2 ms·
I think it's the cost (both tokens and initial setup and debugging the workflow). It's really easy to spend a gazillion tokens by mistake and the resulting wor
by juancn 2mo ago
I think it's the cost (both tokens and initial setup and debugging the workflow).
It's really easy to spend a gazillion tokens by mistake and the resulting workflows are still probabilistic and open for abuse or failure.
Maybe it's too soon, we need more time to figure out what works and what doesn't.
We're still looking for the right balance for when a probabilistic solution (i.e AI) works and when we need a deterministic one (classic software).
- ashu1461 2mo agoCorrect and I think for non technical folks just creating pure ai agents is much easier than creating these workflows which can be harder to test as well.
- throwaway27448 2mo agoThis will come with higher risks, no transparency, and higher costs, of course. That seems like a recipe for even higher frustration than normal software incurs.
- juancn 2mo agoMy guess is that except for simple one-offs or low risk situations, any recurrent use of AI will require some sort of expert to handle it, at least for a while. Liability plays a big role here, in the end a person needs to be made responsible for the output of stuff and face consequences.