4 ms·
> That’s no longer true. We’ve entered a different regime, where spending more tokens generally results in better results. We call this “compounding correctness
by ambicapter 3mo ago
> That’s no longer true. We’ve entered a different regime, where spending more tokens generally results in better results. We call this “compounding correctness” — the more tokens you spend on getting a task correct, the more likely you’ll get a good outcome. We talked about this a bit at the last in person Agentics meetup:
Have we? Is it generally the case that the more tokens you spend, you better results you get? This take is so weird I suspect author somehow financially benefits from tokenmaxxing.
- NateEag 3mo ago> This take is so weird I suspect author somehow financially benefits from tokenmaxxing. They might own a chunk of NVDA.
- baddash 3mo agoit's a huge oversimplification imo. it reminds me of someone worshipping LOC: more = better
- manicennui 3mo agoDid you read the article? "Most teams haven’t yet figured out how to build their own Ramp Inspect or Stripe Minions (if that’s you, reach out — we can help!) but basically everyone is at least using cursor in the side bar."
- noodletheworld 3mo ago? What is your point? That the OP is obviously finically motived to encourage tokenmaxing? Here’s what they said, $$$ aside: > That’s no longer true. We’ve entered a different regime, where spending more tokens generally results in better results. We call this “compounding correctness” — the more tokens you spend on getting a task correct > Compounding correctness flips the calculus. If more token spend leads to better outcomes, then you’re going to want to spend a lot of time running tokens. Which sure as hell sounds like tokenmaxxing to me! The original incentives to tokenmax are gone, but eventually folks will realize that a new and more powerful incentive has take its place. > There were ways to get loops to work, but it was hard. You had to think a lot about how to prompt the agent, which in turn required a pretty deep familiarity with how these things work. > Now, though, it’s easy. Compounding correctness makes it easy Go on, tell me I’m quoting the OP out of context. It’s pretty clear this person believes in compounding correctness, while other, more serious people (1) are perhaps more skeptical. ..and Armins company owns pi. You can’t get much more all in on AI. Compounding correctness sounds cool, but the real examples of people spending lots of tokens are not compounding correctness; they are wide parallel exploration; like Mythos. The OP is confused, and wrong; they’ve made some basic (flawed) assumptions, and based their entire reasoning on them. …and are selling AI things. How surprising. [1] - https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2026/6/23/the-coming-loop/ https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2026/6/23/the-coming-loop/
- manicennui 3mo ago"I suspect author somehow financially benefits from tokenmaxxing" Yes, because they are selling AI services. The article is an ad.
- kaicianflone 3mo agoLooks like it based on Anthropic’s own multi-agent orchestration research: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/multi-agent-research-system https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/multi-agent-research-s... Their findings suggest multi-agent systems result in better performance attributed mostly to token usage (80% of variance).
- simplyluke 3mo ago"Token salesman finds conclusive evidence that more tokens = more better"
- theahura 3mo agoHi, author here. I'm probably somewhat financially benefiting from tokenmaxxing. I also just believe compounding correctness is right, based on my own experience using the tools (which is why I have structured my life to try and financially benefit from tokenmaxxing)
- stopyellingatme 3mo agoHow do you structure your life such that you financially benefit from tokenmaxxing?
- theahura 3mo agostarting a company that benefits from tokenmaxxing, mostly