3 ms·
I didn't imply people in the past were idiots, but how on earth would anyone know what an _agent harness_ is, say?
by bedstefar 1mo ago
I didn't imply people in the past were idiots, but how on earth would anyone know what an _agent harness_ is, say?
- deadbabe 1mo agoBecause the term or concept of “AI Agent” existed long before LLMs??? Jesus…
- techpression 1mo agoThe concept of agents is from the 1970’s, I love how some people think the idea is new. Sure, they didn’t have the LLM component, but the rest is the same.
- dist-epoch 1mo agoAlphaGo already had a harness. An AI in a loop with tools is not exactly a Black Swan.
- grey-area 1mo agoIt’s actually a funny oxymoron if you unpack it - agent implies autonomy and intelligence, harnesses are for unintelligent beasts of burden to control them. So you’re right, it makes absolutely no sense and would be hard to decipher, but does perfectly capture the contradictions inherent in attempts to treat dumb LLM word generators as intelligent independent agents.
- ihaveajob 1mo agoI don't think it's an oxymoron at all. An expert climber still uses a harness for safety, even though they won't (typically) try to jump off the wall.
- grey-area 1mo agoThey would 1 times out of 10 if they were an LLM. Then say sorry, you’re absolutely right I shouldn’t have jumped off the cliff.
- Obscurity4340 1mo agoFrom beyond the grave
- qarl2 1mo agoYou know - that's why we use 2 agents for any important decision. 1 in 10 becomes 1 in 100. And you can get any degree of accuracy you desire. If only humans were so reliable. Why are you ignoring basic principles of engineering?
- oasisaimlessly 1mo agoThat only works if failures are uncorrelated. Why are you ignoring basic principles of engineering?
- qarl2 1mo agoHEH. Never used agents, huh? The failures are mostly uncorrelated. Why are you ignoring basic principles of engineering (knowing what you're talking about before opening your mouth)?