hsaliak

A good % of the Google of yesterday is now in working in frontier labs, crushing it.

id' normally hate this but with agents this is awesome

Nobody is going to read that though, reading will go the way of code reviews. That’s the problem.

Ever since coding agents came out, It felt a little like we were implementing the self improving lisp programs of old.

This idea almost gets us there.

Could the next step be to make it the program itself?

At least it’s safe

The state of Agent APIs is bad. completions API (supported indefinitely) but does not support reasoning. OpenAI's reasoning API started out well, but is moving in the direction as described well in the article. Anthropic's messages API is odd. It includes changes such as the recently introduced system messages that can be injected mid turn, but are not supported in all models (sonnet 5). So you are left with a pretty fragmented state. For coding agents, the practical move is to focus on getting it right with one API - eg reasoning, and let the router/provider handle the conversion for you.

Perhaps, there is value in having the de-facto API not be the Reasoning API from OpenAI but something from a neutral party?

Maybe a well defined open standard that facades over these APIs that can gain adoption. For that to happen, the party championing the API needs to have some reasonable traffic capture - OpenRouter perhaps, or a group of such routers coming together? While it wont solve the encrypted payload from the frontier lab problem, it will at least be a backstop in these APIs just becoming a back and forth of encrypted payloads over time.

Seems to be doing too much, a 1 line in the system prompt is all you need. And it works well enough.

“Output tokens are precious, be succinct in your responses. Use ASD-STE100 simplified technical english”

Let all trust this team to deliver AGI.

This graph biases outcomes (A| O) it would be interessting to have an others.. so we can view the whole picture

so the joke was the implication that they are not frontier.

no, this post was written by Demis from Deepmind.

I have my own coding harness (std::slop), in that i focus on a vim centric flow. Basically a few commands open. up my $EDITOR which is vim.

1. /edit => opens in editor

2. /feedback => opens the last llm message in an editor so i can inline feedback. Think inline responses in email vs bottom posting.

3. /review => same as /feedback but opens up the diff so i do an inline review. Yes I still read the code it ships.

So basically in this flow vim becomes integral to doing anything involved.

It's been clear for some time that model tool calling is heavily fit to a few common patterns, it's unsurprising that a tool call that looks the same or has the same name, but works differently, is falling back to priors and causing problems.

Things are not quite AGI yet; which is why people are now saying that intelligence is the harness + model, because the harness makes up for limitations in generalization.

so he's the quintessential brilliant jerk, ok