4 ms·

The criticism about the labeling is valid and I oversold. For clarity, this is what the agent sees: `spawn`: "Create a spawned child node under your node." `f

The criticism about the labeling is valid and I oversold. For clarity, this is what the agent sees: `spawn`: "Create a spawned child node under your node." `fork`: "Create a forked child node (inherits parent context) under your node." The novelty is less about the distinction between the two, it's the tree generation. I would have served you better, if I just left out the parts that aren't critical to the novelty. Thank you for taking the time to comment.

mpalmer 8mo ago
And thanks for taking the criticism. In all honesty, "would have written it myself but I was too eager to get it out the door" doesn't really make sense to me. You're acknowledging that you took a shortcut to get it out the door (blog post as tech debt is a new one!) - does that mean you'd like to write something up yourself eventually? I hope so, and would like to read it. In particular, since this is presented as research, I'd be very interested to read about your experimental observations that show the risks/costs/edge cases/limits of this pattern. As it stands, there's no indication of self-critique or really any process of systematic evaluation of the solution.
- kimjune01 8mo ago
  on Wednesday, I had a dream about agents. Thursday evening, I talked to Claude about trees. That same night, I pushed out the post. There wasn't much rigor involved but yes I will explore more and report back to you!
- kimjune01 8mo ago
  It is my pleasure to write for you. https://www.june.kim/cord-human https://www.june.kim/cord-human
  - mpalmer 8mo ago
    I enjoyed this! Thank you for taking the time to write it. I like it because I identify with your experiences way more than I do with the standard AI braggy boilerplate. Cheers. And I deserve and accept the gentle snark at the beginning. I will be sure to let you know when I post something, I'll take your notes :)

mpalmer 8mo ago

And thanks for taking the criticism. In all honesty, "would have written it myself but I was too eager to get it out the door" doesn't really make sense to me. You're acknowledging that you took a shortcut to get it out the door (blog post as tech debt is a new one!) - does that mean you'd like to write something up yourself eventually? I hope so, and would like to read it. In particular, since this is presented as research, I'd be very interested to read about your experimental observations that show the risks/costs/edge cases/limits of this pattern. As it stands, there's no indication of self-critique or really any process of systematic evaluation of the solution.

kimjune01 8mo ago
on Wednesday, I had a dream about agents. Thursday evening, I talked to Claude about trees. That same night, I pushed out the post. There wasn't much rigor involved but yes I will explore more and report back to you!
kimjune01 8mo ago
It is my pleasure to write for you. https://www.june.kim/cord-human https://www.june.kim/cord-human
- mpalmer 8mo ago
  I enjoyed this! Thank you for taking the time to write it. I like it because I identify with your experiences way more than I do with the standard AI braggy boilerplate. Cheers. And I deserve and accept the gentle snark at the beginning. I will be sure to let you know when I post something, I'll take your notes :)