coding; no human oversight or validation? He then presents a very naive vision of how agents are superior, where it basically all comes down to "generate code more efficiently" - has that ever been the crux challenge to solving problems with software? a substack that's less than a month old with some rando pumping AI; I guess you can always look at the bandwagon and ask "room for one more?"

by zkmon 10mo ago

manmal 10mo ago

Some of the world is running on emails and excel sheets. That’s doable for an agent already, if you’re willing to let it loose. Problem is, how do you get all your values and unknown knowns into its context?

irishcoffee 10mo ago
I can say with absolute certainty that I have never used an LLM to tweak an email, and will never, ever use an LLM “agent” on my email, work or personal. “Hey, how’s that hardware/software integration effort coming? What are your thoughts on the hardware so far?” Fuck me if I let an LLM answer that.
austinbaggio 10mo ago
Willing to let them loose is the more salient point. If you let your agents loose on your entire body of output and tools at work, then you'll build that knowledge up pretty quickly. Tall ask right now, with privacy and agency (no pun intended) concerns
- manmal 10mo ago
  I’d bet that an agent would never be able to act the same on an email as I would. It just lacks my world view. This begs the question, would it really make sense for it to write emails on my behalf? It will certainly “close the loop” one way or the other, but I doubt I would like the outcome. On the clawdbot discord, someone wrote today that, overnight, Claude sent in all iMessage threads from 2019 the message that it will rather ignore such outdated threads.

skeeter2020 10mo ago

the author also starts with "The fundamental difference with AI agents is that they take the human completely out of the loop, and this changes everything.", then focuses on coding. Is anyone actually having success with completely autonomous agents coding; no human oversight or validation? He then presents a very naive vision of how agents are superior, where it basically all comes down to "generate code more efficiently" - has that ever been the crux challenge to solving problems with software? a substack that's less than a month old with some rando pumping AI; I guess you can always look at the bandwagon and ask "room for one more?"